confusion

LAPD report says confusion hampered Palisades Fire response

The Los Angeles Police Department has released a report that identifies several shortcomings in its response to the devastating Palisades fire, including communication breakdowns, inconsistent record-keeping and poor coordination at times with other agencies — most notably the city’s Fire Department.

The after-action report called the January blaze a “once in a lifetime cataclysmic event” and praised the heroic actions of many officers, but said the LAPD’s missteps presented a “valuable learning opportunity” with more climate-related disasters likely looming in the future.

LAPD leaders released the 92-page report and presented the findings to the Police Commission at the civilian oversight panel’s public meeting Tuesday.

The report found that while the Fire Department was the lead agency, coordination with the LAPD was “poor” on Jan. 7, the first day of the fire. Though personnel from both agencies were working out of the same command post, they failed to “collectively establish a unified command structure or identify shared objectives, missions, or strategies,” the report said.

Uncertainty about who was in charge was another persistent issue, with more confusion sown by National Guard troops that were deployed to the area. Department leaders were given no clear guidelines on what the guard’s role would be when they arrived, the report said.

The mix-ups were the result of responding to a wildfire of unprecedented scale, officials said. At times the flames were advancing at 300 yards a minute, LAPD assistant chief Michael Rimkunas told the commission.

“Hopefully we don’t have to experience another natural disaster, but you never know,” Rimkunas said, adding that the endeavor was “one of the largest and most complex traffic control operations in its history.”

Between Jan. 11 and Jan. 16, when the LAPD’s operation was at its peak, more than 700 officers a day were assigned to the fire, the report said.

The report found that officials failed to maintain a chronological log about the comings and goings of LAPD personnel at the fire zone.

“While it is understandable that the life-threatening situation at hand took precedence over the completion of administrative documentation,” the report said, “confusion at the command post about how many officers were in the field “resulted in diminished situational awareness.”

After the fire first erupted, the department received more than 160 calls for assistance, many of them for elderly or disabled residents who were stuck in their homes — though the report noted that the disruption of cell service contributed to widespread confusion.

The communication challenges continued throughout the day, the report found.

Encroaching flames forced authorities to move their command post several times. An initial staging area, which was in the path of the evacuation route and the fire, was consumed within 30 minutes, authorities said.

But because of communication breakdowns caused by downed radio and cellphone towers, dispatchers sometimes had trouble reaching officers in the field and police were forced to “hand deliver” important paper documents from a command post to its staging area on Zuma Beach, about 20 miles away.

Several commissioners asked about reports of journalists being turned away from fire zones in the weeks that followed the fire’s outbreak.

Assistant Chief Dominic Choi said there was some trepidation about whether to allow journalists into the fire-ravaged area while authorities were still continuing their search for bodies of fire victims.

Commissioner Rasha Gerges Shields said that while she had some concerns about the LAPD’s performance, overall she was impressed and suggested that officers should be commended for their courage. The department has said that dozens of officers lost their homes to the fires.

The report also recommended that the department issue masks and personal protective equipment after there was a shortage for officers on the front lines throughout the first days of the blaze.

The Palisades fire was one of the costliest and most destructive disasters in city history, engulfing nearly 23,000 acres, leveling more than 6,000 structures and killing 12 people. More than 60,000 people were evacuated. The deaths of five people within L.A. city limits remain under investigation by the LAPD’s Major Crimes Division and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

The LAPD reports details how at 11:15 a.m., about 45 minutes after the first 911 calls, the call was made to issue a citywide tactical alert, the report said. The department stayed in a heightened state of alert for 29 days, allowing it to draw resources from other parts of the city, but also meaning that certain calls would not receive a timely police response.

As the flames began to engulf a nearby hillside, more officers began responding to the area, including a contingent that had been providing security at a visit by President Trump.

Initially, LAPD officers operated in largely a rescue- and traffic-control role. But as the fire wore on, police began to conduct crime suppression sweeps in the evacuation zones where opportunistic burglars were breaking into homes they knew were empty.

In all, 90 crimes were reported in the fire zone, including four crimes against people, a robbery and three aggravated assaults, 46 property crimes, and 40 other cases, ranging from a weapons violation to identity theft. The department made 19 arrests.

The new report comes weeks after the city of Los Angeles put out its own assessment of the fire response — and on the heels of federal prosecutors arresting and charging a 29-year-old Uber driver with intentionally setting a fire Jan. 1 that later grew into the Palisades fire.

The LAPD’s Major Crimes and Robbery-Homicide units also worked with the ATF to investigate the fire’s cause.

Source link

ICC Women’s Cricket World Cup 2025: India beat Pakistan amid controversy, confusion – and bugs

Perhaps the biggest talking point came from an incident early in Pakistan’s innings when opener Muneeba Ali was controversially run out.

The left-hander was struck on the pad by Goud and as the India bowler appealed unsuccessfully for lbw, Deepti Sharma collected the loose ball and threw at the stumps.

She hit but replays showed Muneeba had grounded her bat before the ball was even in the picture and a ‘not out’ decision from the third umpire Kerrin Klaaste went up on the big screen in the ground.

