September 1, 2015


News Clips For The Day


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/kentucky-clerk-kim-davis-refuses-same-sex-marriage-gods-authority/

Kentucky clerk still refuses same-sex marriage "under God's authority"
CBS/AP
September 1, 2015

32 Photographs -- Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, right, talks with David Moore following her office's refusal to issue marriage licenses at the Rowan County Courthouse in Morehead, Ky., Tuesday, Sept. 1, 2015. AP PHOTO/TIMOTHY D. EASLEY


MOREHEAD, Ky. - Invoking "God's authority" in a testy exchange with same-sex partners, a county clerk has again refused to issue marriage licenses to gay couples - this time in defiance of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling against her.

On Tuesday morning, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis' office denied the licenses to at least two couples. At first, Davis remained in her office with the door closed and blinds drawn. But she emerged a few minutes later, telling the couples and the activists gathered there that her office is continuing to deny the licenses "under God's authority."

CBS affiliate WKYT reports that one couple, David Moore and David Ermold, who were rejected a fourth time, demanded to speak with Davis.

"Tell her to come out and face the people she's discriminating against,"Ermold said. "We're not leaving until we have a license."

"Then you're going to have a long day," Davis told him.

From the back of the room, Davis' supporters said: "Praise the Lord! ... Stand your ground."

Other activists shouted that Davis is a bigot and told her: "Do your job."

Ermold hugged Moore, his partner of 17 years, and they cried and swayed as they left the clerk's office. Davis' supporters marched by, chanting.

"I feel sad, I feel devastated," Ermold said. "I feel like I've been humiliated on such a national level, I can't even comprehend it."

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to intervene in the case, leaving Davis no legal grounds to refuse to grant licenses to gay couples. A district judge could now hold her in contempt, which can carry steep fines or jail time.

Davis has steadfastly refused to issue the licenses, saying her deeply held Christian beliefs don't let her endorse gay marriages.

Davis stopped issuing all marriage licenses in the days after U.S. Supreme Court legalized gay marriage across the nation. Two gay couples and two straight couples sued her, arguing that she must fulfill her duties as an elected official despite her personal religious faith. A federal judge ordered her to issue the licenses, and an appeals court upheld that decision. Her lawyers with the Liberty Counsel filed a last-ditch appeal to the Supreme Court on Friday, asking that they grant her "asylum for her conscience."

Justice Elena Kagan, who oversees the 6th district, referred Davis' request to the full court, which denied the stay without comment.




“On Tuesday morning, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis' office denied the licenses to at least two couples. At first, Davis remained in her office with the door closed and blinds drawn. But she emerged a few minutes later, telling the couples and the activists gathered there that her office is continuing to deny the licenses "under God's authority." …. The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to intervene in the case, leaving Davis no legal grounds to refuse to grant licenses to gay couples. A district judge could now hold her in contempt, which can carry steep fines or jail time. …. Justice Elena Kagan, who oversees the 6th district, referred Davis' request to the full court, which denied the stay without comment.”

This isn’t just one liberal Supreme Court justice’s stance on the matter since the request was referred to the whole group of judges, and it is going to be hard for the County Clerk to overturn with just legal arguments. I can imagine primarily white Christian protestors marching around, however, and as long as Davis continues to keep an argument of some kind going, this is probably not the end of the matter.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/michael-riley-jr-14-dies-after-battle-with-brain-amoeba-in-texas/

Houston boy, 14, dies after battle with brain amoeba
CBS/AP
August 30, 2015

9 Photographs -- Michael Riley Jr. MICHAEL RILEY JR.'S FAMILY VIA FACEBOOK
8 PHOTOS -- Brain-eating amoeba: How to stay safe from Naegleria fowleri


HOUSTON - A 14-year-old boy has passed away after coming into contact with a rare amoeba while swimming in a lake north of Houston.

Relatives said in a Facebook post late Saturday evening that Michael Riley Jr. succumbed to the ravages of the brain-eating amoeba.

"The tests tonight produced undesirable results which were coupled with the inability to function without support and proper blood flow to the brain," their statement read.

Riley developed a headache and fever, and later became disoriented, after swimming with friends Aug. 13.

