UVALDE, Texas (AP) — A Texas judge on Thursday refused to throw out criminal charges accusing the former Uvalde schools police chief of putting children at risk during the slow response to the 2022 Robb Elementary School shooting, while a lawyer for his co-defendant said they want to move the upcoming trial out of the small town where the massacre occurred. At a court hearing in Uvalde, Judge Sid Harle rejected Pete Arredondo's claim that was he improperly charged and that only the shooter was responsible for putting the victims in danger. Nineteen children and two teachers were killed in the shooting on May 24, 2022. Harle also set an Oct. 20, 2025, trial date. An attorney for Arredondo's co-defendant, former Uvalde schools police officer Adrian Gonzales, said he will ask for the trial to be moved out of Uvalde because his client cannot get a fair trial there. Uvalde County is mostly rural with fewer than 25,000 residents about 85 miles (140 kilometers) west of San Antonio. “Everybody knows everybody,” in Uvalde, Gonzales attorney Nico LaHood said. Both former officers attended the hearing. Nearly 400 law enforcement agents rushed to the school but waited more than 70 minutes to confront and kill the gunman in a fourth-grade classroom. Arredondo and Gonzales are the only two officers facing charges — a fact that has raised complaints from some victims' families. Both men have pleaded not guilty to multiple counts of abandoning or endangering a child, each of which carry punishment of up to two years in jail. Gonzales has not asked the judge to dismiss his charges. A federal investigation of the shooting identified Arredondo as the incident commander in charge, although he has argued that state police should have set up a command post outside the school and taken control. Gonzales was among the first officers to arrive on the scene. He was accused of abandoning his training and not confronting the shooter, even after hearing gunshots as he stood in a hallway. Arredondo has said he was scapegoated for the halting police response. The indictment alleges he did not follow his active shooter training and made critical decisions that slowed the police response while the gunman was “hunting” his victims. It alleges that instead of confronting the gunman immediately, Arredondo caused delays by telling officers to evacuate a hallway to wait for a SWAT team, evacuating students from other areas of the building first, and trying to negotiate with the shooter while victims inside the classroom were wounded and dying. Arredondo’s attorneys say the danger that day was not caused by him, but by the shooter. They argued Arredondo was blamed for trying to save the lives of the other children in the building, and have warned that prosecuting him would open many future law enforcement actions to similar charges. “Arredondo did nothing to put those children in the path of a gunman,” said Arredondo attorney Matthew Hefti. Uvalde County prosecutors told the judge Arredondo acted recklessly. “The state has alleged he is absolutely aware of the danger of the children,” said assistant district attorney Bill Turner. Jesse Rizo, the uncle of 9-year-old Jacklyn Cazares who was killed in the shooting, was one of several family members of victims at the hearing. “To me, it’s hurtful and painful to hear Arredondo’s attorneys try to persuade the judge to get the charges dismissed,” Rizo said. He called the wait for a trial exhausting and questioned whether moving the trial would help the defense. “The longer it takes, the longer the agony,” Rizo said. “I think what’s happened in Uvalde ... you’ll probably get a better chance at conviction if it’s moved. To hold their own accountable is going to be very difficult.” The massacre at Robb Elementary was one of the worst school shootings in U.S. history, and the law enforcement response has been widely condemned as a massive failure. Nearly 150 U.S. Border Patrol agents, 91 state police officers, as well and school and city police rushed to the campus. While terrified students and teachers called 911 from inside classrooms, dozens of officers stood in the hallway trying to figure out what to do. More than an hour later, a team of officers breached the classroom and killed the gunman. Within days of the shooting, the focus of the slow response turned on Arredondo, who was described by other responding agencies as the incident commander in charge. Multiple federal and state investigations have laid bare cascading problems in law enforcement training, communication, leadership and technology, and questioned whether officers prioritized their own lives over those of children and teachers. Several victims or their families have filed multiple state and federal lawsuits. Associated Press reporter Jim Vertuno in Austin, Texas, contributed. Lathan is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.
