According to a CNN article, two white students have recently been allowed to return to a South African university in Johannesburg after they allegedly served two black housekeepers a stew filled with their urine back in 2007.

Roeluf Malherbe and Schalk Van der Merwe were banned from campus after a video emerged allegedly showing the young men - along with several accomplices - mixing beef stew and urinating in it.

What happens next violates every health and safety code - they serve the stew to the dorm housekeepers.

The school recently withdrew its complaints against the students and invited them back to resume their schooling. Jonathan Jansen - the vice chancellor at the university - is the first black man to hold the position at the University of the Free State in Bloemfontein.

The chancellor himself made the decision to allow the students to return.

However, Jansen states the university has no other control of the students’ fate outside the school. Both face criminal charges and human rights charges.

At this point it is undetermined if the students will return to school.

University officials stated the video was made in retaliation of the university’s attempt to integrate the schools. Almost 20 years after apartheid, the dorms are still divided into white and black dormitories.

After the incident occurred, both students released a statement apologizing “for any embarrassment [they] may have unintentionally caused.”

They further claimed that the video was altered to make it to appear as though they “tainted” the stew by urinating in it. They continued to say that the liquid they put into the stew was completely harmless and that they did not mean to hurt anyone, CNN reported.

South Africa’s Ministry of Higher Education does not agree with the decision to let the boys back in. They believe the boys should apologize and face any and all allegations.

From the university’s point of view, there appears to be no sense of remorse from the boys. They believe the boys just think it was a funny prank.

But what about the housekeepers - the victims in this alleged incident? They claim they are still being taunted by the students and have requested new uniforms because the old ones are a constant reminder.

The Ministry believes if the students return to school, it might look like the government is failing to address not only the situation at hand, but also the underlying issue of racism in the university.

Charges have not yet been pressed against the boys and the university is not yet commenting whether or not the boys will return to school.

<!– /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:”Cambria Math”; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:”"; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-size:10.0pt; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>

Richard and Mayumi Heene – the parents of the young boy thought to be flying around Fort Collins, Colo. - are being accused of a hoax and face criminal charges, according to a CNN report.

They are being accused of allegedly fabricating the story that their son Falcon climbed into a homemade flying vehicle and went flying through the sky.

The parents, who were both previously featured on the show “Wife Swap,” have allegedly been looking for fame and celebrity status since the show aired in March 2009. Authorities state they created this incident as a publicity stunt to gain nationwide attention.

This apparent hoax led to a major search and rescue mission after images were aired on television of the young boy flying through the sky in the air balloon contraption.

The aircraft landed 60 miles from where it took off, and when it was found by the rescue teams, the young Falcon was nowhere to be found.

Authorities feared the worst - that the young boy had fallen out of the balloon. Hours later, Falcon emerged from a small space where he was hiding in the attic of his parents’ house.

Falcon’s older brother said he saw his younger brother get into the balloon and even videotaped it, but it appears he did get out of it.

According to a CNN article, the silver helium balloon is 20 feet long and five feet high was found 90 minutes away from the home in a field near Colorado Springs.

Richard Heene is a meteorologist and was building a “3D low altitude Vehicle.” It was not completely ready to fly and was not meant to fly above 20ft high.

Police only questioned the whole incident after the Heene family appeared on Larry King live and during the conversation, Falcon told his father, “ you guys said, um, we did this for the show. “

Authorities, upon hearing this, decided to interview the parents again and they then determined that the whole thing could a fabrication for the parents to gain attention.

The Heenes are facing felony charges of conspiracy to commit a crime, contributing to the delinquency of a minor and attempt to influence a public servant.

Richard Heene’s attorney, David Lane, has not yet seen any evidence from authorities and he hopes that the authorities will let the Heenes turn themselves in instead of creating a big spectacle and bringing them into the station with police escorts, CNN reported.

He maintains the Heenes are good parents to their three children and for them to see their parents in handcuffs could cause devastating effects.

The Larimer County Sheriff’s Department advised no comments will be given until the investigation is complete.

Susan Atkins, the infamous Charles Manson follower, recently died in prison from brain cancer, CNN reported.