In online postings, Michael's family said he had Primary Amebic Meningoencephalitis. The disease usually occurs when the Naegleria fowleri amoeba enters the body through the nose and attacks cells in the brain. The infection causes the brain to swell.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says from 2005 to 2014 the amoeba infected 35 people in the U.S. All but two cases were fatal. A swimmer died of the disease in Oklahoma earlier this month.

While Riley's condition was rare, the amoeba typically lives in warm freshwater and can be found in lakes in the Houston area. It cannot be contracted by drinking contaminated water, only by inhaling it up the nose. To reduce the risk, experts advise keeping your head above water or using nose plugs when you swim in lakes or rivers.




“Relatives said in a Facebook post late Saturday evening that Michael Riley Jr. succumbed to the ravages of the brain-eating amoeba. "The tests tonight produced undesirable results which were coupled with the inability to function without support and proper blood flow to the brain," their statement read. Riley developed a headache and fever, and later became disoriented, after swimming with friends Aug. 13. …. The disease usually occurs when the Naegleria fowleri amoeba enters the body through the nose and attacks cells in the brain. The infection causes the brain to swell. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says from 2005 to 2014 the amoeba infected 35 people in the U.S. All but two cases were fatal. A swimmer died of the disease in Oklahoma earlier this month.”

Stories of rural and small town life in the South are not complete without tales of cutting school to go skinny dipping in the “old swimming hole.” I have only swum in non-chlorinated water once, and I lucked out -- no sickness from it. However it was an unpleasant experience to me because there is always a natural layer of detritus on the bottom of a pond like that, which is slimy or at least squishy soft, and that turns me off. I hope people will stop indulging in this because the risk of death from brain swelling should be enough to cause them to go get a membership in the Y, or a local city pool. Swimming is great exercise, and I would hate to see people forego the pleasure. Besides, anybody who can’t swim may one day find themselves in water deep enough to cause drowning. In fact, I’ve heard that it is possible to drown in a teaspoonful of water. It’s too bad that this child died. The loss of a child is one of the things that cause permanent sadness for a parent. We can “stay busy,” “accept our life”, and so on, but when we do think back to such an event the grief will be immediate and real again.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/pope-francis-to-allow-all-priests-to-absolve-abortion-sin-for-jubilee-year/

Pope eases church rule on abortion forgiveness
By ANNA MATRANGA CBS NEWS
September 1, 2015

Play VIDEO -- Pope shares progressive views on divorce
Photograph -- Pope Francis waves during his Angelus prayer in Saint Peter's square at the Vatican, Aug. 23, 2015. REUTERS



ROME -- Pope Francis has made it easier for women who've had abortions to be granted absolution during confession. The pontiff decreed that during the Jubilee year of Mercy starting December 8, any priest anywhere in the world can forgive the sin.

The church considers abortion a particularly grave sin; a "reserved sin," like attacking a bishop or desecrating the Eucharist, and Tuesday's announcement did not change that.

Reserved sins carry automatic excommunication, which means that the person is banned from all Catholic sacraments, including the sacrament of penance (confession).

Church law says that when a woman has an abortion she and all those who aided her, including doctors, nurses and spouses, are automatically excommunicated from the Catholic Church.

If a woman (or an accomplice) confesses the abortion, an ordinary priest is not allowed to grant absolution, but has to ask the local bishop for permission.

But for the specific period of the Jubilee year -- December 8, 2015 to November 20, 2016 -- the pope has removed that extra step, giving each priest around the world the faculty to grant absolution for abortion.

"I think in particular of all the women who have resorted to abortion. I am well aware of the pressure that has led them to this decision. I know that it is an existential and moral ordeal," Francis said in a letter to Archbishop Rino Fisichella, head of Jubilee initiatives.

"I have met so many women who bear in their heart the scar of this agonizing and painful decision," said the pope.

In May, the Vatican took the first step in this direction, announcing the creation of a special team of priests for the Jubilee called "missionaries of mercy," who would be granted the faculty to absolve the sin of abortion. But Tuesday's announcement goes further, making the absolution universally available.

