Connect with us

U.S.

Anti-Masker Allegedly Gets Fired After Coughing on Grocery Store Customers

Published

on

Viral footage of the incident also shows the woman calling customers “sheep” for complying with mask mandates. 


Anti-Masker Goes Viral

An anti-masker was allegedly fired from her job at the German software company SAP on Wednesday after a viral video showed her intentionally coughing on shoppers in a Nebraska grocery store. 

Video of the culprit was first posted to Reddit on Sept. 3. by a user named “Jessbird,” who said the woman harassed her and her child in the store.

When someone off-screen called the anti-masker a “Karen” for her behavior, she responded by calling them “sheep” for complying with mask mandates.

The shopper who posted this said the woman continued to follow her and her child, even after an employee intervened.

“I then tried to continue my shopping but this lady followed me around the store,” Jessbird wrote in her Reddit post.

I told her she needs to keep her distance and that her coughing on me was assault,” she continued.

“She laughed and kept saying, ‘Look at you, it’s so cute how scared you are!’ By this time I was absolutely livid, trying my best to hold it together in front of my kid. I didn’t finish my shopping. Instead, I went to the self-checkout to pay for my stuff. Next, she followed me to use the self-checkout right next to mine.”

Culprit’s Alleged Employer Speaks Out

Once this footage went viral, internet sleuths and local reporters identified the cougher as 54-year-old Janene Hoskovec, an alleged resident of Scottsdale, Arizona.

A Linkedin page appearing to belong to Hoskovec listed her as a client partner at the Arizona branch of the German software company SAP, prompting many to reach out and make the company aware of her behavior.

In a statement posted Wednesday, SAP said it was investigating the matter, adding, “The health and safety of our employees and the communities in which we live and work are of utmost concern to us.”

In a follow-up tweet, it said, “the individual in question no longer works for SAP.”

See what others are saying: (Insider) (Heavy) (Newsweek)

U.S.

NFL Suspends Three Tampa Players, Including Antonio Brown, for Faking COVID Vaccination Status

Published

on

A Tampa Bay Times previously alleged that Brown had obtained a card that falsely claimed he had received a COVID-19 vaccine.


NFL Suspends Three Players

The NFL announced Thursday that it had suspended wide receiver Antonio Brown and two other Tampa Bay Buccaneers players for misrepresenting their COVID-19 vaccination status. 

The suspensions will last three games. According to the football league, all three players have accepted the disciplinary action and will not appeal.

Brown has not played a game since mid-October due to an ankle injury. He, along with safety Mike Edwards, will be able to return to the field on Dec. 26. The league said that free-agent wide receiver John Franklin III is ineligible for the next three games if signed by the team.

“The health and safety of players and personnel is our top priority,” the NFL and the NFL Players Association said in a joint statement. “The protocols were jointly developed working with our respective experts to ensure that we are practicing and playing football as safely as possible during the ongoing pandemic. The NFL-NFLPA jointly reinforce their commitment and further emphasize the importance of strict adherence to the protocols to protect the well-being of everyone associated with the NFL.”

The suspension comes weeks after the Tampa Bay Times reported that Brown previously obtained a fake vaccination card, which is a federal crime. The outlet was tipped by his former live-in chef, and the report included screenshots of text messages Brown allegedly sent inquiring about fake cards. According to the Times, Brown was willing to pay $500 for a fake card that said he received the Johnson & Johnson jab. 

Players Allegedly Forged Vaccination Cards

Following the report, the Buccaneers released a statement saying it reviewed the cards submitted by players and found “no irregularities.”

According to ESPN, Brown brought the card to training camp but upon learning that he could get into serious trouble for doing so, opted to get the vaccine. 

“Mr. Brown is vaccinated and continues to support the vaccine for any person for whom it is appropriate,” Sean Burstyn, an attorney for Brown, said in a statement. “The NFL made its determination and, instead of going through the drawn out and distracting process of challenging the outcome, Mr. Brown wrapped this up promptly and he will make this most of this time by treating his ankle injury. Mr. Brown will be motivated, well rested, and in the best shape of his life when he returns in [W]eek 16.”

The NFL has not commented on the vaccination status of any of the suspended players. 

The league’s statement said the team will not be fined over the misleading claims from Brown, Edwards, and Franklin. While the NFL did not specify how Edwards and Franklin misrepresented their vaccination status, several reports have indicated that they, too, had fake cards.

“We appreciate the league’s timely handling of this matter and recognize the importance of the health and safety protocols that have been established,” the Buccaneers said in a team statement. “We will continue to implement all league COVID-19 protocols.”

See what others are saying: (ESPN) (The New York Times) (Tampa Bay Times)

Continue Reading

U.S.

Prosecutor Considers Charging Parents of Suspect in Oxford High School Shooting

Published

on

Law enforcement officials said the teenage suspect used his father’s gun to carry out the shooting that left four dead and seven others injured.


Charges Filed, More May Come

The Michigan prosecutor overseeing the investigation into the Oxford High School shooting said Wednesday that she may file charges against the parents of the suspected teenage gunman — a decision that would be highly unusual.

Law enforcement officials said the 15-year-old suspect used his father’s gun in the Tuesday attack, which left four students dead and seven others injured in the deadliest school shooting this year.

The teen, who was a student at the high school, was later arrested and charged as an adult for two dozen crimes, including first-degree murder, attempted murder, and one count of terrorism. He has pleaded not guilty on all charges.

