27-year-old worker Herrera Ignacio, was killed in an explosion at EMR Southern Recycling in Mobile, Alabama

UPDATE 2/11/2019 1:45 P.M.

The man killed in Friday's explosion at Southern Recycling was 27-year-old Herrera Ignacio, according to Mobile Police.

ORIGINAL STORY

MOBILE, Ala. (WKRG) — Police say one person is dead after a work-related explosion at Southern Recycling of Mobile on Friday.

According to police, the explosion happened at around 3:30 p.m. at the facility at 114 Industrial Canal Road.

No foul play is suspected in the man's death.

================================


Worker killed in explosion at recycling center in Mobile
Updated Feb 8; Posted Feb 8



0 shares


By Ashley Remkus | aremkus@al.com


A worker was killed in an accident at EMR Southern Recycling in Mobile this afternoon, authorities said.

Mobile police were called to investigate a loud boom at the recycling center at 114 Industrial Canal Road around 3:30 p.m.

Authorities haven’t released the name of the man who died.

“The victim had been involved in a work related accident that resulted in his death,” said Corporal LaDerrick DuBose in a news release. “The incident is under investigation and there are no signs of foul play at this time.”

The investigation is ongoing.

Daniel Claude Hill, a 54-year old worker, died after falling into a tank of hot sulfuric acid at Michigan Seamless Tube in South Lyon, Michigan

Multiple fundraisers have been established to benefit the family of a South Lyon man killed after falling into a tank of sulfuric acid.

Daniel Hill, 54, fell into the tank of 160-degree acid solution on Saturday afternoon at the Michigan Seamless Tube and Pipe facility, 400 McMunn Street, in South Lyon. He died Saturday night after being pulled from the tank by co-workers, showered off, and transported to The University of Michigan Hospital burn unit.

South Lyon Police Chief Chris Sovik called the incident an "occupational accident" and said no criminal charges will be filed. The Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Administration (MIOSHA) is conducting their own investigation, one that could take several weeks or months.

The grandfather known as "Moose" served in the U.S. Army Motor Pool and loved to go boating and fishing during his free time, according to his obituary. He leaves behind his wife, Pamela, and two children, Ashley and Jacquelyn.

According to the Detroit News, the Hill Family moved to South Lyon from Whitmore Lake in July 2018 having just built a new home.

A private visitation is scheduled for family and friends from 2 p.m. to 8 p.m., at Borek Jennings Funeral Home, 7425 E. M-36, PO Box 735, in Hamburg. That will be followed by an 11 a.m. community farewell service on Saturday at the funeral home.

The family is suggesting that memorial contributions be sent to the Livingston County Humane Society as Hill was a lover of animals having three dogs of his own.
Donate to the family

An outpouring of support has been seen in recent days for Hills' family. This includes the establishment of two online fundraisers.

By visiting https://mealtrain.com/o343on, you can donate money, gifts cards, or volunteer to prepare a meal for the Hill Family. The meal calendar runs through the end of March.

OFW Local 1900, the local steel workers union, has set up a GoFundMe page to collect donations as well. As of Wednesday morning, over $8,500 had been donated by 64 people.

You can donate by visiting: https://www.gofundme.com/in-loving-memory-of-daniel-hill.

Company violations

In a statement, the company called the incident "a very serious industrial accident" and said they are conducting their own internal investigation while cooperating with MIOSHA.

Michigan Seamless Tube, a subsidiary of Hammond, Indiana-based Specialty Steels Works Inc., emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2017.

The company has seven workplace safety violations since 2012, according to the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administation, with fines totaling $93,000.

In November 2012, the company was hit with five violations, four of which were deemed serious, totaling $75,500 in fines.
==========================================
Man dies after falling into tank of sulfuric acid in South Lyon
By Ken Haddad

February 11, 2019

South Lyon, Michigan:

A man who fell into a tank of sulfuric acid in South Lyon has died.

Police said a man was rushed to University of Michigan Hospital on Saturday afternoon after falling into a tank of sulfuric acid at Michigan Seamless Tube on McMann Street near 10 Mile Road.