"I think this is big and very positive news," said theologian Fr. Robert Dodaro, president of the Patristic Institute Augustinianum in Rome. "Pope Francis is showing enormous compassion for people in difficult situations. He has always been very strong on the sacrament of penance, and... he continues to develop what has been a strong theme in his papacy, which is that God is always ready to forgive, and we should not place obstacles in the way."

Filed by CBS Radio News correspondent Anna Matranga.




“The pontiff decreed that during the Jubilee year of Mercy starting December 8, any priest anywhere in the world can forgive the sin. The church considers abortion a particularly grave sin; a "reserved sin," like attacking a bishop or desecrating the Eucharist, and Tuesday's announcement did not change that. …. If a woman (or an accomplice) confesses the abortion, an ordinary priest is not allowed to grant absolution, but has to ask the local bishop for permission. But for the specific period of the Jubilee year -- December 8, 2015 to November 20, 2016 -- the pope has removed that extra step. …. of all the women who have resorted to abortion. I am well aware of the pressure that has led them to this decision. …. In May, the Vatican took the first step in this direction, announcing the creation of a special team of priests for the Jubilee called "missionaries of mercy," who would be granted the faculty to absolve the sin of abortion. But Tuesday's announcement goes further, making the absolution universally available. …. "Pope Francis is showing enormous compassion for people in difficult situations. He has always been very strong on the sacrament of penance, and... he continues to develop what has been a strong theme in his papacy, which is that God is always ready to forgive, and we should not place obstacles in the way."

It is true that nearly all women who have abortions would be in “a difficult situation” if they were to keep the baby. Many times they will lose their job, their family status, and face economic privation and social condemnation in that situation. The book The Scarlet Letter was written about the subject when it wasn’t readily discussed in “polite society.” What this Pope tries to do is make life more manageable for his subjects socially and spiritually. He shows the greatest interest in “the human condition” of any Pope within my memory. Most Popes just sit in the Vatican and make rigidly dogmatic statements. Of course some people think he is a radical in his views. Some American conservative politicians have spoken out against his views on poverty and the environment in particular, on the grounds that it cuts into their profit margin, and some within the Church structure have expressed nervousness and discomfort about what he has done so far.

Personally I’m glad to see it, because I had a very negative view of Catholicism before the last several popes. It no longer seems like a bastion of ultraconservative reasoning to me, (read that as “cold and rigid”), but rather more enlightened thought than half of the American Protestant religions teach today. The old formidable Catholic Church is portrayed in “Philomena” the very disturbing movie from a couple of years ago, as a prime example. The bad news is that it was not fiction. It happened in Ireland.

Read the following excellent article and get a copy of the movie out of the library if you didn’t see it in the theaters. http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2014/02/03/philomena-reminds-us-baby-scoop-era-affected-millions/, “‘Philomena’ Reminds Us That the ‘Baby Scoop Era’ Affected Millions” is the title of the story. The following is an excerpt:

“The “Baby Scoop Era”

Between the 1940s and 1973, when abortion was illegal and single motherhood taboo, unmarried women who became pregnant faced few, punishing options: a shotgun wedding to the father, an illegal abortion that could result in maiming or death, a pariah’s life as a single parent, or “going away,” to one of hundreds of homes for unwed mothers for the duration of their pregnancy, to relinquish their babies for adoption and return home as though nothing had happened. Overwhelmingly, women chose—or were forced to choose—the latter.

It’s a time that in the United States is often referred to as the “Baby Scoop Era,” and during it some estimates hold that a full fifth of all children born to never-married white women relinquished their infants for adoption. For women sent to maternity homes, that number rose to 80 percent, comprising anywhere from 1.5 million to 6 million women.

While, at least in the movie, Philomena maintained that she was never coerced into relinquishing her son, for many U.S. birth mothers or first mothers (preferred terms vary) who are now in their 50s, 60s, or older, the pressure they encountered at maternity homes was harsh and unapologetic. Severe isolation was normal, as was withholding information from women about their pregnancies and impending labor. Maternity home residents were forbidden visits with friends, family, or the fathers of their children, and weren’t allowed to receive letters or phone calls. They were sometimes dropped off at hospitals to labor alone, separate from married mothers, sometimes without pain medication, and pushed to sign relinquishment papers while they were still drugged or recovering from labor. Many were told to deny that they knew the fathers of their children, deliberately misled about their right to keep their babies or about services that could help them, and frequently refused a chance to hold their children after birth. Some had their babies taken while they were sedated or were told that the babies had been stillborn, but were never shown their bodies.”





