- Police documents say that 17-year-old Elijah Al-Amin was stabbed and killed at a gas station in Peoria, Arizona on Thursday morning because he was listening to rap music.
- The 27-year-old suspect arrested for the crime, Michael Adams, told police he felt “threatened” by Al-Amin’s music and is currently in custody for first-degree murder.
- Court records show that Adams has a criminal history of violence and was released from prison two days before the murder.
- News of the teen’s death spread and sparked outrage on social media, with many calling it a hate crime.
Police in Peoria, Arizona say a man stabbed and killed 17-year-old Elijah Al-Amin at a gas station Thursday morning because the teenager’s music made him feel “threatened.”
According to the victim’s father, Al-Amin was leaving work and stopped at a nearby gas station with his girlfriend when he was attacked.
“He was getting a fountain drink, and a dude randomly walked in and stabbed my son in the neck,” Mr. Al-Amin told 12 News. “So my son, he got stabbed he ran out, and he collapsed.”
The suspect, 27-year-old Michael Adams, was arrested a short time later and found with a pocket knife in his possession along with blood on his clothes, according to local reports. He is currently in custody for first-degree murder.
Police documents say Adams allegedly admitted to stabbing Al-Amin telling officers he did so because the teen was playing “rap music in the parking lot.” According to the documents, Adams also said the music made him feel “threatened” and feel like he had to “protect himself and the community from the victim.”
“Rap music makes him feel unsafe, because in the past he has been attacked… by people who listen to rap music,” court records state.
Adams bail is set at $1 million and he is scheduled to appear in court on July 11.
Court records from Maricopa County show that Adams has a history of criminal activity and violence. In October of 2018, he was sentenced to 13 months in prison for aggravated assault and two counts of unlawful theft detection.
According to the Arizona Department of Correction Inmate Datasearch, Adams was released from prison on July 2, just two days before Al-Amin was killed. The datasearch also shows that while in custody, Adams had several disciplinary infractions, including disorderly conduct and assault on an inmate.
Adams’ lawyer, Jacie Cotterell, says the reason for her client’s actions is because he is mentally ill, with both autism and ADHD.
“My client is a very unfortunate young man,” Cotterell told ABC15. “He suffers from what are some obvious mental illnesses, he’s been ill served by the state.”
However, a spokesperson for the Arizona Department of Corrections told local reporters that Adams “was not designated [as] seriously mentally ill (SMI).”
The spokesperson added that “prior to his release, Inmate Adams was provided contact information for services in the community such as continuing care, housing, welfare as well as other community resources.”
In response to Cotterell’s argument, the teen’s father said that any mental illness Adams may suffer from does not excuse his actions.
“To go in or follow him behind the store and stab him, I don’t care what issues you have,” he told 12 News. “You knew right from wrong, as far as I’m concerned he knew right from wrong.”
Some social media users agreed with Mr. Al-Amin and tweeted that mental illness does not justify a crime.
The hashtag Justice for Elijah began trending on Twitter, with many calling the attack a hate crime.
Al-Amin was an upcoming senior in high school and just two weeks away from his 18th birthday.
How Safe Injections Sites in the U.S. Are Fighting Back Against The Opioid Crisis & Do They Work?
America has been hit with a historical opioid crisis. In 2018, more than 31,000 people died from opioid overdoses, which is more than any previous year recorded in American history. Healthcare professionals and public health experts are offering alternatives to the status quo treatments, which leads us to today’s topic: supervised injection facilities (SIF).
Also known as overdose prevention sites and medically supervised injection centers, SIF’s have been proposed as a solution to combat America’s opioid problem. In these centers, no drugs are supplied to the users—they bring their own and are given clean syringes to prevent bloodborne diseases. Advocates or these sites are saying that they would stop countless fatal overdoses because there would be medical staff on site. Countries like Switzerland, Canada, and Australia have implemented versions of these facilities and so far there has not been any reported fatal overdoses at a SIF in the world.
While cities like Seattle, San Francisco, New York City, and Philadelphia have all proposed plans to make sites, they have been met with heavy opposition. The federal government opposed these sites because they claim it breaks federal laws and some residents in these cities are against them due to concerns over attracting more crime. In this video, we’ll be focusing on Philadelphia, as it might become the first U.S. city to legally open a supervised injection facility, along with the court case between the non-profit who is trying to establish the SIF and the federal government.
Elon Musk Defends Calling Rescue Diver “Pedo Guy” in Lawsuit
- In court documents, Elon Musk defended a tweet where he called a diver who helped rescue the Thai soccer team from a cave a “pedo guy” because it “was a common insult used in South Africa.”
- The diver sued Musk for defamation last year after Musk sent an email to BuzzFeed where he referred to the diver as “child rapist” who had taken a “child bride who was about 12 years old.”
- The court documents from the suit, which were made public Monday, also revealed that Musk paid a private investigator more than $50,000 to look into the diver.
