(RICHMOND, Va.) — After nearly three decades, a convicted serial rapist has been identified as the suspect in the 1996 double murder of two women in a Virginia national park, federal authorities said.
But the suspect won’t face charges, as he died in prison six years ago, authorities said.
On May 24, 1996, Laura “Lollie” Winans, 26, and Julianne “Julie” Williams, 24, were sexually assaulted and killed in a “brutal” attack at their Shenandoah National Park campsite, Christopher Kavanaugh, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Virginia, said at a Thursday news conference.
Winans and Williams met through an organization providing outdoor adventure and educational programs for women, Kavanaugh said.
The women went into the park on May 19 and were last seen alive on the evening of May 24, Kavanaugh said.
Their relatives called the National Park Service when they didn’t come home, and their bodies were discovered a week later, the FBI said.
Decades went by without answers.
Then, in 2021, a new FBI team was assigned to investigate the case, and the team determined what evidence would be suitable for retesting, FBI Richmond special agent in charge Stanley Meador said.
A lab recently “pulled DNA from several items of evidence,” and that DNA profile was submitted to CODIS, the national law enforcement DNA database, the FBI said in a statement.
The DNA profile was a positive match to Walter “Leo” Jackson Sr., a convicted serial rapist and avid hiker who was known to visit Shenandoah National Park, the FBI said.
“Even though we had this DNA match, we took additional steps and compared evidence from Lollie and Julie’s murders directly to a buccal swab containing Jackson’s DNA,” Meador said in a statement. “Those results confirmed we had the right man and finally could tell the victims’ families we know who is responsible for this heinous crime.”
The FBI said, “Jackson had a lengthy criminal history, including kidnapping, rapes, and assaults.”
On June 5, 1996, just days after the double murder at Shenandoah National Park, Jackson kidnapped and raped a woman at knifepoint in Ohio, Kavanaugh said. One month later, he kidnapped and raped another woman at knifepoint, Kavanaugh said.
Jackson was most recently sent to prison in 2011 and died behind bars in Ohio in March 2018, the FBI said.
Kavanaugh noted that 22 years ago, a federal grand jury returned an indictment charging another man in the murders of Winans and Williams, but “that case was not built on forensic evidence.”
In 2003, in the lead up to the trial, prosecutors “moved to continue that case because the government’s experts concluded that DNA” from the crime scene was from a then-unidentified man — not their defendant, Kavanaugh said.
Prosecutors then dismissed the case, Kavanaugh said.
The re-testing of the crime scene evidence developed the DNA profile that was uploaded to CODIS, leading to Jackson, Kavanaugh said.
(WASHINGTON) — The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday upheld a longstanding federal ban on firearms for people under domestic violence restraining orders.
The 8-1 opinion was authored by Chief Justice John Roberts. Justice Clarence Thomas was the lone dissenter.
“When a restraining order contains a finding that an individual poses a credible threat to the physical safety of an intimate partner, that individual may—consistent with the Second Amendment—be banned from possessing firearms while the order is in effect,” Roberts wrote. “Since the founding, our Nation’s firearm laws have included provisions preventing individuals who threaten physical harm to others from misusing firearms.”
The ban, Roberts concluded, “fits comfortably within this tradition.”
U.S. v. Rahimi centered on a dispute over a 1994 federal statute that requires domestic violence restraining orders (DVROs) issued by federal and state judges to be reported to the national background check system, and thus serve as a basis to deny a gun sale.
The law has blocked more than 77,000 attempted firearm purchases by people under DVROs since 1994, according to the FBI.
Challenging the law was Zackey Rahimi, a Texas drug dealer with a history of domestic violence, who argued the Second Amendment guarantees his right to possess a gun.
The case marked a major test for the court since its controversial 2022 decision New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen that expanded individual gun rights and created a new framework for evaluating gun regulations saying only those with ties to the nation’s founding history and tradition can be constitutional.
The Bruen decision triggered a flood of challenges to gun safety laws on claims they don’t have a historical parallel and has become a source of confusion for judges who have struggled to apply the new rule consistently.