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/where-the-2016-republican-candidates-stand-on-climate-change/

Where the 2016 Republican candidates stand on climate change
By REBECCA KAPLAN, ELLEN UCHIMIYA
CBS NEWS
September 1, 2015

Photograph -- A plume of exhaust extends from the Mitchell Power Station, a coal-fired power plant built along the Monongahela River, 20 miles southwest of Pittsburgh, on September 24, 2013 in New Eagle, Pa. JEFF SWENSEN, GETTY IMAGES
Play VIDEO -- Climate change is here: Greenland is shrinking
Play VIDEO -- Global warming causes massive changes in Antarctica
Play VIDEO -- America's clean power plan unveiled
Play VIDEO -- Pope Francis issues climate change gauntlet
Play VIDEO -- Marco Rubio on climate change, same-sex marriage


Climate change, more than many other issues, lays bare a stark divide between the two parties: Democrats warn of the grave threat posed by global warming, stressing the need to reduce carbon emissions to prevent a catastrophe. Republicans, including most of the GOP's 2016 presidential candidates, either don't acknowledge climate change is happening, or they question whether it's caused by human activity.

As far as President Obama is concerned, the matter is settled: climate change is real, it's caused largely by humans, and anyone who says otherwise is living in a dangerous state of denial.

"On this issue - of all issues - there is such a thing as being too late," Mr. Obama said Monday during a speech at an Arctic climate summit in Alaska. "And that moment is almost upon us." Failure to act, he added, would "condemn our children to a planet beyond their capacity to repair."

On Tuesday, the president will visit one of the state's shrinking glaciers and visit communities in Alaska's Arctic region that are threatened by rising sea levels.

Republicans, though, have long seen the president's environmental policies as an overreach of federal power and a danger to the economy. Nearly any Republican who succeeds him in the White House in 2016 can be expected to try to roll back some of the climate regulations he has instituted through executive order. Only some of the GOP candidates for president believe that climate change is real, and even fewer think humans are responsible. Hardly any say the U.S. should take steps to address it.

Here's a look at how the GOP candidates view global warming:


Jeb Bush: Count Bush among those who acknowledge climate change but won't weigh in on its cause. He said recently, "The climate is changing," but, he added, "I don't think the science is clear on what percentage is man-made and...what percentage is natural. It's convoluted. And for the people to say the science is decided on this is just really arrogant."

He believes the U.S. needs to adapt, and he wants countries that have increased carbon emissions to cut back. But, he said, "We're not one of them," thanks to the increase in U.S. natural gas production from fracking.


Ben Carson: Carson actually volunteered his position on climate change in Iowa earlier this year without being asked.

"I'll tell you what I think about climate change. The temperature's either going up or down at any point in time, so it really is not a big deal," he told a group of Republicans in Des Moines, Iowa in May, according to the Des Moines Register. "What is a big deal is that the environment is under our control. We do have a responsibility to pass it on to those behind us in at least as good a condition as we found it, hopefully an improved condition."


Chris Christie: "I think global warming is real. I don't think that's deniable. And I do think human activity contributes to it," Christie said at Republican dinner in Keene, New Hampshire in May. "The degree to which it contributes to it is what we need to have a discussion about."

But he doesn't believe that programs intended to limit carbon emissions like cap and trade are effective. He called for a "global solution," rather than unilateral cuts by the U.S.


Ted Cruz: At an event sponsored by billionaire industrialist brothers Charles and David Koch in August, Cruz denied the existence of climate change.

"If you look to the satellite data in the last 18 years there has been zero recorded warming. Now the global warming alarmists, that's a problem for their theories. Their computer models show massive warming the satellite says it ain't happening. We've discovered that NOAA, the federal government agencies are cooking the books," he said.

