safety

A strange quirk at San Quentin state prison is that most of those incarcerated behind its towering walls are unable to see the San Francisco Bay that literally laps at the shore a few yards away.

That changed recently with the completion of new buildings — holding among other accouterments a self-serve kitchen, a library, a cafe and a film studio — and third-floor classrooms that look out over that beautiful blue expanse, long a symbol of freedom and possibility.

In the new San Quentin Rehabilitation Center, along with learning job skills and earning degrees, incarcerated men can do their own laundry, make their own meals, and interact with guards as mentors and colleagues of sorts, once a taboo kind of relationship in the us-and-them world of incarceration.

“You want to clothes wash? You wash them,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom, debuting the new facilities, including laundry machines, for reporters last week. “You want to get something to eat. You can do it, whenever.”

“All of a sudden, it’s like you’re starting to make decisions for yourself,” he said. “It’s called life.”

Listen closely, and one can almost hear President Trump’s brain exploding with glee and outrage as his favorite Democratic foil seemingly coddles criminals. A cafe? C’mon. Bring on the midterms!

March 2024 of the East Block of San Quentin’s former death row.

(Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times)

But what Newsom has done inside California’s most notorious prison, once home to the largest death row in the Western Hemisphere, is nothing short of a remarkable shift of thinking, culture and implementation around what it means to take away someone’s freedom — and eventually give it back. Adapted from European models, it’s a vision of incarceration that is meant to deal with the reality that 95% of people who go to prison are eventually released. That’s more than 30,000 people each year in California alone.

“What kind of neighbors do you want them to be?” Newsom asked. “Are they coming back broken? Are they coming back better? Are they coming back more enlivened, more capable? Are they coming back into prison over and over?”

When it comes to reforming criminals, “success looks like more and more people gravitating to their own journey, their own personal reform,” Newsom said, sounding more like a lifestyle influencer than a presidential contender. “It’s not forced on you, because then it’s fake, man. If it’s coerced, I don’t buy it.”

Of course, coming back better should be the goal — because better people commit fewer crimes, and that benefits us all. But coming back over and over has become the norm.

Traditional incarceration, a lock-’em-up and watch-them-suffer approach, has dramatically failed not only our communities and public safety writ large, but also inmates and even those who guard them.

Incarcerated people come out of prison too often in California (and across the country) with addictions and emotional troubles still firmly in place, and no job or educational skills to help them muddle through a crime-free life. That means they often commit more crimes, create more victims and cycle back into this failed, expensive, tough-on-crime system.

Still, it’s a favorite trope of Trump, and the justification for both his immigration roundups and his deployment of National Guard troops in Democratic cities, that policies such as Newsom’s are weak on crime and have led to the decline of American society.

This narrative of fear and grievance goes back decades, recycled every election by the so-called law-and-order party because it’s effective — voters crave safety, especially in a chaotic world. And locking people up seems safe, at least until we let them go again.

But, as Chance Andes, the warden of San Quentin, pointed out last week, “Humanity is safety,” and treating incarcerated people like, well, people, actually makes them want to behave better.

Here’s where the tough-on-crime folks will begin composing their angry emails. Why are we paying for killers to have a view? Why should I care if a rapist has a good book to read? Our budget is bleeding red, why are tax dollars being used for prison lattes? (To be fair, I do not know whether they actually have lattes.)

But consider this: The prison guards back Newsom.

“Done right, it improves working conditions for our officers and strengthens public safety,” said Steve Adney, executive vice president of the California Correctional Peace Officers Assn., the union that represents guards, of the California model, as Newsom calls his vision.

Faced with high rates of suicide and other ills such as addiction, corrections officers have long been concerned about the stress and violence of their jobs. A few years ago, some union members traveled to Norway to see prisons there. I tagged along.

A correctional officer at Halden prison in Norway checks out the ice cream freezer in the grocery store inside the facility.

(Javad Parsa/For The Times)

The American officers were shocked to see Norwegian prisoners access kitchen knives and power tools, but even more shocked that the guards had built relationships with these criminals that allowed them to do their jobs with far less fear.

Rather than jailers, these corrections officers were more like social workers or guides to a better way of living. Of course, the corrections officers aren’t dumb. That only works with vetted inmates, such as those at San Quentin, who have proved they want to change.

But when you have officers and incarcerated people who are able to coexist with respect and maybe a dash of kindness, you get a different outcome for both sides.

“If we are capable of building this at San Quentin, then we are capable of making the workplace safe for every officer who walks in the gates,” said CCPOA President Neil Flood, a startling statement in favor of radical reform from a law enforcement officer.

But in a moment when most Democrats with ambitions for national office (or even an eye on replacing Newsom) are backing away from criminal justice reform, it would be naive to think the California model won’t be used to bludgeon Newsom in a presidential race, and provide further fuel to the dumpster-fire narrative about the state.

Soon — before the midterms — many expect Congress to move forward on Trump’s expressed desire for a crime bill that would empower police with even greater immunity for wrongdoing, create longer sentences for crimes including those involving drugs and further erode criminal justice reform in the name of public safety.