BOSTON — Another CTE study is exposing the dangers of repetitive head impacts for athletes. The largest study ever of CTE in dead hockey players found that the odds of having chronic traumatic encephalopathy significantly increased with longer careers. The Boston University CTE Center study of 77 dead male ice hockey players showed that the risk for the brain disease jumped by 34% with each year played. Eighteen of the 19 dead National Hockey League players who were studied had CTE — a neurodegenerative disease caused by repeated traumatic brain injuries, and most frequently found in former contact sport athletes exposed to repetitive head impacts. While many think of CTE risk as limited to hockey enforcers, this study makes it clear that all male ice hockey players are at risk. “Ice hockey players with longer careers not only were more likely to have CTE, but they also had more severe disease,” said corresponding author Jesse Mez, co-director of clinical research at the BU CTE Center. “We hope this data will help inspire changes to make the game safer as well as help former ice hockey players impacted by CTE get the care they need,” added Mez, who’s an associate professor of neurology at BU Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine. The researchers studied male brain donors who had been amateur and professional ice hockey players. They found 96% (27 of 28) of pro players had CTE (18 of 19 NHL players, and all nine non-NHL pros); 46% of college, juniors and semi-pro players (13 of 28); and 10% (2 of 21) of youth and high school players. Among enforcers, the researchers found that 18 of 22 had CTE, but the difference between enforcers and non-enforcers was not statistically significant after accounting for years of play. “Enforcers have dominated the CTE conversation, but our findings provide the most evidence for the cumulative amount of play as the predominant risk factor for CTE,” Mez said. “Enforcers had about twice the odds of developing CTE, but the takeaway here is that non-enforcers are getting CTE as well. “Ice hockey players skate quickly, and checking leads to impacts with other players, the ice, boards and glass,” Mez added. “We think years of play is a proxy for these impacts that are harder to measure directly, but are likely what are leading to the disease.” After football and rugby, ice hockey is the third major sport to show a dose-response relationship between years of play and CTE risk, further strengthening the evidence that repetitive head impacts cause CTE. The risk for CTE among female ice hockey players remains unknown, and because the rules around checking differ, the results should not be generalized to female ice hockey players. The researchers stressed that the CTE data reported in this study should not be construed as the prevalence of CTE in the target population, as families whose loved ones are symptomatic are more likely to donate their brains. ©2024 MediaNews Group, Inc. Visit at bostonherald.com . Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
PPG Industries Inc. stock underperforms Thursday when compared to competitorsBuildWithin Sets New Standard with First-Ever Apprenticeships in Startup Entrepreneurship and Prompt EngineeringMount Sinai Hospital to Host Sixth International Prostate Cancer Symposium and World Congress of Urologic OncologyNone
SAN JOSE, Calif., Dec. 10, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Nutanix, Inc. (“Nutanix”) (Nasdaq: NTNX), a leader in hybrid multicloud computing, today announced its intention to offer, subject to market conditions and other factors, $750 million aggregate principal amount of convertible senior notes due 2029 (the “notes”) in a private placement (the “offering”) to persons reasonably believed to be qualified institutional buyers pursuant to Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”). Nutanix also expects to grant the initial purchasers of the notes an option to purchase up to an additional $112.5 million aggregate principal amount of the notes within a 13-day period from, and including, the initial issuance date of the notes. The notes will be unsecured senior obligations of Nutanix. Interest will be payable semi-annually in arrears. The notes will mature on December 15, 2029, unless earlier converted, redeemed, or repurchased. The notes will be convertible at the option of holders, subject to certain conditions and during certain periods. Upon conversion, the notes may be settled in cash, shares of Nutanix’s Class A common stock or a combination of cash and shares of Nutanix’s Class A common stock, at Nutanix’s election. The interest rate, initial conversion rate and other terms of the notes are to be determined at the time of the pricing of the offering. Nutanix intends to use the net proceeds from the offering to (i) repurchase a portion of its outstanding 0.25% Convertible Senior Notes due 2027 (the “2027 notes”) concurrently with the pricing of the offering in separate and privately negotiated transactions with certain holders of its 2027 notes (the “concurrent note repurchases”) effected through one of the initial purchasers of the notes or its affiliate, acting as Nutanix’s agent, and (ii) repurchase up to $200.0 million of shares of Nutanix’s Class A common stock in privately negotiated transactions with institutional investors effected through one of the initial purchasers of the notes or its affiliate, acting as Nutanix’s agent, at a price per share equal to the last reported sale price of Nutanix’s Class A common stock on the Nasdaq Global Select Market on the date of the pricing of the notes (the “Share Repurchase”). Any such Share Repurchase would not reduce the amount available for future repurchases under Nutanix’s existing share repurchase program. Nutanix intends to use the remaining net proceeds from the offering for general corporate purposes, including working capital, capital expenditures and potential acquisitions. From time to time, Nutanix evaluates potential acquisitions of businesses, technologies or products. Currently, however, Nutanix does not have any understandings or agreements with respect to any acquisitions. The terms of the concurrent note repurchases are anticipated to be individually negotiated with each holder of the 2027 notes participating in the concurrent note repurchases, and will depend on several factors, including the market price of Nutanix’s Class A common stock and the trading price of the 2027 notes at the time of each such concurrent note repurchase. Certain holders of any 2027 notes that Nutanix agrees to repurchase may have hedged their equity price risk with respect to such 2027 notes and may, concurrently with the pricing of the notes, unwind all or part of their hedge positions by buying Nutanix’s Class A common stock and/or entering into or unwinding various derivative transactions with respect to Nutanix’s Class A common stock. Any repurchase of the 2027 notes, and the potential related market activities by holders of the 2027 notes participating in the concurrent note repurchases, together with the repurchase by Nutanix of any of its Class A common stock concurrently with the pricing of the notes, could increase (or reduce the size of any decrease in) the market price of Nutanix’s Class A common stock, which may affect the trading price of the notes at that time and the initial conversion price of the notes. Nutanix cannot predict the magnitude of such market activity or the overall effect it will have on the price of the notes or its Class A common stock. No assurance can be given as to how much, if any, of the 2027 notes or the Class A common stock will be repurchased or the terms on which they will be repurchased. Neither the notes nor the shares of Nutanix’s Class A common stock potentially issuable upon conversion of the notes, if any, have been, or will be, registered under the Securities Act or the securities laws of any other jurisdiction, and unless so registered, may not be offered or sold in the United States, except pursuant to an applicable exemption from, or in a transaction not subject to, such registration requirements. This announcement is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of an offer to buy any of these securities and shall not constitute an offer, solicitation, or sale in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation, or sale is unlawful. About Nutanix Nutanix is a global leader in cloud software, offering organizations a single platform for running applications and managing data, anywhere. With Nutanix, companies can reduce complexity and simplify operations, freeing them to focus on their business outcomes. Building on its legacy as the pioneer of hyperconverged infrastructure, Nutanix is trusted by companies worldwide to power hybrid multicloud environments consistently, simply, and cost-effectively. Forward-Looking Statements This press release includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including statements regarding Nutanix’s financing plans, Nutanix’s ability to complete the offering, the timing and size of the offering, the concurrent note repurchases and the Share Repurchase, Nutanix’s intended use of the net proceeds of the offering. These statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially, including, but not limited to, whether Nutanix will be able to consummate the offering, the final terms of the offering, the satisfaction of customary closing conditions with respect to the offering of the notes, prevailing market conditions, the anticipated use of the net proceeds of the offering of the notes, which could change as a result of market conditions or for other reasons, and the impact of general economic, industry or political conditions in the United States or internationally. Forward-looking statements may be identified by the use of the words “may,” “will,” “expect,” “intend,” and other similar expressions. These forward-looking statements are based on estimates and assumptions by Nutanix’s management that, although believed to be reasonable, are inherently uncertain and subject to a number of risks. Actual results may differ materially from those anticipated or predicted by Nutanix’s forward-looking statements. All forward-looking statements are subject to other risks detailed in Nutanix’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2024, and the risks discussed in Nutanix’s other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. All forward-looking statements are qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement, and Nutanix undertakes no obligation to revise or update this news release to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof, except as required by applicable law. © 2024 Nutanix, Inc. All rights reserved. Nutanix, the Nutanix logo, and all Nutanix product and service names mentioned herein are registered trademarks or unregistered trademarks of Nutanix, Inc. (“Nutanix”) in the United States and other countries. Other brand names or marks mentioned herein are for identification purposes only and may be the trademarks of their respective holder(s). This press release is for informational purposes only and nothing herein constitutes a warranty or other binding commitment by Nutanix. Investor Contact: Richard Valera ir@nutanix.com Media Contact: Lia Bigano pr@nutanix.com
Apple launched a bunch of iPads in 2024, including the much-awaited iPad mini refresh and a new iPad Air , which was the first to be available in two screen sizes. The company’s tablet portfolio is now bigger than ever, which can be confusing if you are in the market for a new great tablet . Even if your priorities are clear with size and price, there are a number of overlapping models, which can make decision-making difficult. Do you need a more pocketable iPad or a more powerful tablet? Are you fixated on a specific screen size? Are you confused about how much power is required to run your creative tasks? Which is the best iPad overall? Don’t worry if you don’t have answers to any of these questions right now. This comparison between two of our favorite iPads from 2024 will help answer them so you can make an informed decision. iPad mini (2024) vs iPad Air (2024): specs iPad mini (2024) vs iPad Air (2024): design and display The new iPad mini is a similar-looking product to its predecessor. It sports the same sleek design and an 8.3-inch Liquid Retina display with a 2266 x 1488 resolution at 326 pixels-per-inch (ppi). It’s as pocketable as before, so you can toss it inside your backpack or carry it with you for reading on commutes without any issues. The 2024 iPad Air introduced two variants. Apple borrowed the iPad Pro approach for the iPad Air (2024) and offers it in two sizes, 11-inch and 13-inch. Depending on the screen estate you need, you can choose one of the three iPads mentioned above. While we recommend the iPad mini (2024) for reading and browsing, the iPad Air (2024) is the better product for creatives. Both the iPad mini and Air support Apple Pencil Pro and Apple Pencil USB-C, but you’ll get better brightness (600 nits versus 500 nits) on the 13-inch iPad Air. These screens don’t support Apple’s ProMototion technology, so you get a 60Hz refresh rate. You can get any of the three screen sizes in four colors: Space Gray, blue, purple, and Starlight. It’s a tie here because each of these products appeals to a different user base. Winner: Tie iPad mini (2024) vs iPad Air (2024): performance This year, Apple focused on making the iPads more powerful than ever. Both the new iPad mini and iPad Air feature good performance upgrades. Apple also increased the base storage capacity on the mini to 128GB (finally). Starting with the iPad mini (2024), it gained the iPhone 15 Pro’s A17 Pro chipset. As per Apple, the upgrade results in 30% faster CPU performance and 25% faster graphics. However, in our usage, we experienced the tablet getting warm to the touch when running Lightroom with an SSD connected. If you are a power user, you should opt for the iPad Air (2024) because it packs the MacBook-grade Apple M2 chipset . If you use your iPad for creative tasks such as editing videos or creating art with the Apple Pencil Pro, you’ll be more at home with the M2 iPad Air. The iPad Air (2024) is more powerful than the iPad mini (2024) and wins this round. Winner: iPad Air (2024) iPad mini (2024) vs iPad Air (2024): cameras and battery While you might not use the rear camera on an iPad much, it’s useful to quickly scan documents or take a copy of your notes. And a good quality camera is always better, more so on the front because you could be using your iPad to attend meetings and take work calls. Both the iPad mini (2024) and the iPad Air (2024) feature a 12-megapixel camera on the back and a 12MP Center Stage camera on the front. The iPad Air now sports the front camera in the landscape orientation for a better experience. As for the battery life, both of these models are expected to last the same number of hours. Apple promises nine to 10 hours of battery backup on a single charge. But expect to get better standby battery life on the M2 iPad Air. Winner: Tie iPad mini (2024) vs iPad Air (2024): software The 2024 models of the iPad Air and iPad mini run iPadOS 18 and support Apple Intelligence . The latter is focused on delivering AI-powered features for writing, focus, and communication. Apple recently rolled out a smarter Siri with ChatGPT integration, which might be useful for ideation. Both of these products can be expected to receive at least five years’ worth of software upgrades. iPad mini (2024) vs iPad Air (2024): price and availability The iPad mini (2024) starts at $499 for the Wi-Fi-only variant and costs $649 for the Wi-Fi + Cellular model. The Wi-Fi-only 11-inch iPad Air costs $599 and the Wi-Fi + Cellular option is $749. The most expensive of the lot, the M2 iPad Air 13-inch ,starts at $799 for the Wi-Fi-only variant, while the Wi-Fi + Cellular model will set you back at $949. All of these products are available in multiple storage configurations, with the base model starting at 128GB. These products are available from the Apple Store, as well as through third-party retailers. iPad mini (2024) vs iPad Air (2024): Which one to buy? The iPad mini (2024) is for those who want a tablet for reading and browsing on the go. If your foremost priority is portability, the iPad mini (2024) should be your choice. You get a compact iPad with a powerful processor and a display that supports the Apple Pencil Pro. However, if you are a creative who values performance over portability, the iPad Air (2024) should be your go-to choice. The M2 chipset paired with an up to 13-inch sharp display with Apple Pencil Pro support, reliable OS, and a good battery life makes the iPad Air (2024) a good choice for power users.
Trump's picks for key positions in his second administrationEl Cajon unveils new way for public to track police calls in real-time