Police said the sulfuric acid was at a temperature of at least 160 degrees.

It is unknown how he fell in or how long the man was in the tank before he was pulled out by a co-worker.

The investigation is ongoing. The man has not yet been identified.

Here is a statement from Michigan Seamless Tube:

"A valued Michigan Seamless Tube employee was involved in a serious industrial accident on Saturday afternoon. The employee was taken to the University of Michigan Hospital at Ann Arbor. He did not survive his injuries and passed way at the hospital. The employee was 54 years of age. The company is conducting a comprehensive investigation of the accident and is cooperating with the Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Administration." 

======================================
Worker falls into acid tank at South Lyon manufacturing plant
Micah Walker, Detroit Free Press 

Feb. 10, 2019


A worker was hospitalized in a burn unit after he fell into a vat of sulfuric acid at a pipe supply company in South Lyon.

South Lyon Police are investigating the incident that occurred at Michigan Seamless Tube on Saturday.

The worker was rushed to the University of Michigan Medical Center in Ann Arbor around 12:30 p.m. after he fell into a tank of sulfuric acid, according to a report from WDIV-TV. Police said the temperature of the acid was at least 160 degrees.

According to the website, Medline Plus, sulfuric acid is a strong chemical that can cause severe burns and tissue damage when it comes into contact with skin. When swallowed, the chemical can cause burns in the mouth and throat, drooling, fever, and difficulty breathing.

It is unknown how long the man was in the tank before a coworker pulled him out or how he fell.

After the coworker rescued him, the man was washed off and taken to the burn unit at the hospital.




==============================
Michigan man dies after falling into tank of sulfuric acid

Feb 11, 2019

Bob D'Angelo, Cox Media Group National Content Desk
 
SOUTH LYON, MICH. —

A Michigan man died Saturday after falling into a tank of sulfuric acid in South Lyon, WDIV reported.


The man, whose name has not been released, was rushed to a hospital after a co-worker pulled him out of the tank, the television station reported.

Police said the temperature of the acid at the suburban Detroit business was at least 160 degrees, the Detroit Free Press reported.

According to MedLine Plus, sulfuric acid is a very strong chemical that is corrosive in nature, meaning it can cause severe burns and tissue damage when it comes into contact with a person’s skin.

It is not known how long the man was in the tank, the Free Press reported.

============================================
 

Obituary

Hill, Daniel (Moose) South Lyon, Michigan 

His Legacy… 

Daniel Claude Hill, 54, passed away February 9, 2019. He was born on October 29, 1964, in Flint, Michigan to Vern Hill and Luella (Townsend) Hill. Daniel married the love of his life, Pamela Johnson, on August 31, 1989, in Ann Arbor, Michigan. 

He will be remembered as being a loving husband, a wonderful father, and the best grandfather to his grandchildren, which he called “his little angels”. Daniel was very generous to everyone he met and a very dedicated, hard worker. He served in the Army in the motor pool and was proud of his service. 

He loved fishing and boating during his free time and had a passion for animals, especially dogs. His dogs Chloe, Ally, and Bella made him very happy. Daniel was affectionately known as “Moose” and will be missed by all who knew him. 

His Family… Daniel will be missed by his wife, Pamela; his children, Ashley (Joshua) Fields, and Jacquelyn Dean; siblings, Yvonne(Gary) Balliet, Douglas (Diane) Hill, Carol (Jerry) Haines, Darrell (Jill) Hill, and Donald (Penny) Hill; grandchildren, Olivia and Connor Fields; and many dear friends. He is preceded in death by his parents, Vern and Luella Hill; and his brother, David Hill.