In an interview with the Texas Tribune in March, he said, "the global warming alarmists are the equivalent of flat-Earthers," recalling that Galileo was once branded a "denier" for saying the Earth was round when contemporary scientific wisdom held that it was flat.


Carly Fiorina: "There's a lot of consensus among scientists that climate change is real," Fiorina said at an event in New Hampshire earlier this year. But she also disputes that the U.S. can do anything about it.

"[E]very one of the scientists that tell us that climate change is real and being caused by man-made activity also tells us that a single nation acting alone can make no difference at all," she told Yahoo News in an interview earlier this summer.

Jim Gilmore: Speaking to WMUR in June, Gilmore said that if he were president he "would look at this group of scientists and say, 'Do they have an ax to grind?' and make sure that they're objective." Pressed on whether he is convinced climate change is caused by man, he said, "I would like it to be shown that it's man-made, and if it is, then at that point I think that we have to address how we deal with it."

Lindsey Graham: Graham has called out members of his party who dismiss climate change.

"When it comes to climate change being real, people of my party are all over the board. There was several resolutions," Graham said after a recent Council on Foreign Relations event. "I said that it's real, that man has contributed to it in a substantial way."

Mike Huckabee: On NBC's "Meet the Press" in June, Huckabee said, "Whether it's man-made or not, I know that when I was in college I was being taught that if we didn't act very quickly, that we were going to entering a global freezing. And, you know, go back and look at the covers of Time and Newsweek from the early '70s. And we were told that if we didn't do something by 1980, we'd be popsicles. Now we're told that we're all burning up. Science is not as settled on that as it is on some things," he said.


Bobby Jindal: "I'm sure human activity is having an impact on the climate," Jindal told reporters at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast in September 2014. "But I would leave it to the scientists to decide how much, what that means, what are the consequences." He argues that the Obama administration policies have hurt the environment and the economy and has said Louisiana won't comply with the administration's Clean Power Plan, which aims to curb carbon emissions from power plants.


John Kasich:The Ohio governor has in the past said he's concerned about climate change, telling a conference in 2012, "I happen to believe there is a problem with climate change. I don't want to overreact to it, I can't measure it all, but I respect the creation that the Lord has given us and I want to make sure we protect it."

He's also taken steps to this end, telling NBC's Meet the Press in August that in Ohio, "[W]e preciously take care of Lake Erie. We've reduced emissions by 30 percent over the last 10 years. We believe in alternative energy." But, he continued, "We don't want to destroy people's jobs based on some theory that's not proven." His campaign later modified that statement, reiterating that he believes that climate change is real and that something needs to be done.

Still, most of Ohio's electricity - about two thirds - is generated by coal-burning power plants. Kasich has been a proponent of clean coal, and he said at the 2012 conference, "we are going to dig it, we are going to clean it, and we are going to burn it in Ohio, and we are not going to apologize for it."


George Pataki: For years, since the 1990s, George Pataki believed that climate change is scientifically proven. Unlike most of his GOP opponents, he has supported reductions in greenhouse gases since 1998. He even co-chaired an independent commission on climate change that released a report recommending a market-friendly cap-and-trade system that aimed to cut emissions by 60-80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050. He has not, however, expressed a position on climate change since he announced his presidential candidacy, and there appears not to be any mention of climate change on his campaign website.


Rand Paul: Paul has a mixed voting record on climate change. He voted for an amendment in January that said that climate change is real and humans contribute to it, but then in March cast a vote against a bill that would cut carbon emissions.

This is a sensitive issue for Paul's home state of Kentucky, which keeps the lights on with electricity almost exclusively powered by coal and which is also the third-largest coal producing state in the U.S.

Paul doesn't talk much about the global warming. When he spoke with former top Obama adviser David Axelrod at the University of Chicago Institute of Politics a year and a half ago, he said, that the "earth goes through periods of time when the climate changes, but he's 'not sure anybody exactly knows why,'" according to The Hill.


Rick Perry: In his 2010 book, "Fed Up!" Perry called global warming a "contrived, phony mess" and he has accused scientists of manipulating data to win research funding. At a June 2014 Christian Science Monitor breakfast, he suggested that there's no action that should be taken to curb global warming because "I don't believe that we have the settled science, by any sense of the imagination."