Roberts, seeming to acknowledge a course correction, wrote that “some courts have misunderstood the methodology of our recent Second Amendment cases. These precedents were not meant to suggest a law trapped in amber.”
Justice Amy Coney Barrett in a concurring opinion wrote that a “wider lens” on history is essential when interpreting gun laws: “Historical regulations reveal a principle, not a mold,” she wrote.
Thomas, who authored the Bruen opinion, wrote in his dissent that “not a single historical regulation justifies the statute at issue.”
“Yet, in the interest of ensuring the Government can regulate one subset of society, today’s decision puts at risk the Second Amendment rights of many more,” Thomas wrote.
The National Rifle Association, which had supported Rahimi’s challenge to the law, expressed disappointment in the ruling but emphasized its limited scope.
“The Supreme Court’s narrow opinion offers no endorsement of red flag laws or of the dozens of other unconstitutional laws that the NRA is challenging across the country that burden the right of peaceable Americans to keep and bear arms,” said NRA Institute for Legislative Action executive director Randy Kozuch in a statement on X. “This decision holds only that an individual who poses a clear threat of violence may be temporarily disarmed after a judicial finding of dangerousness.”
The court’s ruling on Friday comes at a time when firearms are a leading factor in intimate partner violence nationwide. So far this year, there have been 952 domestic violence murders involving guns, according to the Gun Violence Archive.
“They listened. They listened to survivors, they listened to us,” said La’Shea Cretian, a 45-year-old mother of two who was shot five times by her ex-boyfriend and survived, praising the Court’s decision. “Because there’s not a day, a minute, or a second that we don’t think about it and we don’t feel the pain… but we have to continue to go on in spite of it all.”
More than 12 million American adults are victims of domestic abuse every year; when a gun is involved, it’s 5 times more likely someone will die, according to Johns Hopkins University researchers.
“We know that firearms make domestic abuse situations significantly more deadly, and firearms’ effects on women’s safety is a crisis,” said former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who founded a gun safety group after being shot in 2011. “This ruling is a small step in the fight to stop violence against women.”
“Our country has stood at a tipping point, with the safety of survivors of domestic violence on the line. But today, we took a step toward protecting millions from their abusers,” Janet Carter, the senior director of issues and appeals at Everytown Law, part of Everytown for Gun Safety, said in a statement.
Attorney General Merrick Garland said the Supreme Court reaffirmed the Justice Department’s view the federal firearm ban for domestic abusers is a “commonsense prohibition” consistent with the Second Amendment.
“The Justice Department will continue to enforce this important statute, which for nearly 30 years has helped to protect victims and survivors of domestic violence from their abusers,” Garland said.
(NEW YORK) — Few modern-day structural mysteries have garnered as much international fascination as the tall, mirrored monolith columns that have appeared in seemingly random locations since 2020.
Reminiscent of the prehistoric Stonehenge in Wiltshire, England, but rooted in Millennium-era fictional lore, monoliths are long vertical metal slabs, each approximately 10 to 12 feet tall.
Monoliths are believed to stem from Arthur C. Clarke’s “Space Odyssey” series and Stanley Kubruck’s 1968 famed sci-fi film “2001: A Space Odyssey,” where aliens used large, black monolith-shaped machines as a guide to monitor and control humans’ evolution.
However, the scores of monoliths that have appeared around the world since 2020 look slightly different from those Clarke and Kubrick imagined — opting for a metal, often stainless steel structure.
From Utah in the United States, Wales in the United Kingdom and as far as Romania in southeastern Europe, these often unexplained structures have left officials and Internet sleuths questioning their makers and intentions.
Below is a timeline of monolith appearances internationally since 2020.
Nov. 18, 2020: Utah The first unaccounted-for monolith appeared in Utah’s remote Red Rock Country on Nov. 18, 2020, during the height of the pandemic.
The Utah Department of Public Safety Aero Bureau was working to conduct a count of big horn sheep in a portion of southeastern Utah when crew members “spotted an unusual object” and landed nearby to investigate further, according to a press release at the time.