As many may remember, she was responsible for the murders of actress Sharon Tate; Abigail Folger, whose family owned the famous coffee company by the same name; and celeb hairstylist Jay Sebring, among others. She was convicted of seven murders in the summer of 1969.

All were found dead at Tate’s home in Bel Air, Calif., which she shared with her husband – film director Roman Polanski. He was not home at the time of the murders.

Perhaps the most disturbing part of this crime is that Tate was eight and a half months pregnant when she was brutally stabbed by Atkins.

Atkins admitted to the crime stating she stabbed Tate several times – killing her and her unborn son as Tate begged for both their lives.

Atkins claimed she committed these crimes with fellow cult members because they were ordered to do so by their leader Charles Manson. Her confession also stated that she and the other members were under the influence of LSD at the time of the murders – a drug known to cause hallucinations.

Atkins was sentenced to death, but her sentence changed to life imprisonment when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the nation’s death penalty in 1972. They later reinstated it in 1976, but her sentence did not change back.

Since then Atkins has requested parole 13 times and has been denied every time. Her last attempt for parole – “a compassionate plea” – was denied even after she had surgery for her cancer related issues.

According to CNN, Tim O’Hara, the Parole Commissioner, said Atkins’ request for parole was denied because the board believes she still does not fully understand the magnitude of her crimes. The parole board also claimed the crime was so horrible that they denied the claim due to its “atrocious nature.”

Atkins served most of her time, 37 years, in the California Institution for Women.

She was later transferred to a community hospital in 2008 due to her health, and was finally transferred to Chowchilla Prison’s Nursing Center a year before she died.

Atkins was said to be a born again Christian, and many of those who knew her thought of her as a model prisoner – but the victims’ families never heard any regret or apology for her awful crimes all those years ago.

The young female student Danmell Ndonye, a young female student at Hofstra University had accused five young men of gang raping her on the New York campus, but later recanted her story, the New York Daily News reported.

She may now be charged for false accusations and suffer consequences from making up a story that could have ruined the future of the accused young men.

Ndonye told the Nassau County Police her cell phone was taken at a campus party while she was dancing and was lured back to the dorm where 5 young men proceeded to tie her up. They each then took turns engaging in un-consensual sexual activity. She stated this occurred around 3am in the university dorm bathroom.

The police were led to believe that this was a preplanned attack by the boys, setting up the young girl for the crime. They at this point had no reason to believe Ndonye was lying to protect herself from embarrassment of the incident.

The accused men were each charged with five counts of first degree rape and were facing up to 25 years in prison if they were convicted, according to the New York Daily News. They could have lost the chance to live their lives.
After claiming she was raped, Ndonye later changed her story stating that the sex was consensual and that the young men never raped her.

Ndonye took back her story after she learned of a video on a cell phone while she was being questioned by the state prosecutor. It allegedly shows that the sex had been consensual. None of the prosecutors knew during the questioning what exactly was on the video, but the girl ended up changing her story and said the sex was indeed consensual, according to the New York Daily News.

She allegedly told police she had been raped because she was afraid to tell her boyfriend about the incident; quite a big price to pay to keep a relationship together.

The charges against the young men were dropped, but it now appears Ndonye might face criminal charges as well as disciplinary actions from the university for making these false accusations.

Rondell Bedward – one of the male Hofstra students involved – had been suspended after Ndonye’s accusations, but his  suspension from the university was lifted after the truth was revealed.

A spokeswoman for the university stated that Ndonye has been suspended until after the school disciplinary hearing scheduled to decide what consequences she will face.

No criminal charges have been pressed nor any civil lawsuits filed at this point, but that does not necessarily mean she will not face any in the future.

Most people hate the feeling that they are getting ripped off - and that doesn’t just stop at your average everyday person.  Celebrities don’t like it either, but they have a much larger pay scale to worry about.

Former wrestler Hulk Hogan, also known as Terry Bollea, filed a lawsuit in Pinellas County, Fla. against his lawyers, according to Tampa Bay Online.