Trump is going hard in the opposite direction, toward more punishment, always the easier and more understandable route for voters fed up with crime (even though crime rates have been declining since President Biden was in office).

The California model is “a political liability in this environment,” said Tinisch Hollins, a victims advocate who worked on the San Quentin transition and heads Californians for Safety and Justice.

But she retains faith that “the majority of people don’t believe that shoving everyone into prison is how we resolve the problem.”

Newsom deserves credit for standing by that position, when simply backing away and dropping the California model would have been the simpler and safer route — it’s complicated and messy and oh-so-easy to make it sound dumb.

I refer you back to the cafe. If construction had been cut at San Quentin, the budget cited as the reason, no one would have noticed and few would have complained.

Instead, sounding a bit like Trump, Newsom said he “threatened the hell out of them if they didn’t get it done before I was gone.”

“This is not left or right,” he said. “This is just being smart and pragmatic and you know, I just … I believe people are not the worst thing they’ve done.”

Politically at least, San Quentin is a legacy for Newsom now, the best or worst thing he’s done on crime, depending on your personal views of second chances.

But it is undeniably a vision of public safety starkly at odds with Trump, one Newsom will carry into his next political fight — where it is certain to cause him some pain.

The UK Government issued an urgent safety alert for a travel electronic after it was identified as posing a serious risk of fire

The Government has issued an urgent safety warning for households who’ve recently bought a particular travel item or are planning a holiday in the near future. In a recent product safety report published on Wednesday, February 18, officials announced that a specific travel adapter must not be used.

This safety alert follows identification of the product as presenting a “serious risk” of fire during use. According to the government’s official website, the travel adapter fails to “conform to the dimensional requirements” of BS 1363 (the British Standard for 13-amp plugs, socket-outlets, and adapters), whilst also containing an undersized fuse.

The item in question is a black plug manufactured by the brand Decqle.

The product subject to the safety alert includes:

• Decqle Universal Travel Adapter – model number DQZ9.

They can also be identified by the following numbers: B0D95K3NV3, 1031-YSR3013, and 10433514U000010, reports the Express.

Ensure our latest headlines always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source. Click here to activate or add us as your Preferred Source in your Google search settings.

It additionally carries the PSD notification number: 2602-0096. A Product Safety Database (PSD) notification number is a unique identifier allocated to reports of unsafe or non-compliant products submitted to the UK’s Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS).

The risk description read: “The product presents a serious risk of fire because the plug does not meet the dimensional requirements of BS 1363 and the fuse is too small.

“The fuse is required to ensure the safe operation of the product under fault conditions, and its absence could lead to the plug overheating and/or exploding. Improvements are also required to the product labelling and marking.

“The product does not meet the requirements of the Electrical Equipment (Safety) Regulations 2016 or the Plugs & Sockets etc. (Safety) Regulations 1994.”

As the travel adaptor was imported into the UK, it has been turned away at the border as a corrective action.

If you want ideas and inspiration to plan your next UK adventure plus selected offers and competitions, sign up for our 2Chill weekly newsletter here

WASHINGTON — Since a government raid near Waco, Tex., turned into a fiery disaster two years ago, Atty. Gen. Janet Reno has steadfastly defended her decision to storm the besieged compound of the Branch Davidian religious sect and cited a need to rescue the 24 children inside from unsafe and worsening conditions.

But as the episode becomes the focus of renewed attention in the nation’s capital and beyond, fresh questions are centering on certain tactics used by federal agents–specifically the firing of hundreds of rounds of a military-style tear gas into the camp–that may themselves have endangered the children.

At 6:02 a.m. on April 19, 1993, following a 51-day standoff, FBI agents in military tanks advanced from siege lines around the Branch Davidian compound and fired volleys of CS gas inside the buildings to immobilize the heavily armed occupants.

The wooden structures were filled with the gas over the next six hours before the building erupted into flames, leaving more than 80 people dead, including all of the children. Before giving the order to advance, Reno said, she was assured by military experts that CS gas would cause no serious harm or permanent damage to the children of the besieged cult members.

However, it is now clear that medical literature and manufacturers’ warnings available at the time dispute that conclusion.

CS gas is potentially so hazardous when applied in confined spaces that California prison guards are cautioned against using it in the cells of unruly inmates. A Sherman Oaks company suspended sales of CS to the Israeli government in 1988 at the same time Amnesty International linked the gas to the deaths of Palestinians in homes and other buildings in the occupied territories.

Although adults can withstand CS exposure by wearing gas masks, and the Branch Davidian compound was well stocked with military equipment, no masks were available to properly fit children.

“All of those young children who breathed that gas for hours and didn’t have masks would have been in intensive care if they had survived,” said Dr. Alan A. Stone, a Harvard University professor of law and psychiatry who was chosen by the Justice Department to review its performance at Waco and only recently began to speak out. “This seems so clear and apparent that it’s hard for me to imagine how the attorney general, who I have great respect for, could have OKd this.”

The official cause of death for the children, whose bodies were badly burned in the blaze, could not be determined. Smoke inhalation was a leading possibility. However, autopsy records also show that some of the victim’s bodies contained cyanide, a chemical emitted when CS gas–and other substances such as plastic–are heated in a fire. Many of the toddlers and infants may have been overcome by the gas before they died, some experts believe.