The Environmental Protection Agency is also the department he famously forgot he would cut during a 2011 presidential debate.


Marco Rubio: "I believe climate is changing because there's never been a moment where the climate is not changing," Rubio said in CBS' "Face the Nation" in April. In an interview with ABC's "This Week" in May 2014, he said, "Our climate is always changing. And what they have chosen to do is take a handful of decades of research and say that this is now evidence of a longer-term trend that's directly and almost solely attributable to manmade activity. I do not agree with that."


Rick Santorum: What rankles Santorum about the debate over climate change is the idea that the science is settled. In June, on "Fox News Sunday," he said,

"Any time you hear a scientist say the science is settled, that's political science, not real science, because no scientists in their right mind would say ever the science is settled," he said.

As far as he's concerned, the idea that man is responsible for the warming and cooling of the earth is "just patently absurd," he told Rush Limbaugh in 2011, and "just an excuse for more government control of your life."


Donald Trump: Although Trump has yet to take a formal position, it's probably fair to say he's not a believer in global warming. His commentary on the topic over Twitter goes back a few years, and that largely denies climate change, especially when the weather is cold.

He goes further than most climate change deniers, saying, in fact, that he thinks it's a hoax.

And Trump thinks he knows exactly who's behind that hoax.


Scott Walker: Walker has dodged questions about whether climate change is caused by man, but his campaign spokeswoman AshLee Strong said, he "believes facts have shown that there has not been any measurable warming in the last 15 or 20 years." He has also given a speech at the Heartland Institute, a group that challenges climate change.

Walker has signaled that he plans to block Wisconsin from implementing to administration's Clean Power Plan, which aims to curb carbon emissions from power plants.




This is what I call a good news article. It takes a subject, researches it and presents the various conclusions in a clear, contrasted way. If I had to choose Republican presidents from this list I would choose: Chris Christie, Carly Fiorini, Lindsey Graham, Bobby Jindahl, John Kasich, and George Petaki. Kasich and Petaki are open to international efforts to control the changes. Most of them, to one degree or another are “deniers.” Trump says he considers it to be “a hoax,” and Santorum calls it "just patently absurd," he told Rush Limbaugh in 2011, and "just an excuse for more government control of your life." Several of them do acknowledge the idea that global warming or “climate change” at least is occurring, is caused by man’s use of fossil fuels, and are ready to participate with other nations to limit the CO2 emissions. A few of them echoed the old Republican line that trying to limit the way Big Business operates will threaten the job supply. That is how they hope to appeal to the poor.

Kasich not only agrees that climate change is manmade and is a problem, but echoes the emotional reaction that I have to it: "I happen to believe there is a problem with climate change. I don't want to overreact to it, I can't measure it all, but I respect the creation that the Lord has given us and I want to make sure we protect it." To me, this is a truly Christian stance. I can’t quote many things from the Bible, but I do remember in Genesis that the Jews were told by Jahweh to “dress the garden” of Eden, and instead we are in the midst of laying waste to it. I don’t see how truly “Conservative” people could fail to take his stance. I think he is the best Republican here for President. Not only does it affirm that he would push for at least some of the things I care about, but that he is an educated, logical and intelligent man. He thinks!





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/video-seems-to-show-cops-shooting-man-with-hands-up/

Video seems to show cops shooting man with hands up
CBS/AP
September 1, 2015

Photograph -- Gilbert Flores in undated photo released by the Bexar County Sheriff's Office KENS-TV/BEXAR COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE


SAN ANTONIO -- Video obtained by a San Antonio TV station appears to show a man with his hands up fatally shot by deputies, an encounter that authorities say happened after the armed man resisted arrest and nonlethal weapons failed to bring him under control.

Gilbert Flores, 41, died shortly after the shooting Friday, the Bexar County Sheriff's Office said in a statement Monday.

The office said it's received threats to its deputies since the video aired.

Deputies Greg Vasquez and Robert Sanchez were responding to a domestic disturbance and found a woman with a cut on her head and a baby who appeared injured, according to the statement.