The crew members discovered the metal monolith installed in the ground in a remote area of Red Rock, according to the release.
Just 10 days later, the monolith disappeared, with officials saying it was removed by an “unknown party.”
“We have received credible reports that the illegally installed structure, referred to as the ‘monolith’ has been removed by an unknown party,” the Utah Bureau of Land Management wrote on X on Nov. 28, 2020.
A man named Andy Lewis later took credit for the removal, sharing a YouTube video of him and a small crew detaching the monolith from the rocks.
“We removed the Utah Monolith because there are clear precedents for how we share and standardize the use of our public lands, natural wildlife, native plants, fresh water sources, and human impacts upon them,” Lewis said in an interview at the time.
Despite Utah officials never specifically saying where the monolith was located, online detectives allegedly found it on satellite images dating back to 2016 and determined its GPS coordinates, according to Britain’s The Independent at the time.
Nov. 27, 2020: Romania Just as the monolith was removed from its location in Utah, another monolith was discovered across the world in Romania.
The prism was found near an archaeological site outside of the city of Piatra Neamt, on the plateau of Bâtca Doamnei, officials said at the time.
Piatra Neamt Mayor Andrei Carabelea took to Facebook to joke about the mysterious monolith in Romania, “My guess is that some alien, cheeky and terrible teenagers left home with their parents’ UFO and started planting metal monoliths around the world. First in Utah and then at Piatra Neamt. I am honored that they chose our city,” the mayor wrote.
Four days after it first appeared, the Romanian monolith disappeared as mysteriously as it arrived.
Dec. 2, 2020: California The streak of monolith appearances continued the exact day the column was removed in Romania — this time in California.
On Dec. 2, 2020, another monolith was discovered on Pine Mountain in Atascadero, a city in San Luis Obispo County in central California.
The 10-foot-tall and approximately 18-inch-wide monolith was found by hikers two miles up from the base of the mountain, according to local reports.
“I think it disappeared in Utah and landed right here in Atascadero,” hiker Blake Kuhn told ABC News’ Fresno affiliate at the time.
However, unlike the mysteries surrounding the other monoliths, the makers of the California column came forward to reveal themselves.
The four men who created and installed the third monolith are Travis Kenney, his father Randall Kenney, Wade McKenzie and Jared Riddle, they said in a statement.
“The purpose of this project was to create a positive and encouraging environment in a rather negative 2020, a year that has been plagued with health issues, political separation, and systemic racism,” Riddle said in an interview with Your Tango. “This event separated all of that!”
December 2020: Various locations After the Internet frenzy the string of back-to-back monoliths caused, several copycat monoliths started popping up around the world in Pittsburgh, Joshua Tree, Las Vegas, Boulder, Albuquerque, Russia, Colombia, Spain and more.
A Business Insider report in Dec. 2020 estimated there were 87 monolith sightings globally.
March 12, 2024: Wales Years after the initial monolith obsession died down, the tall, mysterious structure reemerged in Wales, United Kingdom, in 2024.
The 10-foot-tall silver monolith was discovered in Hay-on-Wye in Powys, Wales, by construction worker Craig Muir while he was out for his regular hike.
Muir posted a video of the bizarre find on TikTok, saying, “I come up here most days, and I’ve never seen this before. Almost looks like a UFO just put it on the ground.”
June 17, 2024: Las Vegas This month, the monolith mystery continued when the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department took to X to share two photos of the long, vertical slab of metal they said appeared on a hiking trail near Gass Peak on the northern side of the Las Vegas area.
“We see a lot of weird things when people go hiking like not being prepared for the weather, not bringing enough water… but check this out,” the department wrote alongside photos of the column.
In the photos, the tall, geometric figure reflects the rocky desert and perfectly aligns with the horizon.
A similar monolith appeared in downtown Las Vegas in December 2020, standing under the Fremont Street Experience canopy.
The monolith was removed by Las Vegas police on June 20, saying it was necessary “due to public safety and environmental concerns.”
