Tuesday, August 30, 2016

Multiculturalist told 2-year-old to `put up his hands' and fight before beating him to death

The fight began with a mother and her boyfriend arguing over groceries.

At some point, prosecutors in Camden County, N.J., say, the woman's 2-year-old boy became upset that 24-year-old Zachary Tricoche had pushed his mother and began to cry, according to the Courier-Post.

That's when Tricoche attacked, prosecutors say, punching the 29-pound boy so hard that the toddler was launched into a wall, Camden County Assistant Prosecutor Christine Shah said at a court hearing last week, according to NJ.com.

Then, Shah said, Tricoche instructed the 36-inch-tall toddler to "put his hands up," meaning "that he should form a boxing stance to fight this full-grown man," NJ.com reported.

At that point, Tricoche hit the boy again, "causing J.B. to again strike his head on a wall and rendering him unconscious," Shah said, according to the Courier-Post.

Both punches struck the boy - identified as Jamil Baskerville Jr. - in his torso, according to CBS affiliate WFMY.

The child's mother called 911 around 11:30 p.m. Saturday and said her toddler was unconscious, the station reported.

Citing a probable-cause statement, the Courier-Post reported the desperate rush to save the child's life:

"My boyfriend is, like, trying to get him to wake up," said the mother, who became distraught as the 911 call continued.

She mentioned bruising to the boy's chest, saying, "It's turning color," but did not refer to any alleged assault.

"He has vomit coming out his nose and mouth," the mother told the 911 dispatcher, who had already dispatched emergency responders. "Can you please hurry up?"

Tricoche, who lived at the home, took the phone at one point to receive directions on administering CPR to the child.

About 30 minutes after that phone call - after the boy had been transported to Cooper University Hospital - he was pronounced dead, WFMY reported.

A medical examiner would later determine that the child's liver has been crushed by the blows, leading him to bleed to death internally, WFMY reported. The station reported that "the official cause of death is blunt force trauma and the manner of death is homicide."

Tricoche, of Pennsauken, N.J., is facing murder charges, according to the New York Post. He was arraigned in Camden County Superior Court on Tuesday and remains in Camden County jail on a $1 million cash bail, the paper reported.

"Tricoche only spoke in court to say that he understood the charges, to tell the judge how to pronounce his last name, and to say that he had a public defender," NJ.com reported, noting that he didn't name the lawyer and appeared alone at the hearing.

Shah said Tricoche has a lengthy criminal history that includes a juvenile conviction for conspiracy to distribute narcotics and several adult convictions, NJ.com reported. In 2011, the outlet reported, he was convicted of distributing drugs in a school zone, which led him to serve a three-year prison term. In 2014, Tricoche was convicted of loitering to obtain a controlled substance, NJ.com reported.

At Tricoche's arraignment, Gerome DeShields, the child's grandfather, told reporters that there was no excuse for a man to attack a child, according to the Courier-Post.

"You're less of a man to sit there and put your hands on any type of child, no matter what age it is," DeShields said. "He was 2 years old. There should be no reason you should want to hit him."


Church of England parishes consider first step to break away over sexuality

A group of parishes is preparing what could be the first step towards a formal split in the Church of England over issues such as homosexuality, with the creation of a new "shadow synod" vowing to uphold traditional teaching.

Representatives of almost a dozen congregations in the Home Counties are due to gather in a church hall in Tunbridge Wells, Kent, later this week for the first session of what they say could eventually develop into an alternative Anglican church in England.

Organisers, drawn from the conservative evangelical wing of Anglicanism, say they have no immediate plans to break away - but are setting up the "embryonic" structures that could be used to do so if the established church moves further in what they see as a liberal direction.

The new alliance will be viewed as a "church within a church" but founders have not ruled out full separation if, for example, the Church of England offers blessing-style services for same-sex unions - a move expected to be considered by bishops in the next few months.

Differences over sexuality have already triggered a major rift in the 80 million-strong worldwide Anglican Communion and formal splits in the US and Canada after the ordination of openly gay bishops, which traditionalists say goes against the teaching of the Bible.

Congregations from three dioceses - Rochester, Canterbury and Chichester - are to become founder members of the new grouping, which does not yet have a name, but they expect others to join.