In contrast, a government specialist in riot-control agents who requested anonymity said scientific studies indicate that it would be “almost virtually impossible” for large quantities of CS to severely injure any of the Davidians, including the 17 children under age 10. And Justice Department officials say they doubt that many, if any, Davidians breathed significant amounts of CS because of strong winds that whipped through large holes knocked in the building by tank-mounted battering rams to insert the gas.

*

Controversy surrounding the Branch Davidian incident has been fanned by the Oklahoma City bombing on April 19, the second anniversary of the Waco blaze. The leading suspect in the fatal attack on the federal building, Timothy J. McVeigh, reportedly considered the Waco siege an example of government’s intention to crush individual liberties, particularly the right to bear arms.

He is not alone. Some conservatives and civil libertarians question whether the full story of the government’s actions at Waco has come to light. At least two congressional committees plan to hold hearings into the Branch Davidian incident this summer.

Officials at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, which conducted the initial raid at Waco to serve search warrants related to weapons violations, maintain they have learned painful lessons from their mistakes and adopted changes to ensure they are not repeated.

But the Justice Department has denied being at fault, instead blaming the loss of life solely on Branch Davidian leader David Koresh, who was suspected of stockpiling illegal weapons.

“There is much to be angry about when we talk about Waco, and the government’s conduct is not the reason,” Reno told a gathering of federal law enforcement officers this month. “David Koresh is the reason.”

Henry Ruth, a former federal prosecutor who served on the independent board that reviewed the ATF’s actions, said he found the Justice Department’s review of Waco full of glowing appraisals.

“That is appalling to me when children die in a fire and there is a precedent for it,” said Ruth, citing the five children who burned to death in 1985 when authorities dropped a bomb on the MOVE community building in West Philadelphia. “When they don’t learn their lessons, are children going to die the next time?”

The FBI was called in on Feb. 28, 1993, to resolve an exceedingly difficult situation at the Branch Davidians’ compound after the ATF raid there went awry. As ATF agents stormed the compound, armed cult members opened fire, killing four officers and five Branch Davidian members. After negotiating a cease-fire with Koresh, the FBI decided that its principal goal was gaining the release of the children inside, according to the Justice Department review of the incident.

Koresh sent out 21 children and 14 adults through March 23. But the releases stopped, and he showed no willingness to surrender.

*

As weeks passed, the uncertainty about the outcome began to mount. The FBI’s longest previous standoff had lasted four days. When the Waco encounter entered its second month, the situation became more “dangerous” because of the difficulty in maintaining security around such a large area and because the FBI’s hostage rescue team was exhausted and in need of retraining, Reno said. The FBI had no backup unit.

On the 22nd day, FBI officials recommended using tear gas to clear the compound. Three weeks later, on April 12, the attorney general was briefed on the FBI’s proposal to use CS gas.

In meetings with military experts, Reno was reassured that the plan to drive out the Branch Davidians with gradual applications of CS gas was safe. They referred to cases of children who had completely recovered within hours of being exposed to CS with no long-term effects.

Reno spent more time weighing the merits of the gassing strategy than any other issue at Waco, said Justice Department spokesman Carl Stern. Among those she consulted was Harry Salem, a toxicologist at the Army’s Chemical and Biological Defense Command.

Reno was advised that although no laboratory tests measuring the effects of CS gas on children had been performed, “anecdotal evidence was convincing” that there would be no permanent injury, according to the Justice Department report. “The military personnel made Reno feel more confident with the concept of tear gas, as opposed to the original concept in her mind of ‘gassing,’ ” the report said.

Salem declined to be interviewed. In written responses to questions submitted by The Times, Salem wrote that CS can be used indoors as long as safety ratios are not exceeded. Achieving lethal concentrations of CS, Salem wrote, would be “extremely difficult.”

After the Waco standoff’s fiery end, Stone, one of the experts retained by the Justice Department to examine what happened, specifically requested the briefing materials Salem provided to Reno. Stone said he was furnished a copy of a 1971 report by the British government that advocated CS as a crowd-control agent in open-air settings.

“There was nothing the attorney general was given in her material and nothing I was ever given which addressed the problem of CS gas in a closed space,” Stone said.

Stone issued a scathing 33-page report in November, 1993, which the Justice Department declined to make available, that criticized the decision to deploy CS gas. In the Justice Department report, Stone wrote, there is no mention during Reno’s deliberations that young children do not have the lung capacity to use gas masks.

“I find it hard to accept a deliberate plan to insert CS gas . . . in a building with so many children,” Stone wrote. “It certainly makes it more difficult to believe that the health and safety of the children was our primary concern.”

Reno has discounted Stone’s criticism, saying he lacks expertise in the field of toxicology.

The danger of applying CS in enclosed spaces is spelled out in an array of medical literature and manufacturers’ reports, including the Army’s guidelines on civil disturbances. Army Field Manual FM 19-15, published in 1985, warns that CS “is not to be used in buildings, near hospitals or in areas where lingering contamination could cause problems.”