MYSTERIOUS MONOLITH UPDATE:
A lot of you have asked about the mysterious monolith that was recently spotted north of Las Vegas. Yesterday afternoon, we assisted with the removal of the item due to public safety and environmental concerns. pic.twitter.com/4NrR9FDo4T
(WASHINGTON) — Gun control advocates and domestic abuse victims’ rights groups on Friday praised a U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding a federal ban on people under domestic violence restraining orders from owning guns.
The 8-1 decision in U.S. v. Rahimi, which ruled that federal and state laws that prevent domestic abusers from temporarily owning a firearm do not violate the Second Amendment, came after several decisions by the conservative-leaning court in the last two years that have scaled back gun control laws.
Janet Carter, senior director of issues and appeals at the gun control non-profit Everytown Law, said in a statement that the ruling was a step in the right direction but more work needs to be done to prevent gun violence.
“Our country has stood at a tipping point, with the safety of survivors of domestic violence on the line. But today, we took a step toward protecting millions from their abusers,” she said in a statement.
La’Shea Cretain, an Everytown volunteer, told ABC News she knows the decision will go a long way after she survived a violent encounter with her ex-boyfriend, a case profiled by ABC News.
The five bullets that put Cretain in a coma are still inside her body.
“It’s going to affect so many children from witnessing their mothers, fathers, grandparents or friends or anyone, experiencing gun violence, at the hands of abusers,” Cretain told ABC News.
Certain added that the court showed that they listened to survivors’ experiences.
“They listened to us. Because it’s not a day, a minute, our second, but we don’t think about it. We don’t feel the pain. But we have to continue to go on in spite of it all,” she said.
Former Arizona Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who survived a shooting in 2011 and now heads the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, echoed that statement.
Her organization noted that women in the United States are 21 times more likely to die from a firearm than women in other high-income countries.
“This is a win for women, children, and anyone who has experienced domestic abuse. Women should be able to live their lives free from the fear of gun violence,” Giffords said in a statement.
Although gun control advocates contend the decision could pave the way for similar laws and firearms restrictions against dangerous individuals, one of the nation’s most prominent gun rights groups argued that the Supreme Court’s decision is narrow.
Randy Kozuch, executive director of the National Rifle Association, said in a post on X Friday, that the decision “holds only that an individual who poses a clear threat of violence may be temporarily disarmed after a judicial finding of dangerousness.” The NRA has been vocal against red flag laws passed in several states which allow people or law enforcement the right to petition a court to have a person’s firearms removed if they pose a threat to others or themselves.
“The Supreme Court’s narrow opinion offers no endorsement of red flag laws or of the dozens of other unconstitutional laws that the NRA is challenging across the country that burden the right of peaceable Americans to keep and bear arms,” Kozuch said.
Kelly Roskam, director of law and policy at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, said in a statement that research has shown that armed domestic abusers are not just a threat to their significant other but to the general public.
“It also shows that laws prohibiting these individuals from having firearms are effective at reducing intimate partner homicide. It is imperative that we be able to continue to do so,” she said in a statement.
President Joe Biden, a staunch gun control advocate, vowed to continue to advocate for laws and policies that prevent arming domestic violence suspects.
Biden noted that Congress and his office have pushed forward policies to prevent shootings in domestic violence cases citing the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, which he helped pass during his time in the U.S. Senate, and the recent Bipartisan Safer Communities Act that narrowed the so-called “boyfriend loophole” so that dating partners convicted of domestic violence cannot buy a firearm.
“No one who has been abused should have to worry about their abuser getting a gun. As a result of today’s ruling, survivors of domestic violence and their families will still be able to count on critical protections, just as they have for the past three decades,” he said in a statement.
(NEW YORK) — In the organization’s first network television interview in nearly a decade, new NRA President Bob Barr explored the organization’s relevance in an election year.
With Barr assuming leadership of perhaps the nation’s most controversial advocacy group, a significant shift in the NRA’s stance on gun control is not expected. This change comes after years of the NRA consistently thwarting efforts to implement such legislation.
NRA elected new leadership following the resignation of former CEO Wayne LaPierre and another executive, who were found liable for using NRA funds for lavish personal expenses. LaPierre has previously stated he would appeal that decision.
