1 dead, at least 12 injured in shooting at Oklahoma City party
(OKLAHOMA CITY) — At least one person has been killed and 12 others have been injured in a shooting that took place at a party at an event center in Oklahoma City, police have confirmed.
Oklahoma City Police said that it appears there was a disturbance which led to “multiple shots being fired both inside and outside the event center.”
The names and ages of those involved in the incident have not yet been released but authorities have confirmed that at least one person was killed in the altercation and 12 others have been injured.
The suspects are currently unknown at this time but several people have been detained, according to law enforcement.
“We are in the process of interviewing witnesses,” authorities told ABC News. “We will provide more details when we get them.”
The investigation is currently active and ongoing.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(SANTA FE, N.M.) — A New Mexico judge will weigh whether to dismiss the case against “Rust” armorer Hannah Gutierrez, who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in the fatal shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, after dismissing the case against Alec Baldwin for evidence suppression.
Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer heard arguments during a virtual hearing Thursday on a defense motion seeking a new trial or dismissal of Gutierrez’s case.
Her attorneys argued in the filing that she is entitled to a new trial or dismissal of the case for “egregious prosecutorial misconduct” and “severe and ongoing discovery violations by the State.”
Marlowe Sommer dismissed Baldwin’s case with prejudice on day three of the actor’s July trial after his attorneys claimed live ammunition that came into the hands of local law enforcement related to the investigation into the deadly on-set shooting was “concealed” from them.
The judge said in court on July 12 while issuing her ruling that the state’s discovery violation regarding the late disclosure of a supplemental report on the ammunition evidence “injected needless delay into the proceedings,” approached “bad faith” and was “highly prejudicial to the defendant.”
During Thursday’s hearing, defense attorney Jason Bowles said the “significance of the items that were suppressed were favorable and material” to Gutierrez.
Bowles told the judge that he became aware of the ammunition at the heart of Baldwin’s dismissal — which had been brought forward by his witness, Troy Teske, during Gutierrez’s trial — but directed Teske to bring it to the sheriff’s office because he “didn’t want to be in the chain of custody.”
“We weren’t told what happened” after that, Bowles said. “We weren’t able to utilize those rounds.”
He also argued that the state suppressed additional evidence, including one of firearm expert Luke Haag’s reports on the revolver involved in the shooting, and an interview with Seth Kenney, the owner of the prop firearms supplier for “Rust.”
“This pattern of discovery abuse occurred in Miss [Gutierrez’s] case in the same manner that it occurred in Mr. Baldwin’s case,” Bowles said, saying they are “asking for dismissal on the same basis that this court dismissed Mr. Baldwin’s case.”
Morrissey argued that Gutierrez and Bowles can’t rely on the dismissal of Baldwin’s case over the rounds because they were in the possession of his witness, Teske.
“She and her lawyer had them during trial and chose not to use them,” she said. “That is exactly what happened,”
“They don’t get to now come and say we made a strategic error, so give us a new trial,” she continued.
Morrissey argued that the other evidence raised by Bowles was not material and said the state did not intentionally withhold evidence.
“Nothing was intentionally buried,” she said, adding that the case had a “terabyte of discovery” with new discovery “coming in constantly.”
She admitted to failing to provide the defense with one of Haag’s report, saying she forwarded it to him when she realized it after Gutierrez’s trial.
“When I realized during the Baldwin preparation for trial that that did not occur, I immediately, I took full responsibility for it,” she said. “We did the best we could do resolve it at that point.”
Morrissey argued that Haag’s findings on the revolver still would not help the defense if there were a new trial. She also argued that the defense could have found the evidence before Gutierrez’s trial themselves through “due diligence.”
Bowles additionally alleged in his motion that Morrissey lied under oath during a motion hearing during Baldwin’s trial and asked that if the judge granted a new trial, to remove Kari Morrissey as the special prosecutor. “I don’t do it lightly,” he told the judge Thursday.
Morrissey contended in court filings that she didn’t lie under oath. During Thursday’s hearing, she said she stands by her response while adding that the defense did not include the legal analysis in their motion to remove her as prosecutor.
“This isn’t just something that you randomly ask for,” she said. “The legal analysis has to be conducted, and it hasn’t been conducted here.”
Thursday’s hearing also addressed a defense motion asking for Gutierrez’s immediate release from prison.
Judge Marlowe Sommer said she will issue rulings on both motions next week.
A jury found Gutierrez guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the death of Hutchins, who was fatally shot by Baldwin on the Santa Fe set of the Western in October 2021 when his revolver fired a live round.
Prosecutors argued during the March trial that the armorer was the source of the live bullet that killed Hutchins and had failed to follow safety protocols meant to protect the crew while handling the firearms.
Gutierrez was sentenced in April to 18 months in prison, the maximum for the offense.
(NEW YORK) — As schools and libraries across the country face record-breaking attempts to remove books from shelves, most Americans are opposed to book restrictions in public schools, according to a new survey.
In 2023, the American Library Association (ALA) documented 4,240 unique book titles targeted for censorship, as well as 1,247 demands to censor library books, materials and resources.
The targeting of unique book titles increased by 65% from 2022 to 2023, reaching the highest level ever documented by ALA.