U.S. EPA Announces First-Ever Comprehensive Nationwide Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Action Plan

EPA Acting Administrator Announces First-Ever Comprehensive Nationwide PFAS Action Plan

Historic plan outlines concrete steps the agency is taking to address PFAS and to protect public health

PHILADELPHIA (February 14, 2019) — 

Today, at an event in Philadelphia, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler announced EPA’s Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Action Plan. This historic PFAS Action Plan responds to extensive public interest and input the agency has received over the past year and represents the first time EPA has built a multi-media, multi-program, national communication and research plan to address an emerging environmental challenge like PFAS. EPA’s Action Plan identifies both short-term solutions for addressing these chemicals and long-term strategies that will help provide the tools and technologies states, tribes, and local communities need to provide clean and safe drinking water to their residents and to address PFAS at the source—even before it gets into the water.

“The PFAS Action Plan is the most comprehensive cross-agency plan to address an emerging chemical of concern ever undertaken by EPA,” said EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler. “For the first time in Agency history, we utilized all of our program offices to construct an all-encompassing plan to help states and local communities address PFAS and protect our nation’s drinking water. We are moving forward with several important actions, including the maximum contaminant level process, that will help affected communities better monitor, detect, and address PFAS.”

The Action Plan describes long- and short-term actions that the EPA is taking including:
•           Drinking water: EPA is moving forward with the maximum contaminant level (MCL) process outlined in the Safe Drinking Water Act for PFOA and PFOS—two of the most well-known and prevalent PFAS chemicals. By the end of this year, EPA will propose a regulatory determination, which is the next step in the Safe Drinking Water Act process for establishing an MCL.

•           Clean up: EPA has already begun the regulatory development process for listing PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances and will issue interim groundwater cleanup recommendations for sites contaminated with PFOA and PFOS. This important work will provide additional tools to help states and communities address existing contamination and enhance the ability to hold responsible parties accountable.

•           Enforcement: EPA will use available enforcement tools to address PFAS exposure in the environment and assist states in enforcement activities.

•           Monitoring: EPA will propose to include PFAS in nationwide drinking water monitoring under the next Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Program. The agency will also consider PFAS chemicals for listing in the Toxics Release Inventory to help the agency identify where these chemicals are being released.

•           Research: EPA will develop new analytical methods so that more PFAS chemicals can be detected in drinking water, in soil, and in groundwater. These efforts will improve our ability to monitor and assess potential risks. EPA’s research efforts also include developing new technologies and treatment options to remove PFAS from drinking water at contaminated sites.

•           Risk Communications: EPA will work across the agency—and the federal government—to develop a PFAS risk communication toolbox that includes materials that states, tribes, and local partners can use to effectively communicate with the public.

•           Together, these efforts will help EPA and its partners identify and better understand PFAS contaminants generally, clean up current PFAS contamination, prevent future contamination, and effectively communicate risk with the public. To implement the Action Plan, EPA will continue to work in close coordination with multiple entities, including other federal agencies, states, tribes, local governments, water utilities, industry, and the public.

For more visit:  www.epa.gov/pfas

Background

In May 2018, EPA convened a two-day National Leadership Summit on PFAS in Washington, D.C. that brought together more than 200 federal, state, and local leaders from across the country to discuss steps to address PFAS. Following the Summit, the agency hosted a series of visits during the summer of 2018 in communities directly impacted by PFAS. 

EPA interacted with more than 1,000 people during community engagement events in Exeter, New Hampshire, Horsham, Pennsylvania, Colorado Springs, Colorado, Fayetteville, North Carolina, and Leavenworth, Kansas as well as through a roundtable in Kalamazoo, Michigan and events with tribal representatives in Spokane, Washington. 

The Action Plan was developed based on feedback from these events in addition to information received from approximately 120,000 comments submitted to the public docket.

Color of Law Violations

Color of Law Violations

U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies—authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.

Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our nation’s democracy. That’s why it’s a federal crime for anyone acting under “color of law” to willfully deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or U.S. law. “Color of law” simply means the person is using authority given to him or her by a local, state, or federal government agency.

The FBI is the lead federal agency for investigating color of law violations, which include acts carried out by government officials operating both within and beyond the limits of their lawful authority. Off-duty conduct may be covered if the perpetrator asserted his or her official status in some way. Those violations include the following acts: 

Excessive force: In making arrests, maintaining order, and defending life, law enforcement officers are allowed to use whatever force is “reasonably” necessary. The breadth and scope of the use of force is vast—from just the physical presence of the officer…to the use of deadly force. Violations of federal law occur when it can be shown that the force used was willfully “unreasonable” or “excessive.”