Barr sat down with ABC News to discuss the organization’s relevancy.
ABC NEWS LIVE: One of your opponents, the organization Everytown [for Gun Safety] said because of the turmoil inside the NRA “the gun lobby has never been weaker.” Is the NRA weak?
BARR: No, the NRA is…You look at. Yeah, I suppose our opponents could take this one slice at a time, or one issue.
ABC NEWS LIVE: It’s a pretty big slice. Financial impropriety. A civil judgment.
BARR: It depends on how you look at it. If we’re talking about successes and the impact and the relevancy of the NRA, you look at our victories. 29 states now, the highest ever, have constitutional carry. That’s because of this organization. We are emerging, you know, from the challenge posed by the state of New York attorney general that tried to put us out of business. That was her goal.
ABC NEWS LIVE: Your political contributions are down, your membership revenue is down. There were concerns about making payroll at some point.
BARR: Listen, every organization has its naysayers, but they’re in the minority in whatever organization I’ve been involved in and this one is no different.
ABC NEWS LIVE: In Uvalde, in Buffalo, the list goes on.
BARR: Uvalde was a, the most awful example I’ve ever seen of ineffective law enforcement.
ABC NEWS LIVE: But he bought the gun. That’s true, but he bought the gun legally. And how do you stop that?
BARR: Are ever going to be able to stop everybody from committing a crime with a gun? No, that’s the same way.
ABC NEWS LIVE: But you can’t cut it down?
BARR: Sure. We can cut it down. We can cut it down by better, more effective enforcement of existing laws.
[on U.S. gun legislation and types of guns]
BARR: The difference is one is fully automatic and one is not. I mean, that is a key difference that a lot of our critics just either don’t understand or they know better and they just slough over it anyway.
ABC NEWS LIVE: You’re making the distinction between automatic and semiautomatic.
BARR: Absolutely, there’s a major difference.
ABC NEWS LIVE: But even still, have you seen what an AR-15 does to a body versus what a 9-mm. pistol does?
BARR: I’ve seen what a shotgun can do to a body.
ABC NEWS LIVE: An AR-15. It leaves a cavity.
BARR: Any, any, any, virtually any firearm can do tremendous damage to a human body.
ABC NEWS LIVE: Do you think the United States has a gun violence problem?
BARR: The United States has a violence problem.
ABC NEWS LIVE: But a gun violence problem?
BARR: We have a problem with crime in this country. And if we focus on the instrumentality, we’re going to lose sight of the forest for the trees. We have a cultural problem in America that is many faceted. We can talk about any one of those.
ABC NEWS LIVE: But does it involve guns?
BARR: We have a lot of crime that doesn’t involve guns in this country.
ABC NEWS LIVE: But a lot of it does.
BARR: Well, and those people should be identified, investigated, prosecuted and put in jail.
There are many areas where the NRA would be willing to work with people from anywhere on the political spectrum, such as increasing the safety in our schools, increasing the training for those who might be in contact with groups of young people.
ABC NEWS LIVE: Is this going to be a fundamentally different NRA?
BARR: No, I mean, the fundamental mission of the NRA is the same today as it was 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago, and that is to teach responsible gun ownership, responsible gun usage, and to make programs available to both our members and the population generally that allow people to exercise their God given and constitutionally guaranteed right to defend themselves.
(NEW YORK) — Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon on Friday filed an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court in an attempt to remain out of prison for his contempt of Congress conviction.
Bannon was ordered by Judge Carl Nichols to surrender to prison by July 1 to serve his four-month sentence.
“An even-handed approach thus strongly favors allowing Mr. Bannon to remain on release,” Bannon’s attorney argued in Friday’s filing.
“There is also no denying the fact that the government seeks to imprison Mr. Bannon for the four-month period immediately preceding the November presidential election,” Bannon’s attorney said. “There is no reason for that outcome in a case that presents substantial legal issues.”
Bannon was sentenced to four months for contempt of Congress in October 2022 after he was found guilty of defying a subpoena from the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, but Judge Nichols agreed to postpone the jail term while Bannon appealed the conviction.
