Terrorist Stephen Paddock kills 58, injures 515 at Las Vegas concert

News Network
October 2, 2017

Washington, Oct 2: As many as 58 people were killed and 515 injured when a terrorist opened fire on an outdoor music festival on Sunday night from the 32nd floor of an adjacent hotel in the Las Vegas Strip. Local police have described the incident as an act of “domestic terrorism.”

The Islamic State, an anti-Islamic terror group, claimed responsibility for the attack but the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) has disputed the claim. “We have determined, to this point, no connection with an international terrorist group,” Aaron Rouse, the special agent in charge of the FBI in Las Vegas, said at a press conference on Monday.

Around 22,000 people had gathered for the Route 91 Harvest country music festival that is held over the three days. Jason Aldean was scheduled to be the headline performer on the final night on Sunday. However, he was not on the stage when the shooting began around 10:08 p.m. Eyewitnesses quoted by the National Public Radio said the shooting went on for several minutes.

The concert goers crowding Las Vegas Village initially did not realise that it was bullets raining on them from the Mandalay Bay Hotel and Casino that overlooks the outdoor venue. The shooter may have been staying in the hotel since Thursday, police said. “..approximately 406 people were transported to area hospitals," the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department said.

The incident is the deadliest mass shootings in recent time in the U.S. The June 2016 mass shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida left 49 dead.

The gunman, identified as Stephen Paddock, a 64-year-old white man, was found dead in his hotel room by the police. Police said they recovered “in excess of 10 rifles” from his room, which they blasted open, and suspected that he used automatic assault weapons in the attack. Paddock from Mesquite was a licensed pilot, owned two planes and had a hunting licence from Alaska, according to initial reports. However, no motives have been suggested for the deadly violence. The FBI has joined the investigation, along with the local police.

President Donald Trump termed the incident “an act of pure evil.” A presidential proclamation ordered flags be flown at half-staff on federal buildings. “We cannot fathom their pain, we cannot imagine their loss,” Mr. Trump said of those who lost loved ones in the massacre.

Comments

ABD
 - 
Tuesday, 3 Oct 2017

Dear Cd, This is a fake news spread in Google and Facebook

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.