A 74-year-old man from Florida was executed on Thursday, marking the first time in modern state history that an inmate of his age was put to death. He had been convicted of fatally stabbing his wife back in 1992.

Dusty Ray Spencer met his end at 6:10 p.m., following a lethal injection of three drugs administered at Florida State Prison, located near Starke.

When offered a chance for final remarks, Spencer expressed remorse, saying, “Sorry, sorry to the family. Into thy hands I commit my spirit and my soul. I’m on my way, Lord. I’m on my way. Amen.”

After a short period of heavy breathing, Spencer’s movements ceased entirely. Despite the warden’s attempts to elicit a response by calling his name and shaking him, Spencer remained unresponsive. After evaluation by a medical professional, he was declared deceased.

Spencer was convicted in November 1992 of the first-degree murder of his wife, Karen Spencer. Her family did not release a statement following his execution.

According to Florida Department of Correction records dating back to 1924, the oldest inmates previously executed by the state were both 72 — Samuel Lee Smithers on Oct. 14, 2025, for the 1996 killings of two women, and R. Charlie Gifford on Feb. 21, 1951, for the 1950 shooting death of state Rep. Charles Schuh Jr.

Another 74-year-old Florida inmate, Dennis Sochor, is scheduled to be executed on July 14 for his conviction in the killing of a woman just hours after midnight on New Year’s Day in 1982 after meeting her at a New Year’s Eve party.

The oldest person executed in modern times in the U.S. was Walter Leroy Moody Jr., 83, who was put to death in Alabama in 2018, for sending mail bombs during a wave of Southern terror, killing a federal judge and a Black civil rights attorney.

Spencer’s execution was the ninth in Florida so far this year.

In 2025, 19 people were put to death in Florida, setting a record for the most executions in one year in the Sunshine State. Before last year, Florida’s record for executions in a year since the death penalty was restored in 1976 was eight in 1984 and 2014.

Florida also executed more people last year than any other state, with Alabama, Texas and South Carolina tied for the second-most with five each. Across the U.S., 47 people were executed in 2025.

Spencer was arrested after choking and threatening to kill his wife, Karen, in December 1991. As he was sitting in jail, he called his wife and warned her that he would finish what he started when he was released.

On Jan. 18, 1992, Spencer beat his wife’s teenage son with a clothes iron when the teen attempted to stop Spencer from attacking his mother, according to officials.

About a week later, the boy went to check out a commotion outside their home and saw Spencer hitting his mother in the head with a brick.

The teen attempted to shoot Spencer with a rifle, but the gun misfired. Spencer threatened the boy with a knife, and the boy ran away to search for help. When police arrived, Spencer’s wife was found dead with several stab wounds to the chest.

Spencer was initially sentenced to death in 1992, after he was convicted of first-degree murder, attempted first-degree murder, aggravated assault and aggravated battery.

Two years later, the Florida Supreme Court ordered his new sentencing after finding that the trial court had mishandled evaluating aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Spencer was resentenced to death the following year, and subsequent appeals were denied.

Last week, the state Supreme Court rejected Spencer’s appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a final appeal earlier on Thursday.

Football Australia pays tribute to young Socceroos fan killed after Federation Square screening

Disney’s highly anticipated live-action take on the beloved “Moana” is creating quite the buzz this summer. The film features Dwayne Johnson taking on the role of Maui and Catherine Laga’aia making waves as Moana herself. Both stars have been reflecting on their experiences bringing this cherished animated world to vivid life.

At a lively fan gathering in Sydney, Australia, Johnson shared his enthusiasm for stepping into the role of Maui. “It was amazing. It was a real honor to bring Maui to life from animation to live-action,” he expressed. Johnson’s connection to the character is deeply personal. “Two reasons. One, (Maui) was inspired by my grandfather, the great High Chief Peter Maivia. I lost him when I was 10 years old. He was one of my heroes. And also, the honor of representing culture,” he explained.

