20bet casino
OTTAWA, Ontario (AP) — One of the most prominent figures from Canada's trucker protests against COVID-19 restrictions in 2022 has been found guilty on five counts including mischief and disobeying a court order. A judge ruled Friday that Pat King was guilty on one count each of mischief, counseling others to commit mischief and counseling others to obstruct police. He was also found guilty on two counts of disobeying a court order. He could face up to 10 years in prison. Hundreds, sometimes thousands, of protesters clogged the streets of the capital, Ottawa, and besieged Parliament Hill for three weeks in early 2022, demonstrating against vaccine mandates for truckers and other precautions and condemning Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government. Members of the self-styled Freedom Convoy also blockaded U.S.-Canada border crossings in protest. The prosecution alleged King was a protest leader who was instrumental to the disruption in Ottawa. The prosecution alleged King coordinated the repeated bouts of honking, ordering the protesters to lay on the horn every 30 minutes for 10 minutes at a time, and told people to “hold the line” when he was aware that police and the city had asked the truckers to leave. The prosecution's case relied mainly on King’s own videos, which he posted to social media throughout the protest to document the demonstration and communicate with those taking part. King’s lawyers argued that he was peacefully protesting and was not one of the demonstration's leaders. King was found not guilty on three counts of intimidation and one count of obstructing police himself. The truckers' convoy gridlocked downtown streets around Parliament Hill, with area residents complaining about the fumes from diesel engines running non-stop, and unrelenting noise from constant the honking of horns and music from parties. Trudeau's government ultimately invoked the Emergencies Act to try and bring an end to the protests. Ottawa Police brought in hundreds of officers from forces across Canada. The protests were first aimed at a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for cross-border truckers. They eventually encompassed fury over COVID-19 restrictions and dislike of Trudeau, reflecting the spread of disinformation in Canada and simmering populist and right-wing anger. The Freedom Convoy shook Canada’s reputation for civility, inspired convoys in France, New Zealand and the Netherlands and interrupted economic trade. For almost a week the busiest U.S.-Canada border crossing between Windsor, Ontario, and Detroit was blocked. It carries more than 25% of trade between the countries, who are each other's largest trading partners.
Rupee hits record low for 6th day, ends at 85.2/$
From March next year, drivers of cars equipped with self-driving technology will be allowed to use it on motorways, reported RTS. This week, the Federal Council approved regulations allowing the use of self-driving systems. Once in force, starting on 1 March 2025, drivers with self-driving cars will be able to take their hands off the steering wheel. However, they must be ready to take control at any time. In addition, in designated parking places and garages, automated driverless parking will be allowed. Beyond motorways and designated parking places, cantons will be given the authority to create approved routes where self-driving technology can be used. However, automated vehicle use on these routes will need to be monitored from a central control room by those operating the vehicles. In addition, the vehicles will need to be able to be controlled from the central facility. Manufacturers of self-drive systems must provide extensive evidence that their systems can guarantee road safety and high traffic fluidity before they can be used.
DOVER, Del. (AP) — A Delaware judge has reaffirmed her ruling that Tesla must revoke Elon Musk’s multibillion-dollar pay package Chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick on Monday denied a request by attorneys for Musk and Tesla’s corporate directors to vacate her ruling earlier this year requiring the company to rescind the unprecedented pay package. McCormick also rejected an equally unprecedented and massive fee request by plaintiff attorneys , who argued that they were entitled to legal fees in the form of Tesla stock valued at more than $5 billion. The judge said the attorneys were entitled to a fee award of $345 million. The rulings came in a lawsuit filed by a Tesla stockholder who challenged Musk’s 2018 compensation package. McCormick concluded in January that Musk engineered the landmark pay package in sham negotiations with directors who were not independent. The compensation package initially carried a potential maximum value of about $56 billion, but that sum has fluctuated over the years based on Tesla’s stock price. Following the court ruling, Tesla shareholders met in June and ratified Musk’s 2018 pay package for a second time, again by an overwhelming margin. Defense attorneys then argued that the second vote makes clear that Tesla shareholders, with full knowledge of the flaws in the 2018 process that McCormick pointed out, were adamant that Musk is entitled to the pay package. They asked the judge to vacate her order directing Tesla to rescind the pay package. McCormick, who seemed skeptical of the defense arguments during an August hearing, said in Monday’s ruling that those arguments were fatally flawed. “The large and talented group of defense firms got creative with the ratification argument, but their unprecedented theories go against multiple strains of settled law,” McCormick wrote in a 103-page opinion. The judge noted, among other things, that a stockholder vote standing alone cannot ratify a conflicted-controller transaction. “Even if a stockholder vote could have a ratifying effect, it could not do so here due to multiple, material misstatements in the proxy statement,” she added. Meanwhile, McCormick found that the $5.6 billion fee request by the shareholder’s attorneys, which at one time approached $7 billion based on Tesla’s trading price, went too far. “In a case about excessive compensation, that was a bold ask,” McCormick wrote. Attorneys for the Tesla shareholder argue that their work resulted in the “massive” benefit of returning shares to Tesla that otherwise would have gone to Musk and diluted the stock held by other Tesla investors. They value that benefit at $51.4 billion, using the difference between the stock price at the time of McCormick’s January ruling and the strike price of some 304 million stock options granted to Musk. While finding that the methodology used to calculate the fee request was sound, the judge noted that the Delaware’s Supreme Court has noted that fee award guidelines “must yield to the greater policy concern of preventing windfalls to counsel.” “The fee award here must yield in this way, because $5.6 billion is a windfall no matter the methodology used to justify it,” McCormick wrote. A fee award of $345 million, she said, was “an appropriate sum to reward a total victory.” The fee award amounts to almost exactly half the current record $688 million in legal fees awarded in 2008 in litigation stemming from the collapse of Enron.Bristol Myers Squibb Co. stock underperforms Tuesday when compared to competitors