The lawsuit states that the lawyers overcharged him $1 million for his son Nick’s car crash back in 2007. Nick had crashed his vehicle into a palm tree after his car jumped over a median.  He and his passenger, John Graziano, were severely injured and taken to the hospital.

In the lawsuit, Hogan is claiming he paid more than $1 million to his lawyers to defend his son for a civil case filed by Graziano from the accident.

According to the Tampa Bay papers, Hogan states that his insurance company, Progressive Select Insurance Co., could and should have supplied him an attorney at no cost to him under his insurance policy.

At the time of the accident, the vehicle Nick was driving, a Toyota Supra, was insured by Progressive. The policy covered bodily injury limits of $250,000 per person and has a total limit of $500,000 per accident. Progressive would defend the policy holder if any civil suit arose from the accident.

Hogan states that no one at the insurance company had contacted him with this information until much later after he decided to hire out different attorneys, Tampa Bay Online reported.

About two weeks after the accident Hogan decided to consult with Morris Weinberg Jr. and Lee Fugate from the Zuckerman Spaeder law firm. He hired them to defend his son Nick against criminal charges and to protect him against civil lawsuits.

Hogan later found out the insurance company had sent letters to everyone except for him - including his business managers and his financial managers stating the company had appointed him an attorney.  Word of this, according to Hogan, also reached his newly hired attorneys, but they never told him they received the letter.

He also alleges that the attorneys told Progressive Hogan wanted only this law firm to represent him and they came to an agreement with the insurance company that they would only charge Hogan $145/per hour.

According to Tampa Bay news reports, Hogan claims the law firm charged him much higher rates from $475 and up. Hogan could no longer retain the law firm for the case.

Progressive had already paid the firm $350,000 from the $444,000 they were seeking in reimbursement.  The insurance company then decided they were no longer going to represent Hogan due to his bills being “grossly inflated and unnecessary.”

The firm states that Hogan’s claims are “baseless” and they will fight in court.

In America, a fashion crime won’t get anyone forty lashes, but unfortunately it can in Sudan.

Northern Sudan is predominantly Islamic, and the Islamic law has restrictions on public indecency, mainly for women, according to CNN.com.

Lubna Al-Hussein was threatened with forty lashes for wearing pants that were allegedly “too tight” with a sheer blouse. According to Al-Hussein, she was wearing pants, a blouse and a hijab (a head scarf worn by Muslim women).

Lashing – a common punishment in Sudan for both men and women - can be held in public.  The public lashings are reserved mainly for men, and for women the lashings are handled in private and occur shortly after the trial.

At the time of her arrest, Al-Hussein was attending a restaurant party in Khartoum when Sudan police barged in and began inspecting woman at the party to make sure their clothes were decent for public appearance.

Al-Hussein was not the only one arrested at the party - 18 other women were arrested with her. Her lawyer, Nabil Adib, does not think she was targeted specifically. According to Adib, it’s a common occurrence for police to enter public and private parties to hold these inspections.

Courts found her guilty of the crimes, but decided not to give her the lashes. They instead ordered that she pay a fine of 500 Sudanese pounds, which is equal to 209 American dollars. If she did not pay the fee, then she would be thrown in prison for one month. Her trial lasted a day and she was not allowed any witnesses or to present a defense case, according to her Adib.

Al-Hussein chose jail time and refused to pay the fine based on principal. Now, she’s looking to appeal the court’s decision in hopes to make the effort to declare the Muslims’ decency law unconstitutional.

Al-Hussein worked as a journalist for the media department of the United Nations and resigned from her position to waive her immunity as an international worker and face trial.

This action brought attention across the world and many protestors showed up at the court hearing to protest this offense. Police had to throw tear gas into the crowds to break up the protesting.

According to CNN they detained 47 supporters, apparently injuring some of these women. From Amnesty International to United Nations, this is one trial that has everyone around the world was watching, and waiting to see the results.

According to a Boston Globe article, current legislation governing criminals in Massachusetts makes it difficult for former prisoners to find work.

As a result, these former offenders are more likely to become repeat offenders. Currently there is a bill in the Massachusetts legislature that will completely change the state’s criminal record system.