After a federal appeals court upheld the criminal conviction in May, prosecutors requested Bannon begin serving his prison term.
“All of this is about one thing. Shutting down the MAGA movement. Shutting down grassroots conservatives, shutting down President Trump,” Bannon said to reporters in June.
(WASHINGTON) — Lawyers for former President Donald Trump argued Friday that Jack Smith’s appointment as special counsel in Trump’s classified documents case gives the U.S. attorney general the authority to “set up a shadow government” by giving Smith the authority to serve in government without being confirmed by the Senate.
“That sounds very ominous,” U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon said, before she asked whether that is really a realistic risk given there are well-defined special counsel regulations.
Trump’s lawyers made the argument as part of their efforts to have the classified documents case dismissed on the grounds that Smith’s appointment was unlawful — an issue other courts have largely rejected.
Trump attorney Emil Bove argued Friday that it was a realistic risk given Smith was convening and relying on grand jury proceedings in Washington, D.C., and “avoiding judges on this bench,” referring to district judges in Florida.
“I don’t know if it’s fair to draw aspersions,” replied Cannon, who has been overseeing the classified documents case against the former president.
Bove said they wanted clarity on the level of engagement between the special counsel’s office and the attorney general in order to resolve the motion — suggesting an evidentiary hearing was needed.
Cannon appeared skeptical at times about Trump’s argument, but at the same time seemed to indulge some of it.
The hearing then devolved into a history lesson, dating back to special counsel appointments under President Ulysses S. Grant and the definitions of specific words in the special counsel appointments clause.
The Trump team’s arguments are based on a legal theory pushed by conservative legal critics of the special counsel, who has been overseeing the case against Trump since his appointment by Attorney General Merrick Garland in November 2022.
Trump pleaded not guilty last June to 37 criminal counts related to his handling of classified materials after leaving the White House, after Smith said he repeatedly refused to return hundreds of documents containing classified information ranging from U.S. nuclear secrets to the nation’s defense capabilities, and took steps to thwart the government’s efforts to get the documents back.
Trump has denied all charges and denounced the probe as a political witch hunt.
Judge Cannon set aside all of Friday for arguments, kicking off a series of related hearings that will continue into next week.
On Monday Cannon will hear arguments on a motion brought by Trump challenging the funding of the special counsel’s office. The same day, Cannon will hear additional arguments over Smith’s request for a limited gag order limiting Trump’s rhetoric about law enforcement involved in the search of his Mar-a-Lago estate in August 2022.
Then on Tuesday the judge is scheduled to consider Trump’s request to throw out evidence gathered during that search, as well as testimony provided by Evan Corcoran, Trump’s former lead attorney who Smith has alleged Trump misled as part of Trump’s efforts to obstruct the government’s investigation.
The trial in the case had originally been scheduled to begin on May 20, but last month Cannon indefinitely postponed the trial’s start date pending the resolution of pretrial litigation, making it all but certain the case won’t go to trial before Election Day.
(UKRAINE) — It can be difficult to sleep in Kharkiv. Ukraine’s second-largest city is now under continuous attack, its residents waking many nights to the sounds of huge blasts.
Less than 20 miles from the border with Russia, Kharkiv has become known around the world as a symbol of Ukraine’s resistance.
Two years ago, Ukraine drove Russian forces back from the city. But things have changed. Russia bombs the city most days and last month launched a huge new offensive toward Kharkiv.
Ukrainian officials and residents fear, that unable to seize it, Russian President Vladimir Putin may be seeking to make the city — once home to 1.5 million people — unlivable.
“They’re trying to, try to get as much close as they can so they artillery can hit Kharkiv and just push away civilians trying to make them exhausted mentally and physically and, you know, like make Kharkiv empty more and more and more empty every day,” Roman Kachanov, a fire chief with Fire Station 11, said. “That’s what I’m afraid of.”
But despite the continuous attacks, its people try to keep ordinary life going.
“People just have a normal life knowing that every day, somewhere bombs will hit and maybe kill them, maybe not,” Kachanov said. “So this is life in Kharkiv.”