Sexual assaults by officials acting under color of law can happen in jails, during traffic stops, or in other settings where officials might use their position of authority to coerce an individual into sexual compliance. The compliance is generally gained because of a threat of an official action against the person if he or she doesn’t comply.

False arrest and fabrication of evidence: The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right against unreasonable searches or seizures. A law enforcement official using authority provided under the color of law is allowed to stop individuals and, under certain circumstances, to search them and retain their property. It is in the abuse of that discretionary power—such as an unlawful detention or illegal confiscation of property—that a violation of a person’s civil rights may occur.

Fabricating evidence against or falsely arresting an individual also violates the color of law statute, taking away the person’s rights of due process and unreasonable seizure. In the case of deprivation of property, the color of law statute would be violated by unlawfully obtaining or maintaining a person’s property, which oversteps or misapplies the official’s authority.

The Fourteenth Amendment secures the right to due process; the Eighth Amendment prohibits the use of cruel and unusual punishment. During an arrest or detention, these rights can be violated by the use of force amounting to punishment (summary judgment). The person accused of a crime must be allowed the opportunity to have a trial and should not be subjected to punishment without having been afforded the opportunity of the legal process.

Failure to keep from harm: The public counts on its law enforcement officials to protect local communities. If it’s shown that an official willfully failed to keep an individual from harm, that official could be in violation of the color of law statute.

Filing a Complaint
To file a color of law complaint, contact your local FBI office by telephone, in writing, or in person. The following information should be provided:

• All identifying information for the victim(s);
• As much identifying information as possible regarding the subject(s), including position, rank, and agency employed;
• Date and time of incident;
• Location of incident;
• Names, addresses, and telephone numbers of any witness(es);
• A complete chronology of events; and
• Any report numbers and charges with respect to the incident.

You may also contact the United States Attorney’s Office in your district or send a written complaint to:

Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
Criminal Section
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, Northwest
Washington, DC 20530

FBI investigations vary in length. Once our investigation is complete, we forward the findings to the U.S. Attorney’s Office within the local jurisdiction and to the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., which decide whether or not to proceed toward prosecution and handle any prosecutions that follow.

Civil Applications

While the FBI does not investigate civil violations, Title 42, U.S.C., Section 14141 makes it unlawful for state or local law enforcement agencies to allow officers to engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives persons of rights protected by the Constitution or U.S. laws. This law, commonly referred to as the Police Misconduct Statute, gives the Department of Justice authority to seek civil remedies in cases where law enforcement agencies have policies or practices that foster a pattern of misconduct by employees. This action is directed against an agency, not against individual officers. The types of issues which may initiate a pattern and practice investigation include:

• Lack of supervision/monitoring of officers’ actions;
• Lack of justification or reporting by officers on incidents involving the use of force;
• Lack of, or improper training of, officers; and
• Citizen complaint processes that treat complainants as adversaries.

Under Title 42, U.S.C., Section 1997, the Department of Justice has the ability to initiate civil actions against mental hospitals, retardation facilities, jails, prisons, nursing homes, and juvenile detention facilities when there are allegations of systemic derivations of the constitutional rights of institutionalized persons.

Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act Violations 

Violations Beginning in the mid-1980s, the United States witnessed a dramatic escalation in the number of acts of violence and harassment directed towards reproductive health care providers and clinics. These incidents, typically in the form of blockades, arson, use of chemical irritants, bomb threats, death threats, stalking, and vandalism, continued well into the next decade. In 1993, the first murder of a reproductive health care provider occurred. Dr. David Gunn, a physician who provided abortion services, was murdered during an anti-abortion protest at a clinic in Pensacola, Florida.