Kelly Donahue, spokeswoman for Federal Laboratories Inc., which produces CS gas, said the chemical is designed for use in a large, open area. “If you were to shoot too much in a building or enclosed area, you could suffocate individuals.”

*

CS takes its name from two scientists, B.B. Corson and R.W. Stoughton, who invented it in 1928. The chemical, ortho-chlorobenzal malononitrile, is considered a “super tear gas” because it works instantly, causing burning eyes, coughing, breathing difficulty, stinging skin and vomiting. Though it is commonly referred to as a tear gas, CS is actually a white crystal that looks like talcum powder. In 1959, the Army adopted CS as its standard riot-control agent, and the chemical was used extensively in the Vietnam War.

The widespread use of CS by South Korea on hundreds of thousands of civilians in 1987 was researched by the Physicians for Human Rights group. After discovering that civilians suffered serious acute illnesses, sometimes with permanent injury, the group called for banning the use of CS on humans.

“Exposure to high concentrations of tear gas in small, enclosed spaces for 10 minutes is potentially lethal, particularly to infants and children. . . ,” the organization concluded.

High levels of CS exposure have led to heart failure and death in adults, according to a 1989 report in the Journal of the American Medical Assn. The principal author of the study, Dr. Howard Hu of Harvard University Medical School, said he would have strongly recommended against firing CS into the Branch Davidian compound if there was any chance the occupants would remain inside.

*

In the days leading up to the assault, FBI officials told the attorney general they planned to introduce the CS gradually over two or three days. They hoped to force the Davidians out the front door by using gas at opposite ends of the compound.

But the tear-gas raid on April 19 was anything but gradual.

Within minutes of the initial delivery of two bottles of CS, the Davidians fired automatic weapons at the military armored vehicle, according to the Justice Department report. Two M-60 tanks and four Bradley fighting vehicles responded by launching an all-out assault on all areas of the building. Under the plan approved by Reno, the FBI was authorized to escalate the gassing operation if the tanks encountered resistance.

By 6:31 a.m., half an hour after the mission began, the entire building had been filled with CS. The rest of the morning, the FBI continued to deliver gas volleys through all openings of the residential structure to increase the pressure on the occupants.

The attack was so rapid that the tanks quickly exhausted the supply of tear-gas canisters that was to last for several days. At 7:45 a.m., senior FBI officials requested additional rounds of CS from field offices around the country. By the time the final gas volleys were fired at 11:40 a.m., the Bradley tanks had fired at least 300 rounds at the building and the M-60 combat vehicles had made six gas injections.

*

Clive Doyle was inside the chapel when an M-60 tank burst through the front door spraying CS and as additional so-called ferret rounds from the Bradley vehicles landed through the windows. While most Davidians in the chapel had gas masks, Doyle said, they only worked for about half an hour before the filters started to fail. He said there were screams as the gas burned the skin of some people and left others gasping.

“The ferret rounds were almost like rockets,” said Doyle, 54, who lived at the compound off and on for nearly three decades and was acquitted of all charges at the Branch Davidian trial last year.

“They crashed through windows, came whistling past your head and embedded themselves in the wall,” he said. “You could hear them hissing once they broke open. We were praying to God that somehow we would be delivered.”

Doyle said there was “no doubt” the gas poured into an aboveground concrete bunker where the women and children had retreated. The 20-by-21-foot bunker, which had been used as a locked vault and food cooler, was waist-deep in stored ammunition.

“The children had no protection from [the gas] being sprayed because there were no windows or major holes,” Doyle said. “I can imagine it was agonizing for them without gas masks and being in a cul-de-sac part of the building with no wind.”

FBI officials offered a contrasting view. They say that any suggestion that CS could have worked its way through rooms into the bunker is highly improbable.

“They probably would not have had to don gas masks or shed one tear from the CS that would have entered that bunker,” said the government specialist on tear gas.

The charred remains of children, including at least 10 who were younger than 3, were found in the bunker along with 13 women, seven men and a fetus. Coroner’s investigators determined that mothers put wet blankets around the children and held them in their arms before they died.

Given the large quantities of CS pumped into the building, it would have been very difficult for children to have walked out to safety, as envisioned by the FBI plan, some experts say.

“The kids would never have made it,” said George F. Uhlig, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel and professor of chemistry at the College of Eastern Utah who has researched the use of CS at Waco. “Eventually you pump in enough gas and you exclude breathing.”

An arson investigation team compiled by the Texas State Rangers found that the ensuing fire that engulfed the compound was deliberately set by one or more people inside the building. The team concluded that the fire was not caused or spread by any chemicals used in the gassing operation.

It is unclear how many Davidians inhaled the CS gas, according to the Justice Department report. The passage of at least an hour between the last gas attacks and the end of the fire would have allowed evidence of the gas to dissipate in the bodies.

“It is impossible to predict what role CS played in this case,” said Dr. Nizam Peerwani, chief medical examiner of Tarrant County, Tex., whose office performed the toxicological tests on the bodies.

