Doe V. Butler University Et Al

Summary: The legal action initiated by Jane Doe 2 implicates Butler University, Michael Howell, and Ralph Reiff. The plaintiff alleges that Howell, a university athletic trainer, sexually assaulted her and other women's soccer team members over a prolonged period. Howell is accused of fostering an intimidating atmosphere, manipulating the athletes, and leveraging his authority to dictate game participation. The plaintiff also claims that Howell routinely exposed female athletes' private areas during treatment, a practice colloquially known as "the breeze". The plaintiff further asserts that Howell singled her out, mandating daily treatments during her freshman year, irrespective of her injury status. These treatments, which allegedly involved inappropriate touching and exposure of her breasts, caused Ms. Doe to experience discomfort and fear. Howell is also accused of sending Ms. Doe personal and flirtatious text messages, and instigating discord among her and her teammates. Reiff, Howell's immediate superior, is accused of negligence for his failure to investigate the situation, provide adequate training to the coaches, implement safety measures, or safeguard the women from Howell's alleged abuse. The lawsuit also implicates Butler University for its purported failure to supervise Howell effectively or ensure the athletes' safety. The university is alleged to have been aware of Howell's inappropriate conduct but failed to take necessary preventative measures. The lawsuit further alleges that when the plaintiff and five other women reported Howell's misconduct, Butler University tipped off Howell about the investigation before notifying law enforcement or confiscating his work-issued phone. This purportedly allowed him to eliminate or relocate potentially incriminating photos and videos. The lawsuit seeks damages in excess of $75,000 and aims to compel Butler University to establish safety protocols, reach out to former student-athletes to determine if they were also victims of Howell's alleged abuse, prevent Howell from retaining his professional license, and hold the defendants accountable for their alleged actions and inactions. The case has been filed in a court located in the defendants' jurisdiction and where the alleged incidents occurred.

Full Screen

United States of America v. Robert Hunter Biden

Summary: Hunter Biden is currently embroiled in a lawsuit, accused of purchasing a Colt Cobra revolver in October 2018 while allegedly using illegal substances. Despite denying drug use on the necessary paperwork, if found guilty, he could face a maximum of 25 years in prison along with substantial fines. Biden's defense team contends that the charges are politically driven, asserting that Biden's temporary possession of an unloaded firearm did not constitute a public safety risk. They intend to contest the charges, leveraging an agreement with the prosecution, recent federal court decisions, and potential Second Amendment defenses. This case could potentially ignite wider discussions about Second Amendment rights, especially as the Supreme Court is poised to deliberate on a related issue concerning gun ownership for individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders. Opinions are divided among political and legislative figures, with some speculating that advocates of the Second Amendment might oppose the law that prohibits gun ownership for drug users.