In response to the alarming trend of increasing violence, the U.S. Congress enacted the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, Title 18 U.S.C. Section 248, in 1994. Often referred to by its acronym, the FACE Act makes it a federal crime to injure, intimidate, or interfere with those seeking to obtain or provide reproductive health care services – including through assault, murder, burglary, physical blockade, and making threatening phone calls and mailings. This law also prohibits damaging or destroying any facility because reproductive health services are provided within.

Since the passage of the FACE Act, the number of violent crimes committed against reproductive health care providers and facilities has dramatically decreased. The FBI and its local, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement partners aggressively pursue all violations of the statute for eventual prosecution by local United States Attorney’s Offices and/or the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division in Washington, D.C.

In addition to the FACE Act, other frequently considered federal statutes in FACE Act investigations include: Arson or Bombing, Title 18 U.S.C. Section 844(h); Mail Threats/Threatening Communications, Title 18 U.S.C. Section 875(c); Interstate Threats, Title 18 U.S.C. Section 876(c); and Use of Firearm During the Commission of a Federal Violation, Title 18 U.S.C. Section 924(c). Violators of the FACE Act are subject to criminal penalties, including imprisonment and fines. The severity of the punishment demands upon the nature of the offense and whether or not the person who committed the crime is a repeat offender.

It should be noted the FACE Act does not criminalize the lawful exercise of one’s constitutional rights. For instance, it is not a violation to protest peacefully outside of a reproductive health care facility, including such actions as carrying signs, chanting, singing hymns, distributing literature, and shouting as part of First Amendment protected activities – as long as no threats are communicated and facility access is in no way impeded.  

==========================================

Basilis N. Stephanatos, PhD, JD

____________________________________________________________

February 4, 2019

William T. Walsh

Clerk, United States District Court

District of New Jersey

M.L. King, Jr. Federal Building & U.S. Court House

50 Walnut Street

Room 4015

Newark, New Jersey 07101-0999

Tel.: 973-645-3730

THE HONORABLE JOHN MICHAEL VAZQUEZ

United States District Judge

Lautenberg U.S. Post Office & Courthouse

2 Federal Square, Room 417

Newark, New Jersey 07102

Tel.: 973-297-4851/973-645-2157(Deputy Clerk)

RE:     Civil Action No. 02:12-cv-01793 (JMV-JBC)

            JURY FOUND STEPHANATOS NOT-GUILTY

Dear Judge Vazquez:

I am writing to inform the Court that a Bergen County jury of my peers has found me not guilty of all the fabricated charges by Defendants Ronald A. Lucas, Victor D’Agostino that somehow I had pointed a gun at the officers on June 28, 2011.  This was a not-guilty verdict on all four (4) very serious charges on the fraudulently obtained indictment in September 2011. 

THE OFFICERS MADE NUMEROUS ADDITIONAL CONTRADICTING AND UNCORROBORATED STATEMENTS DURING THEIR TESTIMONY EVIDENCING FABRICATION OF EVIDENCE AND CONSPIRACY TO PROSECUTE MALICIOUSLY

During their January 29, 2019 testimony (both direct and cross) Defendants Lucas and D’Agostino made a very significant number of additional contradicting and uncorroborated statements; this led to the non-guilty verdict.

Importantly, the sheriff officers testified under oath that they failed to “knock and announce” prior to performing a search of my home.

The numerous contradicting statements of the sheriff officers provide further proofs that they fabricated their charges against Dr. Stephanatos.

I will submit the additional evidence to this Court only if and when you order me to do so.

THE PASSAIC COUNTY PROSECUTOR PROVIDED “SMOKING GUN” EVIDENCE AGAINST ROBERT DEL VECCHIO

On January 23, 2019, as part of the pre-trial discovery, the Passaic County prosecutor, Mr. Stephen Bollenbach, provided me with several handwritten pages prepared by Defendant Robert Del Vecchio in May 2011.  The newly discovered pages show that Defendant Del Vecchio faxed letters to the Passaic County Sheriff stating that Stephanatos was a “dangerous Deft” and that Stephanatos had threatened him on May 24, 2011.  All these written statements by Defendant Del Vecchio were fabricated by him to prejudice the Passaic County Sheriff against Stephanatos and to force Stephanatos out of his home using the void ab initio ex-parte writ of possession.