The deputies encountered Flores, who was armed, and attempted to arrest him, the sheriff's department said. The statement didn't say what type of weapon Flores had.

After Flores resisted, the deputies used nonlethal weapons in an attempt to detain him, but when "those efforts failed," they shot him, according to the statement.

The video, taken by a bystander and obtained by KSAT-TV, appears to show Flores standing still with his arms raised just before two shots are heard. Flores drops to the ground. The video doesn't include audio of deputies' commands or Flores' response, and the scene is partially obscured by police vehicles and passing cars.

Moments later, deputies drag and flip Flores onto his stomach. About a minute and a half later, an ambulance arrives.

The video was shot from more than 100 feet away, reports CBS San Antonio affiliate KENS-TV, adding that the video appears to show him without a weapon in his hands, which are open and raised at the time of the shooting. Authorities have said he was armed with a knife when deputies arrived.

The deputies, who had both been with the sheriff's office for more than 10 years, have been placed on standard paid administrative leave. The sheriff's department is investigating and has said the officers were not wearing body cameras.

"Certainly what's in the video is a cause for concern, but it's important to let the investigation go through its course so that we can assure a thorough and complete review of all that occurred," Sheriff Susan Pamerleau said at a news conference Friday.

But her office later criticized the release of the video as "unethical" and "sensational."

"These deputies have not been charged with a crime and a family lost their loved one," the office wrote in a Facebook post Monday.

The post encouraged people who disagree with the publishing of the video to "call KSAT and let them know what you think" and listed the station's phone number."

In a separate statement, the office said it has "taken precautions to make sure our deputies are safe after receiving threats concerning their safety. All of our deputies are on heightened awareness."

The department didn't respond to messages Monday seeking further comment on the video.

A woman at the residence where the shooting took place declined a reporter's questions Monday, referring him to San Antonio attorney Thomas J. Henry, who did not immediately return phone calls seeking comment.




“Video obtained by a San Antonio TV station appears to show a man with his hands up fatally shot by deputies, an encounter that authorities say happened after the armed man resisted arrest and nonlethal weapons failed to bring him under control. …. The video, taken by a bystander and obtained by KSAT-TV, appears to show Flores standing still with his arms raised just before two shots are heard. Flores drops to the ground. The video doesn't include audio of deputies' commands or Flores' response, and the scene is partially obscured by police vehicles and passing cars. Moments later, deputies drag and flip Flores onto his stomach. About a minute and a half later, an ambulance arrives. The video was shot from more than 100 feet away, reports CBS San Antonio affiliate KENS-TV, adding that the video appears to show him without a weapon in his hands, which are open and raised at the time of the shooting. Authorities have said he was armed with a knife when deputies arrived. …. "Certainly what's in the video is a cause for concern, but it's important to let the investigation go through its course so that we can assure a thorough and complete review of all that occurred," Sheriff Susan Pamerleau said at a news conference Friday. But her office later criticized the release of the video as "unethical" and "sensational." …. The post encouraged people who disagree with the publishing of the video to "call KSAT and let them know what you think" and listed the station's phone number." In a separate statement, the office said it has "taken precautions to make sure our deputies are safe after receiving threats concerning their safety. All of our deputies are on heightened awareness." …. A woman at the residence where the shooting took place declined a reporter's questions Monday, referring him to San Antonio attorney Thomas J. Henry, who did not immediately return phone calls seeking comment.”

I really don’t know what is “unethical” about the station’s publishing the video alongside the Sheriff’s Department fallacious official report. So often since I began clipping these articles the Deputies have reported something that a video taken at the scene contradicts. It is probably no accident that this shooter “was not wearing a body camera.” Many police departments now are buying them for their officers and changing the way they train them as well, which is great, but not all are. I do think the trend toward sunshine which has begun in our cities will produce good changes, but this particular set of officers didn’t follow an ethical and professional policing policy, unfortunately. That is what I think is “unethical” in this case.

Thank goodness for the free press in this country. May the “conservative thought” period which we have entered in the US under the Reagan and Bush administrations and in many countries around the world be of short duration and limited strength. I want to see American democratic views still surviving when I die.