While the criticism has mounted, the Justice Department has held firm that the use of the CS was appropriate. Within the past two weeks, Reno went back to Salem to ask him about the safety of CS gas, according to Justice Department spokesman Stern.

“He hasn’t changed his thinking at all,” Stern said.

Times staff writer Ronald J. Ostrow contributed to this story.

Feb. 13 (UPI) — Amazon-owned Ring announced it is ending its partnership with Flock Safety, a company whose artificial intelligence-powered technology came into question after a Ring Super Bowl ad touting new surveillance features.

In a blog post published Thursday, Ring said the two companies “made the joint decision to cancel the planned integration” they initially announced in October.

“Following a comprehensive review, we determined the planned Flock Safety integration would require significantly more time and resources than anticipated,” the Ring post read.

Ring’s surveillance camera capabilities came under fire Sunday after the company aired a 30-second commercial highlighting its new Search Party feature.

The feature allows users to upload images of their missing pets to the Ring Neighbors app, which would then use AI to trawl footage in the cloud to find the missing pet. If a missing pet is spotted in the footage, the information would be sent to the owner of the camera that picked up the footage and give them the option to notify the missing pet’s owners.

Ring said the Search Party feature is automatically enabled on all outdoor cameras enrolled in a Ring subscription. But critics questioned whether the AI technology could be combined with Ring’s new facial recognition technology, Familiar Faces, and provide law enforcement surveillance on humans.

Of additional concern, Flock Safety’s technology allows customers to grant local and federal government agencies access to the data picked up by the cameras. Among the organizations that could have access to this data are Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Secret Service and the Navy.

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., in November called on the Federal Trade Commission to investigate Flock Security for allowing government access to the data without “meaningful privacy protections.”

“At the urging of concerned constituents, I conducted further oversight and have determined that Flock cannot live up to its commitment to protect the privacy and security of Oregonians,” Wyden wrote in a letter to the FTC. “Abuse of Flock cameras is inevitable, and Flock has made it clear it takes no responsibility to prevent or detect that.”

Sen. Ed Markey, D-Ma., who has previously criticized Ring’s connections to law enforcement, posted his thoughts on the Super Bowl ad on X.

“This definitely isn’t about dogs — it’s about mass surveillance,” he wrote.

Emma Daniels, a spokeswoman for Ring, told The Verge, that the Search Party feature works only with dogs and is “not capable of processing human biometrics.”

“These are not tools for mass surveillance,” she added. “We build the right guardrails, and we’re super transparent about them.”

In a January blog post, Flock Safety maintained that it doesn’t work directly with ICE or other agencies within the Department of Homeland Security. The company said every piece of data collected by its technology is owned by the customers.

“Decisions about whether, when, and how data is shared are made by the customer that owns the data, not by Flock,” the post read. “There is no hidden back-door access in Flock technology.

“If a local agency chooses not to collaborate with any federal entity, including ICE, Flock has no ability to override that decision.”

Chappell Roan has left her booking agency, Wasserman Music, over its founder Casey Wasserman’s ties to the late Jeffrey Epstein and convicted child sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell.

“As of today, I am no longer represented by Wasserman, the talent agency led by Casey Wasserman,” Roan wrote on Monday in a post to social media. “I hold my teams to the highest standards and have a duty to protect them as well. No artist, agent or employee should ever be expected to defend or overlook actions that conflict so deeply with our own moral values. I have deep respect and appreciation for the agents and staff who work tirelessly for their artists and I refuse to passively stand by. Artists deserve representation that aligns with their values and supports their safety and dignity. This decision reflects my belief that meaningful change in our industry requires accountability and leadership that earns trust.”

Roan had been represented by Jackie Nalpant, Kiely Mosiman, Adele Slater and Anna Bewers at Wasserman. It’s unclear whether her agents will follow her out the door of the embattled agency; representatives for Roan did not immediately return a request for comment.

Roan is the highest-profile act to leave Wasserman after the release of the most recent batch of Epstein documents. Billie Eilish previously left the agency in 2024 after separate allegations of Wasserman’s sexual misconduct surfaced. For now, the agency still represents other A-list talent including Kendrick Lamar, Coldplay and Tyler, the Creator, though many in the industry suspect a wave of departures is coming.

Casey Wasserman — a powerful figure in sports and entertainment who leads Los Angeles’ 2028 Olympics committee and his eponymous talent agency — came under fresh scrutiny after he surfaced in a new batch of federal documents released as part of an investigation into the late sex trafficker Epstein and his associate Maxwell.

Wasserman has said in a statement to media: “I deeply regret my correspondence with Ghislaine Maxwell which took place over two decades ago, long before her horrific crimes came to light. I never had a personal or business relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. As is well documented, I went on a humanitarian trip as part of a delegation with the Clinton Foundation in 2002 on the Epstein plane. I am terribly sorry for having any association with either of them.”

Wasserman has previously admitted to flying with Epstein on the financier’s private plane on a trip to Africa with Maxwell and former President Clinton. In newly surfaced messages to Maxwell, who is serving a lengthy prison sentence for sex trafficking of minors, Wasserman wrote: “I thought we would start at that place that you know of, and then continue the massage concept into your bed … and then again in the morning … not sure if or when we would stop.” She responded: “Umm — all that rubbing — are you sure you can take it? The thought frankly is leaving me a little breathless. There are a few spots that apparently drive a man wild — I suppose I could practise them on you and you could let me know if they work or not?”