In addition to his role in Sydney, Johnson’s promotional tour also took him to Shanghai, China, where he delighted “Moana” fans by showcasing his impressive rapping ability, further endearing himself to audiences worldwide.

For Catherine Laga’aia, her cinematic debut as Moana has been a transformative journey, one that mirrors the adventures of her character. At the same Sydney event, she revealed, “I feel like I’ve learned as much about myself as Moana did herself on her journey. I feel like I really went through kind of a similar process, almost in an alternate world, kind of stepping so far away from home into something that I’d never experienced before. So I think I grew a lot in that process, and I’m really proud of the person who’s kind of come out of it.”

Director Thomas Kail also praised Laga’aia’s performance while in Sydney, noting that her casting was seamless. “She has that thing, you know, that thing that I say, you can only coach it, you can’t teach it,” he remarked, affirming that her presence on screen captured the essence of Moana beautifully.

Fans can prepare for the upcoming film by watching the animated “Moana” and “Moana 2” streaming now on Disney+.

Watch the live-action “Moana” in theaters on July 10.

The Walt Disney Company is the parent company of Disney+ and this ABC station.

The Bear has just released its fifth and final season in its entirety on Hulu, introducing fans to a fresh slate of characters for a last hurrah.

Over the course of its impressive run, The Bear has featured an array of guest stars, including the likes of Bob Odenkirk, Sarah Paulson, John Mulaney, Gillian Jacobs, John Cena, and Olivia Colman. Season 5 keeps this tradition going by bringing more fresh faces into the mix.

Warning: Spoilers ahead for Episode 2 of The Bear Season 5.

In the second episode of The Bear Season 5, titled “Lamb,” Carmy (played by Jeremy Allen White), Sydney (Ayo Edebiri), Richie (Ebon Moss-Bachrach), and their team are in a high-stakes scramble to save the restaurant. With their finances in disarray, flooding in the basement, and a storm outside, the pressure is on. In a bid to manage the crisis and clear his debts, Uncle Jimmy (Oliver Platt) enlists some powerful aid. Returning is The Computer (Brian Koppelman), to help crunch the numbers and provide guidance. Additionally, a quirky new character named Cheese, or Terry Cheddario, makes their debut. (Yes, you read that right!)

So, who exactly is Cheese in this season of The Bear? And what should viewers know about Elsie Fisher, the actor behind the new character? Continue reading for a closer look at Season 5’s newcomer and Fisher’s background.

Who Is Cheese In The Bear?

Cheese bursts into The Bear’s kitchen in Episode 2 behind Unc, who introduces her as Terry Cheddario, niece of Computer.

“I’m Terry. Don’t call me Terry,” Cheese tells Syd before leaving to take a call because “the EPA is after my ASIC miners.” What the heck does that mean, you ask? Sounds like the Environmental Protection Agency is after Cheese’s specialized computers that mine crypto! We’ve got another tech wiz on our hands!

While Syd and team try to assure Unc that they can overcome their latest setbacks, Cheese sets everyone straight and calls out the “hazardous conditions” explaining, “Floods devalue the property. Rotted pipes do the same. We need to know what we’re working with.”

When the flooding gets , Cheese tells it like it is and paints the following bleak picture of the restaurant’s future: “I don’t even need to survey the rest of it. You’ve got active criminal occupation, combustible hazardous storage, unresolvable code violations that Richie cannot and will not correct. That’s also on the Superfund list. So the EPA has identified extensive subsurface contamination. That means your soil’s fucked. Your roof is caving in, and your deed requires you to pay buyer money. They’d flip it into anything but a restaurant. Zoning restrictions. Noise complaints. Donna and the Lincoln Park Zoo incident. Historical landmarks, stormwater ordinance. Inspection requirements. Brownfield incentives… I can almost guarantee you that this entire property is sitting on a sinkhole, giving you about 5 to 10 years before the ground starts to collapse into itself.”