These efforts have increased alongside state legislation restricting certain school content on topics like race, sex, gender and more.
However, a new study by the Knight Foundation — a nonprofit that provides grants for journalism and the arts — found that two-thirds of Americans oppose efforts to restrict books. There are more strong opponents than strong supporters of book restrictions, with a 3-1 divide among respondents.
The study found that 62% of Americans oppose their state government legislating what content is allowable in school books.
Public school parents are more likely to be in favor of book restrictions, but more than half of parents (59%) still oppose book restrictions. This is lower than the 67% opposition rate among non-parents.
About 7% of parents with reading-age children reported their child reading an age-inappropriate book from school, and 25% of pre-K-12 parents are concerned about this happening in the future.
Classroom or library content restrictions are often based on concerns about what is deemed “age-appropriate” for certain ages — as is the case in legislation in Florida, Utah, Texas and other states.
More survey participants said it is a bigger concern to restrict students’ access to books that have educational value than it is for them to have access to books that have inappropriate content, especially when it comes to students in middle school and high school.
Six in 10 survey respondents saw age appropriateness as a legitimate reason to restrict students’ book access. However, the report found that far fewer say it is legitimate to block access to books that contradict parents’ political views, religious beliefs or moral values.
Most public school parents are confident in the appropriateness of their school’s book selections. The study also found that 78% of all adults say they are confident that their community’s public schools select appropriate books for students to read.
Though the public feels strongly about the issue — 62% call it highly important — very few have taken action themselves on the issue. Only 3% have personally engaged in the debate, according to the report — 2% engaging to maintain access and 1% to restrict access.
Conservatives are over-represented in the support for book restrictions, making up 57% of book restriction supporters but only 27% of all adults, according to the Knight Foundation. Conservatives are also less likely to feel politically represented in public school books.
(SAN FRANCISCO) — In a first-of-its-kind lawsuit, California Attorney General Rob Bonta and a coalition of environmental nonprofit groups are suing ExxonMobil for the company’s alleged role in the global plastics pollution crisis.
The state claims the oil and gas giant engaged in a “decades-long campaign of deception” to lie to consumers about the sustainability of plastic recycling, according to the lawsuit filed Monday in San Francisco County Superior Court.
The suit alleges the company perpetuated the myth that plastics, particularly single-use plastics, are sustainable and recyclable, knowing this was false and that 95% of plastics end up in landfills.
ExxonMobil is the leading producer of synthetic polymers, which are essentially the building blocks of single-use plastics such as bottles, wrappers and bags, according to the lawsuit.
“Plastics are everywhere, from the deepest parts of our oceans, the highest peaks on earth, and even in our bodies, causing irreversible damage — in ways known and unknown — to our environment and potentially our health,” Bonta said in a press release announcing the lawsuit.
The lawsuit claims ExxonMobil deliberately shifted the responsibility for plastic waste to consumers by promoting the idea that plastic recycling was their individual duty, while the company knew recycling was not a viable solution.
In response to the lawsuit, a spokesperson for ExxonMobil released a statement to ABC News saying, “For decades, California officials have known their recycling system isn’t effective. They failed to act, and now they seek to blame others. Instead of suing us, they could have worked with us to fix the problem and keep plastic out of landfills.”
The filing follows a two-year investigation initiated in 2022, during which the attorney general says his office issued multiple subpoenas and obtained extensive materials to build the case.
“For decades, ExxonMobil has been deceiving the public to convince us that plastic recycling could solve the plastic waste and pollution crisis when they clearly knew this wasn’t possible,” Bonta said.
“We are focused on solutions and meritless allegations like these distract from the important collaborative work that is underway to enhance waste management and improve circularity,” a spokesperson for the company told Reuters in a written response after the AG opened the investigation in 2022.
Bonta claimed in the lawsuit that ExxonMobil promoted “advanced recycling,” which is portrayed as an innovative recycling solution but that the program is neither new nor effective.
ExxonMobil’s “advanced recycling” process cannot handle large amounts of post-consumer plastic waste such as potato chip bags without risking the safety and performance of its equipment, according to the suit.
The lawsuit claims the recycling program only accounts for “less than one percent of ExxonMobil’s total virgin plastic production capacity, which continues to grow.”
In the statement to ABC News, a spokesperson for ExxonMobil claimed, “To date, we’ve processed more than 60 million pounds of plastic waste into usable raw materials, keeping it out of landfills.”
As of September 2024, Exxon Mobil’s market cap was ranked at over $512 billion, making it the 18th most valuable company in the world.
“ExxonMobil lied to further its record-breaking profits at the expense of our planet and possibly jeopardizing our health. Today’s lawsuit shows the fullest picture to date of ExxonMobil’s decades-long deception, and we are asking the court to hold ExxonMobil fully accountable for its role in actively creating and exacerbating the plastics pollution crisis through its campaign of deception,” Bonta said.
The California DOJ is seeking billions in civil damages, for environmental destruction, harm to public health, and to end the company’s “deceptive practices.”
More than 26 million pounds of trash has been collected from California beaches and waterways since 1985, according to the lawsuit, and approximately 81 percent of it was plastic.
The lawsuit alleges most of the plastic items collected on the annual California Coastal Cleanup Day can be traced to ExxonMobil’s polymer resins.