Local politicians have called for Wasserman to leave the Olympic committee. “I think Casey Wasserman needs to step down,” said L.A. County Supervisor Janice Hahn. “Having him represent us on the world stage distracts focus from our athletes and the enormous effort needed to prepare for 2028.”

Last week, Bethany Cosentino, the solo artist and founder of the band Best Coast, left the agency over Wasserman’s Epstein ties, saying: “We are tired of learning, over and over, that men who control access, resources, money and so-called safety in our industry are given endless grace. We are tired of being asked to treat proximity to something horrific as an unfortunate situation we should simply move past — especially when the person involved still holds all the power.”

As the Trump administration ploughs forward with its incendiary policies, European trust in the US government is fading.

Amid tariff threats and pledges to conquer Greenland, citizens and politicians in Europe are unsettled — questioning a long-standing alliance.

Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (FDP), chair of the Defence Committee in the EU Parliament, claims to have an answer that is “worth its weight in gold”. In this case, the expression is more literal than figurative.

Around 1,236 tonnes of German gold, worth more than €100bn, are sitting in vaults in the US. Strack-Zimmermann has now announced that, in view of Trump’s recent political manoeuvres, it’s no longer justifiable to leave them be. This has reignited a fierce debate: to retrieve or not to retrieve?

The demand to bring gold back to Germany has been around for a long time, with some surveys suggesting that many citizens are in favour of the move. Similar debates are happening in Italy, which has the third-largest gold reserves in the world after the US and Germany.

Why does Germany hold gold in the US?

Germany’s gold reserves amount to around 3,350 tonnes. About 36.6% of this is in the US, a legacy of the Bretton Woods system of fixed exchange rates after World War II.

“At the time, all exchange rates were tied to the dollar, and the dollar was tied to gold,” Dr. Demary, senior economist for Monetary Policy and Financial Markets at the German Economic Institute (IW), told Euronews.

“Germany had large export surpluses with the US, so we accumulated a lot of dollars. To keep exchange rates stable, we exchanged those dollars for gold. That’s how these reserves were built up.”

During the Cold War, it was also practical to store gold abroad, as the US was considered a safe place in case of conflict with the Soviet Union. Over the years, some gold has been repatriated. By 2017, 300 tonnes were brought back from New York, 380 tonnes from Paris, and 900 tonnes from London.

This was part of a Bundesbank plan, unveiled in 2013, to store half of Germany’s gold reserves in Germany from 2020 onwards.

Bringing in the gold treasure: What are the risks?

Strack-Zimmermann and other politicians and economists cite Trump’s unpredictable trade and foreign policy as the reason for moving the gold out of the US.

“Of course, there is always some risk when you keep assets abroad,” said Demary. For example, there is a storage risk if a break-in occurs. But this risk exists whether the gold is stored abroad or in Germany.

“Another possible scenario is that the US government, due to tight currency reserves, could prevent the gold from being transferred,” he explained.

To ensure the safety of gold holdings, the Bundesbank has had to make frequent trips to New York in the past to take an inventory.

“It makes sense to leave this gold in the US in case we have a banking crisis here and need to obtain dollars,” said Demary.

Retrieving the gold could not only be logistically complex, but also risky.

“The gold would have to be transported in armoured vehicles onto a ship, which would also need to be guarded, and then brought back to Frankfurt under security,” added Demary. “There could be robberies, the ship could sink, or the cargo could be seized.”

Is Strack-Zimmermann’s demand pure populism?

Is Strack-Zimmermann’s demand pure symbolic politics? “I think so,” said the economist. “Perhaps it was a political move in response to the tariff threats, saying, ‘We’re bringing our gold back now.’”

According to the economist, it is also possible that Strack-Zimmermann estimated the magnitude of this gold value to be somewhat greater than it really is. In any case, the gold is currently safe in New York, even if Trump wanted to use it to exert pressure on Germany.

“The Federal Reserve is actually independent in its monetary policy. The US government cannot simply intervene. They would have to change laws first,” explained Dr Demary.

Even in the absolute worst case, if the US refused to release the gold, there would still be the option to go to court and enforce its return or receive compensation in dollars, said Demary.

“You have to weigh up the pros and cons and I would say the advantages of leaving the gold in the US outweigh the disadvantages,” he told Euronews.

Jan. 30 (UPI) — While Russia and Ukraine continue targeting each other’s energy infrastructure amid their war, the International Atomic Energy Agency leader said backup systems are critical for ensuring safety.

IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi on Friday told the agency’s board of governors the war in Ukraine is nearing its fifth year and poses the world’s greatest risk for a nuclear accident.

Ukraine has 15 nuclear reactors that generate about half of the nation’s electricity, and Russia has 36 operable reactors that generate up to 20% of its electricity, according to the World Nuclear Association.

The number of reactors in the two warring nations highlights the need for backup systems in those nations and all others that contain nuclear reactors to prevent accidents and ensure reliable off-site power, Grossi said.