However, before the game restarted, the decision was looked at again and it transpired that when the ball hit the stumps and dislodged the bails, Muneeba had lifted her bat and was still stood out of her crease.

While the batter had already grounded her bat and was not trying to sneak a single, the third umpire changed her decision to ‘out’ and despite Pakistan protests, which saw captain Fatima Sana tell her batter not to leave the field for a short time, Muneeba had to go.

In a further twist, had India simply reviewed the lbw decision, the whole controversy would have been avoided because ball-tracking showed Muneeba was plumb lbw.

Source link

Anger and confusion as Meta overturns more Instagram account bans

Graham Fraser

Technology Reporter

Getty Images An anonymous man sitting on a bed looking out of the windowGetty Images

The banning of accounts has left an emotional impact on people

Instagram users have told the BBC of their confusion, fear and anger after having their accounts suspended, often for being wrongly accused by parent company Meta of breaching the platform’s child sex abuse rules.

For months, tens of thousands of people around the world have been complaining Meta has been banning their Instagram and Facebook accounts in error.

They say they have been wrongly accused of breaching site rules – including around child sexual exploitation.

More than 500 of them have contacted the BBC to say they have lost cherished photos and seen businesses upended – but some also speak of the profound personal toll it has taken on them, including concerns that the police could become involved.

Meta acknowledged a problem with the erroneous banning of Facebook Groups in June, but has denied there is wider issue on Facebook or Instagram at all.

It has repeatedly refused to comment on the problems its users are facing – though it has frequently overturned bans when the BBC has raised individual cases with it.

Here are some of the stories users have shared with BBC News.

‘I put all of my trust in social media’

Yassmine Boussihmed, 26, from the Netherlands, spent five years building an Instagram profile for her boutique dress shop in Eindhoven.

In April, she was banned over account integrity. Over 5,000 followers, gone in an instant. She lost clients, and was devastated.

“I put all of my trust in social media, and social media helped me grow, but it has let me down,” she told the BBC.

This week, after the BBC sent questions about her case to Meta’s press office, her Instagram accounts were reinstated.

“I am so thankful,” she said in a tearful voice note.

Five minutes later, her personal Instagram was suspended again – but the account for the dress shop remained.

Getty Images Two women taking a selfie Getty Images

Lucia, not her real name, is a 21-year-old woman from Austin, Texas.

She was suspended from Instagram for just over two weeks for breaching Meta’s policy on child sexual exploitation (CSE), abuse and nudity.

As with all the other cases, she was not told what post breached the platform’s rules.

That has left wondering if a picture she posted of herself and her 21-year-old friend wearing bikini tops somehow triggered the artificial intelligence (AI) moderation tools, as she thinks they “look a little bit younger”.

She also uses her account to interact with under 18s, such as sending Reels to her younger sister.

“It is deeply troubling to have an accusation as disgusting as this one,” she told BBC News.

“Given that I have a desire to work in juvenile justice as an attorney and advocate on behalf of children, I am appalled to have been suspended for something I know I did not do and would never do.”

She appealed, and then about seven hours after the BBC highlighted Lucia’s case to Meta’s press office, her account was restored with no explanation.

Over 36,000 people have signed a petition accusing Meta of falsely banning accounts; thousands more are in Reddit forums or on social media posting about it.

Their central accusation – Meta’s AI is unfairly banning people, with the tech also being used to deal with the appeals. The only way to speak to a human is to pay for Meta Verified, and even then many are frustrated.

Meta has not commented on these claims. Instagram states AI is central to its “content review process” and Meta has outlined how technology and humans enforce its policies.

A community torn away

Duncan Edmonstone A picture of Duncan Edmonstone. He is a white man with black glasses and a grey beard. He is wearing a blue jumper.Duncan Edmonstone

Duncan Edmonstone thinks unfair social media bans “has real world consequences that Meta’s management don’t consider”

Duncan Edmonstone, from Cheshire, has stage four ALK+ lung cancer. The 55-year-old finds solace in the support network he has on private Facebook groups.

For 12 days at the end of June, he was banned for breaking cybersecurity guidelines before being reinstated.

“The support groups are my lifeline, and there are actual examples of where advice from group members has made a difference to other patient’s treatment,” he said.

“I draw satisfaction and meaning, in a life that is probably going to be cut short, from helping other people in that group.”

Banned, unbanned – then banned again

Getty Images The Instagram logo on a phoneGetty Images

Ryan – not his real name – has been banned, reinstated, and banned again from Instagram over the past few months.

The former teacher from London was thrown off the platform in May after he was accused of breaching the CSE policy.

He spent a month appealing. In June, the BBC understands a human moderator double checked and concluded Ryan had breached the policy.

Then his account was abruptly restored at the end of July.

“We’re sorry we’ve got this wrong,” Instagram said in an email to him, adding that he had done nothing wrong.

Ryan was left flabbergasted.

“‘Sorry we called you a paedophile for two months – here is your account back,'” is how he characterised the tone of the message.

But that wasn’t the end of the story.