- Musk also said he gave the statement to BuzzFeed based on information provided by the investigator, and because he was concerned the diver could be the next Jeffrey Epstein.
Court Filings Made Public
Telsa CEO Elon Musk defended calling a rescue diver “pedo guy,” court documents revealed Monday.
Musk originally made the comment in July 2018, after Vernon Unsworth, a British diver who helped rescue the Thai soccer team trapped in a cave last year, gave an interview to CNN where he had some choice things to say about Musk.
Notably, Unsworth said the submarine Musk had designed to rescue the soccer team would not work and that it was just a PR stunt.
Musk responded by calling Unsworth a “pedo guy” in a now-deleted tweet.
He also sent an email to BuzzFeed reporter Ryan Mac, in which he accused Unsworth of being a “child rapist” who had taken a “child bride who was about 12 years old at the time.”
Musk said he thought the email was off the record, but BuzzFeed said they never agreed to that. In September 2018, Unsworth filed a defamation lawsuit against Musk in the Central District of California.
Court filings from the defamation suit against Musk were made public on Monday.
Musk Defends “Pedo Guy” Tweet
In those documents, Musk claimed that referring to Unsworth as “pedo guy” was not a direct accusation of pedophilia.
“‘Pedo guy’ was a common insult used in South Africa when I was growing up,” Musk wrote. “It is synonymous with ‘creepy old man’ and is used to insult a person’s appearance and demeanor, not accuse a person of acts of pedophilia.”
“I did not intend to accuse Mr. Unsworth of engaging in acts of pedophilia,” he continued. “In response to his insults in the CNN interview, I meant to insult him back by expressing my opinion that he seemed like a creepy old man.”
The fact that Musk is arguing he was expressing his opinion is important in this context because under the First Amendment, opinions are usually protected speech and not considered defamatory.
The documents also included Musk’s deposition, where he talks more in-depth about the “pedo guy” tweet.
In the deposition, Musk said he sent BuzzFeed the email because he was worried it could turn into a Jeffrey Epstein situation, referring to the wealthy financier who was accused of sexually assaulting dozens of young women, including many underage girls.
“What if we have another Jeffrey Epstein on our hands?” he said. “And what if he uses whatever celebrity he gains from this cave rescue to shield his bad deeds? This would be terrible.”
Musk’s Epstein argument might become problematic. First of all, he made the statements to BuzzFeed before the new allegations surfaced, which some have argued proves he just is using current news to frame Unsworth in a certain way, and that he did not actually consider Epstein at all.
That argument is also furthered by the fact that it has been reported that Musk had attended several events with Epstein, all of which were after Epstein pleaded guilty to soliciting prostitution from an underage girl in 2008.
Notably, Musk also said in the filings that he paid a private investigator more than $50,000 to investigate Unsworth after receiving an unsolicited email from the PI in August 2018.
In the documents, Musk says that the investigator: “reported that Mr. Unsworth met and began a relationship with his alleged Thai wife when she around twelve years old.”
He also added that the investigator “reported that Mr. Unsworth associated with Europeans who engage in improper sexual conduct in Thailand,” and that he “learned that Mr. Unsworth frequented Pattaya Beach which is well known for prostitution and sex tourism, and that Mr. Unsworth was unpopular at the rescue site because other rescue workers thought that he was ‘creepy.’”
Musk goes on to say this was the basis for the comments he made in his email to BuzzFeed.
“I did not authorize Mr. Mac or BuzzFeed to publish the contents of the email nor did I intend or expect that they would,” he said. “Especially without first independently verifying and confirming its information.”
He later added that he gave the information to Mac “so that BuzzFeed could conduct its own investigation into Mr. Unsworth and corroborate the information.”
Musk’s lawyers even admitted in the court filings that the private investigator’s findings “lacked solid evidence of Mr. Unsworth’s behavior.”
Following the release of the court documents, Unsworth’s lawyer gave a statement to BuzzFeed condemning the Musk’s defense.
“The motion filed by Elon Musk today is a disgusting and transparent effort to continue falsely smearing Vernon Unsworth without any credible or verified supporting evidence,” the lawyer said.
“Mr. Unsworth’s opposition to Musk’s motion will reveal the whole truth of Musk’s actions and the falsity of his public statements and his motion with respect to Mr. Unsworth will be exposed.”
See what others are saying: (BuzzFeed News) (The Washington Post) (Business Insider)
Controversy, Racism, and Genius Kids?! How One Sperm Bank Changed Everything…
The Repository for Germinal Choice is the most controversial sperm bank in U.S. history. While it was operational some people believed this bank was racist and they even compared the companies goals to Nazi eugenic practices. But even though this sperm bank was highly controversial, it also completely changed the sperm bank industry.
So check out our video for the full story on how this controversial sperm bank would go on to shape an entire industry.