“There must be secure off-site power from the grid for all nuclear sites,” he told the board of governors.

Grossi cited Russia’s control of the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant in southeastern Ukraine as especially troubling, saying “all efforts should be made to ensure off-site power remains available and secure at all times.”

The nuclear power plant is Europe’s largest and was reconnected to its last active power backup system on Jan. 19 after undergoing repairs amid a temporary cease-fire between the two nations.

The backup system helps to ensure the reactor is cooled and supports other important safety systems, which Grossi said must remain “available and secure at all times” to prevent a nuclear accident.

It went offline after being damaged on Jan. 2 due to military actions, which forced the facility to rely on its main power line to cool its six shutdown reactors and spent-fuel pools.

The IAEA also is monitoring the facility’s ability to operate during the winter months, including ensuring water does not freeze its respective cooling and sprinkler ponds.

Grossi also warned of a potential calamity if some or all of Ukraine’s electrical substations were to go offline.

“Damage to them undermines nuclear safety and must be avoided,” Grossi said, adding that a group of agency experts are examining 10 substations amid Russian military strikes on Ukraine’s power infrastructure.

Other nuclear facilities that pose significant concerns include Ukraine’s Chernobyl site, which recently relied on diesel-powered generators to supply backup power until repairs were completed on its damaged substation power lines.

While the IAEA and others have managed to prevent a nuclear accident amid the ongoing war, Grossi said the “best way to ensure nuclear safety and security is to bring this conflict to an end.”

Russian attacks on Ukraine’s electrical substations could cut power to nuclear plants, increasing risks of meltdown.

The United Nations nuclear watchdog has held a special session on Ukraine amid growing fears that Russian attacks on its energy facilities could trigger a nuclear accident.

Rafael Grossi, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said at the start of Friday’s extraordinary board meeting in Vienna that the war in Ukraine posed “the world’s biggest threat to nuclear safety”.

The meeting was held as an IAEA expert mission conducted a weeks-long inspection of 10 electrical substations that Grossi described as “crucial to nuclear safety”.

Although nuclear power plants generate power themselves, they rely on an uninterrupted supply of external power from electrical substations to maintain reactor cooling.

Ukraine has four nuclear power plants, three of them under Kyiv’s control, with the fourth and biggest in Zaporizhzhia occupied by Russian forces since the early days of their full-scale invasion in 2022.

Moscow and Kyiv have repeatedly accused each other of risking a nuclear catastrophe by attacking the Zaporizhzhia site.

The plant’s six reactors have been shut down since the occupation, but the site still needs electricity to maintain its cooling and security systems.

Earlier this month, Russia and Ukraine paused local hostilities to allow repairs on the last remaining backup power line supplying the plant, which was damaged by military activity in January.

Ukraine is also home to the former Chornobyl plant, the site of the world’s worst nuclear accident in 1986. The site’s protective shield containing radioactive material was damaged last year in a drone strike allegedly carried out by Russia.

Status of energy ceasefire unclear

The four-hour IAEA meeting, which aimed to increase pressure on Russia, was called at the request of the Netherlands, with the support of at least 11 other countries.

Russia’s “ongoing and daily” attacks against Ukraine’s energy infrastructure in recent weeks have caused significant damage, Netherlands’ Ambassador Peter Potman told the board.

“Not only does this leave millions of Ukrainians in the cold and dark during a very harsh winter, but it is also … bringing the prospect of a nuclear accident to the very precipice of becoming a reality,” he said.

Ukraine’s ambassador, Yuriy Vitrenko, said it was “high time” for the IAEA to “shine an additional spotlight on the threat to nuclear safety and security in Europe” caused by Russia’s “systematic and deliberate” attacks.

Russian Ambassador Mikhail Ulyanov dismissed the board’s gathering as “absolutely politically motivated”, adding there was “no real need to hold such a meeting today”.

The status of a current weeklong moratorium on attacks targeting energy infrastructure is currently unclear.

United States President Donald Trump said Thursday that Russia had agreed to his request not to attack Ukraine’s energy infrastructure for a week.

On Friday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy confirmed that neither Moscow nor Kyiv had conducted strikes ⁠on energy targets from Thursday night onwards.

However, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov later suggested the pause in attacks would end on Sunday.

Gold has risen more than 20% since the start of the year, surpassing the significant $5,500 milestone this week.

The precious metal’s rally, seen alongside a lift in commodities such as silver and platinum, is driven by a number of interlinking factors — including geopolitical tensions, rising government debt, and an uncertain outlook for interest rates and inflation.

Gold’s appeal is linked to the narrative that it is a safe haven asset, acting as a “hedge against inflation”. It typically increases in value when the dollar declines, it’s easily sold, and it’s also a tangible, finite commodity.

These factors are significant at a time when questions are being raised about the dollar, as well as fiat currencies like the Japanese yen. As government debt rises, so do fears around inflation and fiscal stability.