They claim the Church of England's leadership is progressively "watering down" centuries-old teaching, not just over the issue of sexuality but many core beliefs including the authority of the Bible.

Top of their agenda will be discussing founding new "Anglican" congregations in England - with or without the blessing of the Church's hierarchy.

Crucially, they may decide to withhold money from the offering plates in their dioceses, instead channelling funds towards finding their own "missionary" plans.

And they are likely to consider joining forces with an existing network of congregations outside the Church of England with links to a powerful alliance of Anglican bishops overseas, particularly in Africa.

If senior leaders of the Church of England water down the teaching of the Church of England on key issues like homosexuality then this synod could easily evolve into a new Anglican jurisdiction in England

It came as the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev Justin Welby spoke of being "constantly consumed with horror" at the Church of England's treatment of gay and lesbian people.

During a session at the Greenbelt Christian festival over the weekend, a gay audience member asked the Archbishop when, if ever, the church would be in a position to bless their civil partnership.

The Rev Dr Peter Sanlon, Vicar of St Mark's Church in Tunbridge Wells, who is hosting this week's meeting, said: "If senior leaders of the Church of England water down the teaching of the Church of England on key issues like homosexuality, then this synod could easily evolve in to a new Anglican jurisdiction in England.

"The Archbishop of Canterbury has signalled that he is aware of the possibility that a significant proportion of the church will not accept a change in the church's teaching.  "This could be the beginning of that playing out."

He added: "I am not leaving the Church of England - but in order to stay, I need new partnerships and structures to discharge the mission of the Church of England, which is to bring the message of Christ to every postcode in England.

"We have set these structures up in a very small embryonic form across three dioceses.

"My only problem now is coping with the number of clergy contacting me wanting to know how they can join in."

The Telegraph understands that so far 11 local Parochial Church Councils (PCCs) have scheduled debates on a motion upholding a traditionalist creed-like statement known as the "Jerusalem Statement" and taken part in a new "Anglican synod of churches" committed to upholding it. Of those, five have passed the motion, and six others are due to.

Some evangelicals believe the Church is moving away from its Christian foundation itself. Eyebrows were raised earlier this year, for example, when it emerged that York Minister had introduced a Zen Buddhist meditation group.

Dr Sanlon added: "Clergy like me are not going to just leave the Church of England. However, we need new structures to establish new churches to fulfil the mission that the Church of England ought to be discharging.

"My overriding concern is to see the mission of the Church of England effectively discharged: the partnerships to do that are not possible between churches which promote ambiguity about teaching on sexuality."

The Rev Canon Dr Gavin Ashenden, a royal chaplain, said: "The energy behind this new jurisdiction comes from a growing perception that the CofE is so desperate to remain chaplain to a country that is turning its back on Christian ethics, that there comes a point when it fails to be faithful to Christ and in particular his teaching on marriage.

"At that point, and it may already have arrived, there will be a rupture and the orthodox will make arrangements to safeguard the integrity of the Church for the future."

A spokesman for the Church of England said a recent process of "shared conversations" involving bishops, clergy and laity would lay the foundations for "further formal discussions" about sexuality in the Church of England.


Germany stabbing: Knifeman 'shouts Allahu Akbar' as he attacks couple at music festival leaving wife fighting for life

The two victims - a 66-year-old woman and a 57-year-old man - were attacked but managed to overpower the man who was then arrested by police in Oberhausen

A couple at a German music festival have been attacked by a knifeman who witnesses claim was heard shouting "Allahu Akbar".

A 66-year-old woman, believed to be the other victim's wife, is said to be fighting for her life.

The other victim - a 57-year-old man - is seriously injured however he still managed to overpower the man who was then arrested by police officers in Oberhausen.

The attack took place just after 7pm on Saturday evening.

Police officers say the suspect is a 26-year-old from Duisburg, Germany. In a statement, police said the suspect was "apparently under the influence of narcotics".

Officers say they have also recovered a weapon from the scene.

German media reported that the suspect is homeless.

The phrase "Allahu Akbar" means "God is Great" and has been chanted by Islamic terrorists during attacks. However officers are yet to confirm a motive for the attack.

The country has been on high alert for months and has suffered a spate of chilling attacks.

In July a 17-year-old Afghan refugee seriously injured five people with a knife and hatchet on a train near Würzburg in Germany. The attacker was shot dead when he attacked police officers


Why do we need an obesity strategy?