Judge Guida, the presiding judge over the criminal proceedings ruled that Dr. Stephanatos did not threatened conspirator Del Vecchio with any physical violence and he only warned Del Vecchio of legal action.

I will submit the newly discovered additional evidence to this Court only if and when you order me to do so.

THE MALICIOUS PROSECUTION CLAIM WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THIS COURT ONLY WHEN ORDERED TO DO SO

I am also writing to inform the Court that I will be filing a claim of malicious prosecution with this or another federal court.  This claim is based on the Fourth Amendment and it is timely, as the criminal proceedings ended in my favor on February 4, 2019.  The Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claim is a tort action brought in civil court to recover money damages for the harm suffered from the malicious claim.  I will seek to recover money from the Defendants for the various costs associated with having to defend against the baseless and vexatious charges.  The damages will include the cost of making a $300,000 cash bond, attorney fees, and economic harm from being wrongfully incarcerated and not being able to find employment or pursue my law license as a result of the pending charges for the last 8 years. I will also seek to recover money for the emotional distress associated with being jailed and wrongfully prosecuted for the last 8 years by the Passaic County sheriff and the Defendant officers and for the malicious statements made by Defendant Robert Del Vecchio to the sheriff, damaging my good standing and reputation in the community for the last 8 years.

A FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT DUE PROCESS CLAUSE STAND-ALONE CLAIM ALSO EXISTS UNDER SECTION 1983 FOR FABRICATION OF EVIDENCE

Pursuant to Halsey v. Pfeiffer, 750 F.3d 273 (3d Cir. 2014), a court should not foreclose a Fourteenth Amendment stand-alone claim for fabrication of evidence even if a Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claim fails (for example) because of the existence of probable cause even without the fabricated evidence.  Such a claim is available even if the criminal defendant is acquitted, “if there is a reasonable likelihood that, absent the fabricated evidence, the defendant would not have been criminally charged.” Black v. Montgomery County, 835 F.3d 358, 370 (3d Cir. 2016).  In Michele Black v. County of Montgomery, No. 15-3399 (3d Cir. 2016) where the Third Circuit ruled that “an acquitted criminal defendant may have a stand-alone fabricated evidence claim against state actors under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment if there is a reasonable likelihood that, absent that fabricated evidence, the defendant would not have been criminally charged.”  This fabrication of evidence claim has already been filed with the Court in October 2018.

Based on evidence discovered during the trial, Stephanatos has additional claims against the Passaic County Sheriff.

1.            A §1983 CLAIM FOR FAILURE TO PROPERLY TRAIN, SUPERVISE AND CONTROL OFFICERS (AGAINST THE PASSAIC COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT);

2.            A STATE LAW TORT CLAIM FOR FAILURE TO PROPERLY TRAIN, SUPERVISE AND CONTROL OFFICERS (AGAINST THE SHERIFF DEPARTMENT);

3.            A §1983 CLAIM FOR FAILURE TO INVESTIGATE (AGAINST THE PASSAIC COUNTY DEFENDANTS)

I will submit the malicious prosecution claim and the failure to investigate, train and supervise the sheriff officers, including the newly-obtained discovery and trial testimonies, to this Court only if and when you order me to do so.

Respectfully submitted,

________________________________

Basilis N. Stephanatos, PhD, JD

PS.:  I had the duty to report to this Court the results of the criminal proceedings and the availability of newly discovered evidence to correct manifest error of law or fact.  Please do not consider this letter as a violation of a standing court order regarding the submission of documents to the Court.

CERTIFICATION OF BASILIS N. STEPHANATOS

I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing statements made by me are true and correct.  I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment. NJ Court Rule R. 1:4-4(b); 28 U.S.C. §1746.

DATE:  February 12, 2019

Respectfully Submitted,

___________________________________

Basilis N. Stephanatos, PhD, PE, JD