Summer interns at Boston’s TenPoint Coalition organized a three-mile march from Roxbury to the State House to show support for the legislation currently under review.

For the full story about these criminal rights and the Massachusetts legislation, visit the Boston Globe.

Harrowing stories of neglect are becoming commonplace–last year, a 7-year-old Ohio girl was repeatedly raped on her special needs bus, and the news has recently been full of stories about the criminal charges associated with the death of Danieal Kelly, a 14-year-old girl with cerebral palsy whose  mother left her to starve and dehydrate to death in her bed.  But even with stories like these popping up in the news on a regular basis, it’s almost impossible to believe the story of Ed Rivera and Linda Hockaday.

Rivera is a 22-year-old mentally and physically disabled man who attends a special  needs program in New York City.  Hockaday is the 51-year-old matron charged with transporting Rivera and others like him.

While most of us were celebrating the new year on Wednesday night and early Thursday morning, Rivera–who has cerebral palsy–was sitting strapped into a seat in a locked bus.  Rivera sat in that seat for 19 hours in bitter cold.

Lest you think that perhaps Hockaday simply made a terrible mistake, think again:  Rivera is 6′2″ tall and was strapped into the seat directly behind the driver’s seat.  And, Hockaday has reportedly admitted that she knew Rivera was there.  Her explanation, according to CBS news, was that she didn’t want to be late for church.

Hockaday is now facing criminal charges and Rivera is in the hospital.  It appears that Hockaday isn’t alone in her responsibility for this near-tragic event, either.  News reports suggest that when police first went to the Outstanding Transport facility to search for Rivera, employees there didn’t bother to tell officers that there was a second bus lot.  It was in that second lot that Rivera was finally located, when police returned to the facility hours later with Rivera’s entire family to continue the search.

We’ve long known that people convicted of drug and alcohol related crimes and blue collar economic crimes such as theft were more likely to commit new crimes if they didn’t have access to things like a place to live, clean clothing, a telephone number to use on job applications, and all of the basics that make running a productive everyday life possible.

We have to believe, though, that legislators sincerely thought they were reducing the risk that sex offenders would repeat their crimes when an increasining number of jurisdictions enacted laws regulating where a convicted sex offender might live.  For instance, there are restrictions on how near to a school a sex offender may live-and in some states, those restrictions extend to parks, bus stops, and a number of other locales presumed to be frequented by potential victims.

While that makes a lot  of sense in theory, California officials are reporting that it’s not working out exactly as planned.  The restrictions are making it difficult–sometimes impossible–for convicted sex offenders to find housing.  And it turns out that just like other classes of criminal, sex offenders are more likely to commit new crimes when they lack a stable environment and a known location.  The California Sex Offender Management Board says that forcing sex offenders into a transient lifestyle actually increases the threat.

Michigan this week became the thirteenth state to legalize medical marijuana, though the law won’t be fully effective until April.  Until that time, medical marijuana users find themselves in an odd gray zone, in which they haven’t yet been issued the cards that will allow them to use the drug legally, but may raise medical use as a defense should they be charged.

But the more controversial development came earlier this week, from the U.S.  Supreme Court.  Three years ago, an Orange County Superior Court ordered law enforcement officials to return seized marijuana to Felix Kha after a doctor confirmed that he was using marijuana on medical advice and charges against him were dropped.  But prosecutors balked.  The Court of Appeals sided with Kha and the Superior Court, citing a federally protected property right.  Prosecutors appealed to the California Supreme Court, arguing that no such federally protected right could exist, since federal law makes marijuana possession illegal.

The California Supreme Court declined to hear the case, leaving prosecutors with only two options–honor the lower court ruling or take the matter one step further.  They chose to continue the fight, and asked the United States Supreme Court to decide the issue.

When the U.S. Supreme Court declined to address the issue, the 3+ year battle came to an end.  However, because the ruling is only binding in one appellate district in California, the question remains open in other jurisdictions and the issue is likely to arise again, eventually forcing state supreme courts and/or the U.S. Supreme Court to decide the issue as jurisdictions split and the law varies from place to place.