In the US, incendiary policies from the Trump administration are increasing market jitters around the health of the economy, prompting what some analysts view as a “sell America” trade. In recent weeks, the president has threatened to conquer Greenland, hinted at US intervention in Iran, sought to influence policy at the Federal Reserve, and launched an attack on Venezuela. To top that off, he’s also threatened more tariffs on trading partners, bringing back a well-worn tactic from 2025.

Although analysts argue that the dollar will not be unseated as the world’s reserve currency anytime soon, it seems investors are diversifying away from the greenback. The US’ next moves remain uncertain, and no one wants to be caught in the crosshairs. As an alternative to fiat currencies, gold may seem like a strong portfolio option.

“Investors previously bought US Treasuries as they were viewed as being quite risk-free. But especially because of the way that some wealth has been weaponised, certain countries are becoming more careful about how they allocate their capital,” said Simon Popple, managing director at Brookville Capital. “The dollar debasement helps the gold price,” he told Euronews.

Even so, Popple and other analysts stress that a major factor lifting the bullion price is far less complicated. As gold continues to make headlines, investors are caught up in the momentum, sparking a buying frenzy.

“People are naturally drawn to things they see moving and they’ve seen gold have an astonishing rally,” said Chris Beauchamp, chief market analyst at IG. “It’s bound to lead to an ignition of interest.”

He added that while gold has beneficial investment properties, the metal’s ability to hold its value is overstated, particularly in the short term. Gold’s position in the market notably shifted after former US president Richard Nixon decided to end direct dollar convertibility to gold in 1971. Put simply, countries no longer fixed their currencies to a specified amount of the precious metal.

“The gold standard is still invoked to suggest the metal is some kind of totemic asset we should have because it’s a fixed store of value. It’s not,” concluded Beauchamp.

Kenneth Lamont, a principal in Morningstar’s Manager Research Department, reiterated this message, also drawing comparisons between gold and crypto. While both are limited in supply, they are both “incredibly volatile”, he stressed.

“If you’re using either crypto or gold to buy something, it might be 30% less from one day to the next. It’s not actually a good store of value in the short term.”

While gold is much more established than bitcoin, and it has historically performed well over the long term, analysts stress that the unpredictability of both assets means the death knell is not yet ringing for fiat currencies.

Whether bullion’s price will continue to climb in the immediate future is a guessing game. Even so, given the precarious nature of global politics, it seems the metal may still have further to run.

CLEVELAND — Luka Doncic grabbed at his left leg. He immediately thought of Dru Smith. The Miami Heat guard’s knee injury suffered in 2023 when he slipped off the side of the Cleveland Cavaliers court haunted Doncic while he winced in pain near the Lakers bench.

The Lakers superstar avoided serious injury after falling off the side of the Cavaliers’ raised court on Monday, but the threat of a player being hurt by Cleveland’s unique 10-inch drop off between the court and the arena floor came into focus again during the Lakers’ 129-99 loss to the Cavaliers.

“It is absolutely a safety hazard,” Lakers coach JJ Redick said after Doncic was able to return later in the first quarter. “And I don’t know why it’s still like that. I don’t. You know, you can lodge formal complaints. A lot of times you don’t see any change when you lodge a formal complaint.”

Doncic was injured shooting a fadeaway three with 7:58 left in the first quarter. He was hopping on one foot after releasing the shot and hopped right off the platform, grabbing immediately for his left leg. When he hobbled to the locker room, Doncic could barely put any weight on his leg.

But he returned with 1:32 remaining in the first quarter and finished with 29 points, six assists and five rebounds. He didn’t have any additional braces or wraps on his left leg, but he said he didn’t feel quite 100%.

“I kind of got scared,” Doncic said. “It wasn’t a great feeling and looking back at the video I think I got a little bit lucky. It hurts obviously more now, but, just, I tried to go.”

Smith was injured much more severely in 2023 when he was closing out on defense, landed on a stat sheet and slipped over the edge. He suffered a season-ending anterior cruciate ligament sprain in the accident, and the Heat contacted the NBA to express concerns about the floor at the time.

“It’s tough to see another player get hurt on this court, with the fall, with the drop off,” Lakers guard Gabe Vincent said Monday, “so hopefully something can get fixed with that, but we’re fortunate that [Doncic] is OK.”

Cleveland’s Rocket Arena, which opened in 1994 and was last renovated in 2019, is also home to the Cleveland Monsters, an American Hockey League affiliate of the Columbus Blue Jackets. The basketball court is raised to accommodate the ice underneath the floor. But several teams in the NBA, including the Lakers, share their arena with hockey teams and none have a court that drops off like Cleveland’s.

“It’s the only court like this so, I guess it’s my fault,” Doncic said. “I [gotta] stop jumping like that.”

The Lakers have history with concerning courts this year. In November, Doncic said during a postgame news conference that the Lakers’ custom NBA Cup court used during a home game against the Clippers was dangerously slippery. The team flagged the problem to the league and the Lakers did not use the court again because it was not deemed safe for play in time for the other NBA Cup games.

But when asked if there was a way he could bring the latest problem up with the league, Doncic demurred.

“I don’t know,” Doncic said, “don’t involve me in that.”

Similarly, Redick said any changes would be “way above my pay grade.”