Authorities have not yet identified a motive but said Wednesday that there was a “mountain” of evidence showing the suspect’s desires and plans to kill students at his school.

Officials recovered two cellphone videos the student had made the night before the shooting in which he talked about killing his classmates at the high school the next day. They also recovered a journal from the teen’s backpack where he wrote about his desire to “shoot up” the school.

A review of the suspect’s social media accounts also showed that he had access to a firearm. Some posts even showed him with the same type of gun as the murder weapon, a SIG Sauer 9mm.

While law enforcement authorities did not mention any specific posts, a screenshot from the teenager’s now-deleted Instagram that has been widely circulated includes a picture he posted on Friday of a hand holding a gun with the caption, “Just got my new beauty today. SIG SAUER 9mm. Ask any questions I will answer.”

Officials have confirmed that the suspect’s father bought the gun used in the shooting four days earlier, though they have not said how he got the gun or whether it was secured in the family’s home prior to the incident.

In her remarks regarding possible charges for the boy’s parents on Wednesday, Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald argued that gun owners have a responsibility to ensure their weapons are secured, especially in households with young people.

“Those who do not do that should and will be held accountable, we have to do better,” she said, adding that she expects more charges to be filed against the suspect as well.

According to The Washington Post, adult gun owners “are almost never held accountable when children use their weapons to harm themselves or others.”

That’s despite the fact that if children as young as 6 did not have access to guns, well more than half of the country’s school shootings since 1999 would never have happened,” the outlet reported.

More Details Emerge

Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard told CNN Thursday that two teachers separately reported concerning behavior from the student in the days before the attack, which prompted two meetings with school administrators.

According to the sheriff, the first report came the day before the shooting when “a teacher in the classroom where he was a student saw and heard something that she felt was disturbing.” 

“They had a counseling session about it with school officials, and a phone call was left with the parents,” he added.

The second incident occurred on Tuesday, shortly before the attack, and school officials called in the boy’s parents for a meeting.

“A different teacher in a different classroom saw some behavior that they felt was concerning, and they brought the child down to an office, had a meeting with school officials, called in the parents, and ultimately it was determined that he could go back into class,” Bouchard continued, though he declined to provide more details about the behavior the suspect displayed.

A probable cause hearing for the charges against the teen has been scheduled for Dec. 13, and a preliminary examination hearing has been set for Dec. 20.

Editor’s Note: At Rogue Rocket, we make it a point to not include the names and pictures of mass murders or suspected mass murderers who may have been seeking attention or infamy. Therefore, we will not be linking to other news coverage, as they may contain these details.

Continue Reading

U.S.

Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Landmark Abortion Case That Could Overturn Roe v. Wade

Published

on

If the high court agrees to strike down the abortion precedent that has been in place for decades, numerous states would be able to quickly ban the procedure in all or most instances.


Oral Arguments on Mississippi Abortion Ban 

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in the biggest abortion case in decades as part of a challenge that could overturn Roe v. Wade and reverse legal precedents for reproductive rights that have been in place for nearly half a century. 

The case is based on a 2018 law in Mississippi that banned most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy with exceptions for “severe fetal abnormality” but not rape and incest.

Mississippi’s only abortion clinic sued on the grounds that the law was unconstitutional. Both a district judge and a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit ruled against the law, and the state appealed to the Supreme Court.

When Mississippi asked the justices to take up its case in June of 2020, the state’s attorney general, Lynn Fitch (R), explicitly stated that the petition’s questions “do not require the Court to overturn” Roe, which was decided in 1973, or the subsequent 1992 decision, Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

In Casey, the Supreme Court ruled and reaffirmed that states could not ban abortion before the fetus can live outside the womb, which is generally around 24 to 28 weeks.

However, Fitch changed tactics after Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who personally opposes abortion, was appointed to a seat vacated following the death of liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, effectively solidifying a supermajority of conservatives on the Court.

In an apparent attempt to capitalize on the Court’s new makeup, Fitch filed a brief this summer asking it to overturn Roe when it ruled on the Mississippi ban.

Far-Reaching, Immediate Implications

As a result of the latent motion, if the justices rule in favor of Mississippi, the decision would have a devastating impact on abortion access nationwide.

Mississippi is one of many Republican-held states that have passed severe abortion restrictions that lower courts have struck down because they violate Supreme Court decisions on fetal viability.

Almost all of those laws are not in effect with the exception of Texas’ six-week ban, which the high court last month refused to block as legal challenges play out.

Notably, the justices could decide to uphold the 15-week ban but not agree to Fitch’s motion asking them to overturn Roe. Such a move would undo the precedent for fetal viability set under Casey and allow states to ban abortions earlier, but it would leave the 1973 ruling intact.

However, if the justices do agree to scrap Roe, not only would that decision create a path for more states to pass laws that limit abortions, it would also allow abortion bans to take effect very quickly in many parts of the country

According to the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute, 22 states currently have laws in place that could be used to restrict abortion if Roe is struck down. That figure includes 12 states that have “trigger laws,” which would ban all or most abortions immediately if the precedent is overturned.

While the Court is hearing arguments now, it is not expected to rule on the matter until next spring or early summer, setting up the subject to be a major focus for the 2022 midterms.

Although Roe v. Wade is a constitutional matter, public polls have shown that support for the precedent has remained strong over the years — even as more conservative states attempt to impose increasingly strict bans. 

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (NPR) (NBC News)

Continue Reading