Our waistlines are none of the government’s business

As long-awaited as a bus in a rural village, the government’s new childhood obesity strategy was finally published last week. The response was a wall of wailing campaigners, who accused the government of weakness and even of kowtowing to big business – despite the fact that the strategy confirms plans to impose a 20 per cent tax on sugary drinks and pressure food manufacturers into reducing sugar content by 20 per cent over the next four years. To anyone with a modicum of common sense, this looks like another serious wave of state intervention in our eating habits.

So why the moaning? Well, earlier drafts of the strategy suggested even more illiberal policies, like extending advertising bans on foods high in salt, fat and sugar, and banning supermarket promotions of ‘unhealthy’ foods. Instead, a greater emphasis has been placed on encouraging children to exercise – to be paid for by the sugary drinks tax.

Sarah Wollaston MP, chair of the Commons Health Committee, said: ‘I’m afraid it does show the hand of big industry lobbyists and that’s really disappointing.’ Diane Abbott similarly declared: ‘Theresa May has given in to the food and drink industry at the expense of our children’s health.’ Jamie Oliver was apparently ‘in shock’ at the strategy, saying: ‘It contains a few nice ideas, but so much is missing.’ Even the British Retail Consortium (BRC), which represents the big supermarkets, was disappointed, arguing that a voluntary scheme for sugar reduction would lead to some firms seeking a competitive advantage by not cutting sugar as much as others. Instead, the BRC wants mandatory reductions.

All of which confirms a much-repeated lesson of modern politics: there is simply no satisfying public-health zealots. Once upon a time, slapping a tax on sugary drinks and demanding the reformulation of foods were the key demands of anti-sugar campaigners. Now, an obesity strategy that does precisely those things shows the government has caved in to Big Food.

The sugary drinks tax is not only illiberal, it’s plain dumb. It won’t have any noticeable effect on obesity. Those who love a particular brand of sugary drink will just cough up more money to buy it. Those who like such drinks but aren’t too fussed about brand can switch to a cheaper one and probably end up paying less. In any event, so few calories come from sugary drinks that, even if people stopped drinking them altogether, it would make little impact on their waistlines, especially if they satisfy their sweet tooths with other products instead. As it happens, sales of sugary soda in Mexico, which introduced a similar tax a couple of years ago, already appear to be bouncing back. And whose consumption was affected most by the tax? Those with the lowest incomes. A sugary drinks tax means robbing the poor to soothe the anxieties of the rich.

The other major intervention in the strategy is the plan to browbeat food manufacturers into cutting sugar in their products by five per cent every year for the next four years. This will make foods less enjoyable – the sugar is there for a reason, after all. Moreover, you can’t simply replace sugar in many products with artificial sweeteners because the sugar is important in the consistency of the product. Biscuits and cakes depend on sugar, in part, for their texture. And how do you make a bar of milk chocolate less sugary? There is little alternative but to make the bars smaller. So we’ll be buying less enjoyable food or just getting less of it for our money.

What no one seems to be asking is why the government needs an obesity strategy in the first place. For most people, the problem of obesity is relatively straightforward: eat less and take more exercise. Of course, that is often easier said than done, but ham-fisted government regulation is hardly the answer. Demanding that Whitehall gets a say in what ingredients are used in our food is a recipe for, if not disaster, worse food and higher prices. If people want to cut down on sugar, all they need to do is stop eating it. The choice should be left up to us.

What’s more, we are not in the midst of some national emergency, with obesity rates skyrocketing. In fact, obesity rates among children plateaued 10 years ago, and have probably fallen since. Moreover, most people who fit the definition of ‘obese’ are merely mildly chubby – that spare tyre is unlikely to have any significant impact on your health. For a small percentage of people, their obesity is such that it could reduce their life expectancy and make day-to-day living much more difficult. Let’s devote our energies to solving their problems rather than taxing and regulating everyone.

The obesity strategy is awful, but it could have been worse. Maybe Theresa May will be a more traditionally Conservative prime minister – that is, less interested in micromanaging our lives – than her paternalistic predecessor, David Cameron. Maybe dealing with Brexit will ensure her diary is too full to worry about such trivialities. Here’s hoping.



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here


No comments: