US News
By Katherine Donlevy
Published
April 24, 2024, 9:05 p.m. ET
The former Washington state school officer accused of fatally shooting his ex-wife and underage girlfriend took his own life in front of his infant son after a dramatic confrontation with law enforcement, authorities confirmed on Friday.
Elias Huizar, aged 39, engaged in a high-speed chase with Oregon State Troopers near Eugene, almost a day after the police initiated a search for the alleged double murderer who fled with the teen's 1-year-old son.
During the pursuit, Huizar reached speeds exceeding 100 mph before crashing into a highway median, as reported by troopers.
After exchanging gunfire with officers and crashing into a semi-truck, Huizar turned the gun on himself, ending his life at the scene.
Oregon State Police Capt. Kyle Kennedy stated, "Since the start, our goal has been simply to bring Roman Santos home safely … and we’ve done that. Roman is safe in the care of Oregon officials, he is doing well."
Following the fatal shooting of his ex-wife Amber Rodriguez, police discovered a second body in Huizar's Washington residence, identified as Angelica Santos, the 17-year-old girl he was accused of assaulting while working as a school officer.
Huizar, who was facing charges related to Rodriguez's death, had not been charged in connection with Santos' demise, with the cause of her death still under investigation.
West Richland Police Chief Thomas Grego suggested that pending criminal charges and domestic issues might shed light on the motive behind the rampage.
On the day of the killings, Huizar was scheduled to appear in court to address child rape allegations involving Angelica and her unconscious 16-year-old friend.
Amidst custody disputes and safety concerns, Rodriguez tragically lost her life, leaving behind two children, one of whom witnessed the horrific incident.
Despite a protection order prohibiting Huizar from possessing firearms, authorities are investigating the source of the weapon used in the tragedy.
Huizar's employment with the Yakima Police Department ended in 2021, following which he...
Breaking News: School Resource Officer Faces Allegations
The department announced on Tuesday that a former school resource officer is under investigation for alleged misconduct, sparking concerns about discipline within the educational system.
Controversial Relationship
During his time at Washington Middle School in Yakima, the officer, whose identity remains undisclosed, reportedly developed a relationship with a student named Angelica. Shockingly, records indicate that the officer impregnated Angelica when she was just 15 years old, raising serious ethical questions.
Legal Troubles
Subsequently, the officer transitioned to a role as a substitute teacher in the Richland School District. However, his tenure was cut short when he was apprehended earlier this year. The district revealed that he was arrested for allegedly assaulting a 16-year-old girl who was a friend of his underage girlfriend, highlighting the gravity of the situation.
Community Outcry
The allegations have sent shockwaves through the community, prompting discussions about safeguarding students and ensuring accountability among school staff. Parents and educators alike are calling for stricter measures to prevent such incidents from recurring.
Stay Informed for Updates
As the investigation unfolds, it is crucial to stay informed about developments in this case. The implications of this scandal extend beyond the individuals involved, emphasizing the need for transparency and vigilance in educational institutions.
Tragic Incident Unfolds: Elias Huizar’s Death
Recently, a heartbreaking event shook the community as Elias Huizar tragically took his own life during a police chase following a double murder. This incident has left many in shock and disbelief.
The Unfolding Tragedy
As the events unfolded, Elias Huizar found himself in a high-speed police chase after being involved in a double murder. The chase ultimately ended in tragedy as Huizar made the devastating decision to take his own life.
Community Response
The community has been left reeling from the news of this tragic incident. Many are struggling to come to terms with the loss of life and the circumstances surrounding it. Support services have been mobilized to help those affected cope with the aftermath.
Seeking Answers
Authorities are now working tirelessly to piece together the events leading up to the double murder and subsequent police chase. The motive behind Huizar’s actions remains unclear, leaving many questions unanswered.
Reflecting on the Impact
As the community mourns the loss of life and grapples with the shock of the incident, it serves as a stark reminder of the fragility of life. It is a time for reflection and coming together to support one another in the face of tragedy.
Stay Informed
For more details on this tragic incident, you can visit here.
Related
Tragic Events Unfold: The Story of Elias Huizar’s Alleged Crimes and Chaotic Standoff
Keelung Fugui Market is a sea sand house that will finally be demolished this year – Life – Liberty Times e-newsletter
- No Comments
Keelung Fugui Market is a sea sand house that will finally be demolished this year. (Photo by reporter Lu Xianxiu)
2024/04/25 16:31
[Reporter Lu Xianxiu/Keelung Report]The Fugui Market on Xinliu Road, Keelung City, was professionally identified as a sea sand house and will be closed in 2021. The city government plans to demolish it this year, but the budget is less than 700 million yuan. Demolition will begin after the additional budget is sent to the city council for review and approval in May. If everything goes well, it will be completed by the end of the year and short-term greening will be used as a public space for residents. However, it is surrounded by old buildings, and residents hope to work with the Fugui Market to renovate the old city.
The public Fugui Market, built in 1976, is located at the intersection of Xinliu Road and Yier Road. It has been 48 years old. It has one underground floor and four floors above ground. The first floor is a retail market, the third floor is residential, and the second and fourth floors are the Limin Hall and activity Center. The fourth floor has been abandoned for many years due to falling cement from the ceiling, exposed steel bars, and severe water leakage. The city government commissioned a professional to identify the sea sand house with seriously excessive chloride ion content, which was closed and not open to the public. On March 1, 2021, it was announced that it would be abolished for market use. Some vendors have moved to other public markets, and some have rented storefronts nearby for business.
There have been frequent earthquakes recently, and the sea sand houses in Fugui Market are in danger of collapsing. The city government has budgeted 7 million yuan for demolition. However, prices have increased in recent years, and demolition is difficult. Some cannot be demolished with machines and must rely on labor. The evaluation cost is nearly 1,400 yuan. Ten thousand yuan, less than 7 million yuan, will be sent to the parliament for review in the supplementary budget in May this year.
The Industrial Development Department of the city government stated that it is currently conducting pre-contract work, including neighbor house identification and damage insurance, etc. If everything goes well, the demolition will be completed before the end of the year. However, there are concerns about water inflow in the basement offshore. The basement will be retained for the time being, and the base will be greened in the future. It is used as a public space for residents; residents in the surrounding area hope to plan a dangerous old city. The urban development office of the city government is about to set up a city update office, which will be taken into consideration.
Keelung Fugui Market is a sea sand house that will finally be demolished this year. (Photo by reporter Lu Xianxiu)
No need to draw, no need to grab. Now use the APP to read the news. Guaranteed to win every day. Click me to download the APP. Click me to see the event instructions.
Related
- Topics: Chloride, city council review, Dangerous building, Dangerous old people are updated, earthquake risk, greening, Insufficient budget, Keelung City, Keelung Fugui Market, Limin, Pre-contracting, public market, sea sand house, spring water problem
Comments
Trending
Exclusion of product liability possible through a self-formulated disclaimer?
Products from various categories have a certain potential for injury to the buyer if they are used improperly. Dealers who recognize this often try to protect themselves with self-written disclaimers and thus exclude liability for damage to the customer. But is this legally possible and sensible? We clarify.
I. Self-formulated disclaimer on product liability
In various offers of products whose use not in accordance with the instructions can cause certain health risks to the user, dealers often try to protect themselves with blanket exclusions of liability.
With phrases like
“No liability for injuries caused by handling the product” or “We assume no liability for any kind of risks or accidents.” or “Please follow the instructions for use. Liability for damages resulting from improper use is excluded.”
Responsibility for risks resulting from handling the products should be passed on to the customer across the board.
At least that’s the theory. After all, the retailer does not want to be responsible for customers ignoring instructions for use, using products incorrectly and then suffering damage due to their own fault.
II. Product liability vs. personal risk
The extent to which such disclaimers are legally permissible and sensible is based on the distribution of responsibility and attribution in applicable damage law.
According to this, anyone who carries out a self-endangering or self-damaging act with knowledge or negligent ignorance of the risk is fundamentally responsible for its consequences.
If a user uses a properly designed and produced and otherwise defect-free product at his own risk improperly and/or contrary to the instructions, he is also liable for any resulting damage and cannot legally pass on the consequences suffered to the selling dealer or the manufacturer. In this respect, there is no connection of responsibility.
The whole thing looks different if the dangerousness of a product is based on a product defect and the purchaser is therefore harmed when handling the product. There can be no question of a personal risk here, because the purchaser had no knowledge of the lack of product safety.
In this case, any damage suffered can very well be compensated
However, a claim against the dealer, who as a mere reseller will rarely be responsible for the product defect, can only be justified if the dealer is at fault for the customer’s injury. This is not the case if it can be proven that the trader neither knew nor should have known about the error and its risk potential.
III. Disclaimer on product liability makes no sense and can often even be warned
Based on the principles of tort law, there is no legal need at all for disclaimers that are intended to exclude liability on the part of the retailer for improper product use.
Anyone who voluntarily and consciously ignores instructions for use and usage regulations and thereby suffers damage is responsible for the damage themselves.
If customers injure themselves due to improper handling of products, they cannot legally pass on the damage caused to the retailer.
At best, such disclaimers can only reflect what is already valid by law and therefore lack any sense.
However, if product liability disclaimers are incorrectly worded too broadly, they create an independent risk of warning due to a violation of statutory exclusion bans.
According to established case law, exclusions of liability are understood to be general terms and conditions that are based on the clause prohibitions of the §§ 307 – 309 BGB must be measured.
According to Section 309 No. 8 b BGB, dealers cannot effectively exclude their liability for defects (including liability for damage to health caused by defects). Clauses that attempt to do this are inadmissible and subject to warning.
Likewise, manufacturers cannot effectively waive product liability claims in accordance with Section 14 ProdHaftG.
If self-formulated disclaimers now generally refer to “damage when dealing with products”, “risks and accidents” or “usage-specific risks”, the exclusion of liability is also extended in an inadmissible, warning-like manner to designs in which product defects are the cause of injury and for which According to the law, an obligation to pay liability cannot be excluded.
IV. Conclusion
Self-formulated product liability disclaimers are strongly discouraged.
If the purpose of this is to address issues and exclude claims for compensation in cases in which a user is injured due to improper product handling, they make no sense whatsoever. By law, dealers cannot be held liable here.
However, even formulated disclaimers carry additional warning risks because they are often too general and extensive and then violate legal prohibitions on deviations from warranty and manufacturer product liability.
Tip: Do you have any questions about the article? Please feel free to discuss this with us in the
Entrepreneur group of the IT law firm on Facebook.
Related
Exclusion of product liability possible through a self-formulated disclaimer?