Kachanov and his team have been responding to Russian strikes for more than two years. They tackle blazes and rescue survivors from the rubble, in a relentless battle that intensified again over the last two months.
“I think me and a lot of other Ukrainians who are still here, who are still in Kharkiv, if we will be thinking negative, it will make our condition even worse,” Kachanov said. “I’m trying to stay positive.”
Kachanov decided to send his wife and daughter abroad for safety after the full-scale invasion, and they have remained there since.
“A lot of us separated from their families, a lot of divorces, a lot of everything,” Kachanov said. “So that’s hard. Emotionally hard. Not emotionally hard because of war, because of dead, injured people. Even [we got] used to this one. Yeah. Sometimes you have some stuff in your head. Maybe you need to speak with the guys with a beer. Maybe cry a bit.”
Since 2022, seven firefighters have been killed in Kharkiv, and nearly 50 have been wounded, according to local authorities. Firefighters also say Russian troops frequently target sites a second time once first responders arrive, a tactic known as the “double tap.”
Last month, Kachanov suffered a concussion after an explosion in a structure where he was fighting to control a fire caused by a Russian strike. He said he has also been at fires dozens of times in the past year that have been hit by a second Russian strike.
The attacks frequently disrupt the work of teachers, trainers, and other essential workers. Adapting to them often means having to move life underground. Last month, Kharkiv opened its first purpose-built underground school, located 16 feet below ground. For the kids here, it means they can attend in-person classes for the first time in more than two years.
“We started in distance learning for two years, and now our children can just sit at the desk, they can speak to each other, you can see that they are smiling, they are happy to be here, and they feel safe here,” Olga Grigorash, a teacher at the school, said.
Local volunteer groups have also stepped in to provide humanitarian assistance, and helping with the evacuation of civilians from towns and villages closer to the frontline. Maria Zaitseva, the founder of the charity, Unbreakable Kharkiv, distributes humanitarian aid and helps evacuate people from combat areas.
Last month, Zaitseva decided to evacuate her own children to Germany.
“This summer I decided that it would be safer for my children to stay with my parents during the holidays,” Zaitseva said. “Because Kharkiv is being destroyed. Hits on civilian targets, shopping centers, residential areas. It is very dangerous.”
Amid fears of a Russian breakthrough, the Biden administration in June agreed to begin allowing Ukraine to use American weapons to strike back across the border inside Russia.
That has let Ukraine push Russian missile launchers farther away from Kharkiv, and in the past week the bombing in Kharkiv has notably eased, residents said.
“Things in Kharkiv are quieter,” Zaitseva said. “A lot quieter since our international partners allowed Ukraine to hit inside Russia. And we have results — in Kharkiv it’s better. It would be even better if we were allowed to strike at Russian aircraft.”
(NEW YORK) — Thirteen states in the East from Massachusetts to Kentucky are on alert for more extreme heat before the dangerous temperatures move to the South and the West.
Record highs were shattered in New England on Thursday, including 99 degrees in Manchester, New Hampshire; 98 degrees in Hartford, Connecticut; and 97 in Augusta, Maine.
On Friday, the temperature is forecast to hit a scorching 98 degrees in Louisville, Kentucky; 84 degrees in Indianapolis; 96 degrees in Pittsburgh and Washington, D.C.; 95 in Philadelphia; and 92 in New York City.
In Philadelphia, this could be the longest stretch of 90-degree temperatures this early in the season in 30 years.
This weekend, the heat will spread into the South.
Washington, D.C., may hit 100 degrees this weekend, which would be the first time the city reached triple digits in June in 12 years.
Record highs are possible in Little Rock, Arkansas, by Monday.
The dangerous heat is also returning to the West this weekend, with heat alerts in effect in California, Arizona and Utah.
Temperatures could climb to 110 degrees in Palm Springs, California; 114 in Phoenix; and 107 in Las Vegas.
There are hundreds of deaths each year in the U.S. due to excessive heat, according to CDC WONDER, an online database, and scientists caution that the actual number of heat-related deaths is likely higher.