Hours after the BBC contacted Meta’s press office to ask questions about his experience, he was banned again on Instagram and, for the first time, Facebook.

“I am devastated and I don’t know what to do,” he told the BBC.

“I can’t believe it has happened twice.”

His Facebook account was back two days later – but he was still blocked from Instagram.

Ryan says he has been left feeling deeply isolated – and worried the police are going to “knock on the door”.

His experiences mirrors those of other Instagram users who told the BBC of the “extreme stress” of having their accounts banned after being wrongly accused of breaching the platform’s rules on CSE.

What has Meta said?

Getty Images An illustration of social media, with a person scrolling on their phone and emojis graphics such as a like or a smile are visibleGetty Images

When a user is suspended and they appeal, Meta pledges to look at their account. If the appeal is successful, the user is reinstated. If not, the user is then permanently banned

Despite taking action on Yassmine, Lucia and Ryan’s accounts, Meta has not made any comment to the BBC.

In common with all big technology firms, it has come under pressure from authorities to make its platforms safer.

In July, Meta said it was taking “aggressive action” on accounts breaking its rules – including the removal of 635,000 Instagram and Facebook accounts over sexualised comments and imagery in relation to children.

Meta’s wide-ranging policy on child sexual exploitation has changed three times since Boxing Day last year, with all amendments occurring since 17 July.

It has not said what impact, if any, these changes had on the cases the BBC has raised with it.

A green promotional banner with black squares and rectangles forming pixels, moving in from the right. The text says: “Tech Decoded: The world’s biggest tech news in your inbox every Monday.”



Source link

Prepare for confusion in new flag football season: ‘Crazy stuff is going to happen’

With the City Section now having more girls flag football teams (93) than 11-man teams (71), the growing popularity of the sport is clear. But the sport faces a huge challenge when official practice begins on Aug. 8 — rule changes.

Confusion among all the stakeholders — coaches, players, officials, parents — is certain to take place in the early games.

That was evident during a meeting on Wednesday. City Section coaches received a briefing from Nelson Bae, the section’s rules interpreter. There were so many questions that City Section commissioner Vicky Lagos had to halt them or the meeting would have lasted for hours. Coaches were told to submit their questions later.

A national rulebook was established by the National Federation of State High School Assns. and some of the changes are massive, such as the addition of punting and screen blocking.

“Crazy stuff is going to happen,” Bae told the coaches. “All of us are going to have to adjust. I’ve already seen some things, ‘This is going to be a problem.’”

Screen blocking could be a vocal point of confusion because, as Bae said, penalties could be called on every play similar to holding in 11-man football. No contact is allowed when blocking but deciding who made the contact and who receives the penalty will be the judgment call that could have parents yelling in the bleachers if they don’t understand the correct interpretation.

Coaches are having to train players not to use their hands and rushers can’t run into moving screens or a penalty is supposed to be called.

“Go around,” Bae advised.

It will be confusing in early games, particularly until everyone adjusts.

There will be four playoff divisions, up from three last season, as the sport enters its third season in the City Section.

Coaches have been seeking out soccer players to serve as punters. Prepare for the unexpected this fall.

Source link

Confusion and concern loom over Mexico’s historic judicial election | Elections News

From the beginning, the reforms were controversial. Thousands of court workers went on strike to protest the constitutional amendment. Some protesters even stormed the Senate building.

Critics accused the Morena party of seeking to strengthen its grip on power by electing sympathetic judges. Already, the party holds majorities in both chambers of Congress, as well as the presidency.

Opponents also feared the elections would lead to unqualified candidates taking office.

Under the new regulations, candidates must have a law degree, experience in legal affairs, no criminal record and letters of recommendation.

Candidates also had to pass evaluation committees, comprised of representatives from the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government.

And yet, some of the final candidates have nevertheless raised eyebrows. One was arrested for trafficking methamphetamine. Another is implicated in a murder investigation. Still more have been accused of sexual misconduct.

Arias suspects that some candidates slipped through the screening process due to the limited resources available to organise the election.

She noted that the National Election Institute had less than 10 months to arrange the elections, since the reforms were only passed in September.

“The timing is very rushed,” she said.

One of the most controversial hopefuls in Sunday’s election is Silvia Delgado, a lawyer who once defended the cofounder of the Sinaloa Cartel, Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzman.

She is now campaigning to be a judge in Ciudad Juarez, in the border state of Chihuahua.

Despite her high-profile client, Delgado told Al Jazeera that the scrutiny over her candidacy is misplaced: She maintains she was only doing her job as a lawyer.

“Having represented this or that person does not make you part of a criminal group,” she said.

Rather, she argues that it is Mexico’s incumbent judges who deserve to be under the microscope. She claimed many of them won their positions through personal connections.

“They got in through a recommendation or through a family member who got them into the judiciary,” she said.

President Sheinbaum has likewise framed the elections as part of the battle against nepotism and self-dealing in the judicial system.

“This is about fighting corruption,” Sheinbaum said in one of her morning news briefings. “This is the defence of the Mexican people for justice, for honesty, for integrity.”

Source link