Is that all? NO! But we’re depressed, Cheese! Cut it out! As you might guess, Cheese is anti-restaurant and thinks they’re a horrible business. Despite not agreeing with the team’s desire to save The Bear, however, Cheese supports them and works closely with Unc and Her Unc throughout the season to figure out a solution, like franchising! Did The Bear fans have a burning desire or need to meet The Computer’s niece with just hours left in the series? I doubt it! But guest stars have become the show’s bread and butter, and Fisher effortlessly cooks in the role, nailing fast-paced dialogue and jumping headfirst into The Bear‘s chaos.

Who Plays Cheese On The Bear? Meet Elsie Fisher

Cheese on The Bear is played by Elsie Fisher, a 23-year-old actor and voice-over artist with nearly 50 TV and film credits to their name. If Cheese looks familiar, you’ve likely seen Fisher in a prior project, as they kickstarted their on-screen career at age six! Since landing a role in Medium in 2009, Fisher has done voice work for popular films like Despicable Me and starred in Eighth Grade, Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2022), Barry, The Summer I Turned Pretty, Roommates, and more.

Want to stay up-to-date with Fisher outside of The Bear, you can follow them on Instagram at @elsiekfisher to learn more!

Stay tuned for more The Bear Season 5 coverage from Decider.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has urged Florida’s law enforcement agencies not to release a Cuban national facing serious allegations of drugging and raping a woman without authorization.

On June 18, Yusel Keoma Perez-Leyva, 42, was apprehended following accusations that he had drugged and sexually assaulted a woman after an evening spent at a nightclub.

According to the victim, Perez-Leyva, who was reportedly employed as an Uber driver during the time of the incident, allegedly administered drugs to her. The day after the supposed assault, she experienced soreness in her vaginal area, leading her to suspect that she had been raped.

Investigators analyzed surveillance footage that purportedly depicted Perez-Leyva carrying the seemingly intoxicated victim into his apartment, as reported by NBC Miami.

“This illegal alien from Cuba is charged with raping and kidnapping a woman in Miami,” said DHS Acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis. “This sexual predator was released into our country by the Biden Administration. ICE has lodged a detainer against him, and because Florida cooperates with ICE, he will be turned over to ICE custody and never released into American communities again.”

Perez-Leyva is charged with kidnapping and sexual battery while a victim was physically incapacitated, according to jail records.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has asked the Miami-Dade Corrections and Rehabilitation Department (MDCR) not to release him without first notifying federal authorities.

News Media has reached out to the MDCR for comment.

Miami-Dade authorities, and Florida as a whole, generally cooperate with ICE and honor the agency’s detainers, unlike sanctuary jurisdictions in other states.

Perez-Leyva illegally entered the United States through Arizona in 2021 before being released by the Biden administration, DHS said.

In a thriving democracy, voters should never face the dilemma of choosing between facilitating easy voting and ensuring the integrity of the electoral process. Both objectives can and must be achieved simultaneously.

This question misses the mark entirely.

This is why the debate surrounding the US Postal Service’s suggestion that states provide voter data prior to distributing ballots overlooks a more critical issue.

Opponents, primarily Democrats from traditionally Democratic regions, quickly condemned the suggestion as a threat to voting rights. They asked the usual question: “Where is the proof of extensive fraud?”

Maintaining the integrity of elections extends beyond addressing fraud after it occurs. It involves establishing robust systems that inspire public trust well before any votes are cast.

Banks don’t wait for money to disappear before verifying identities. Airports don’t abandon security because most passengers aren’t criminals. Every serious institution understands that trust depends on verification.

Our elections should be no different.

California has built one of the nation’s most expansive vote-by-mail systems. Prior to COVID, voters had to request an absentee ballot.

Today, every active registered voter automatically receives a ballot by mail. Millions of ballots travel through the US Postal Service (USPS) during every statewide election.

At the same time, California permits any eligible voter to register online, and election laws allow ballots postmarked by Election Day, even by hand, and received up to a week afterward to be counted if they meet statutory requirements. 

The system is designed to maximize participation, but it’s painfully slow. It also depends heavily on the accuracy of voter rolls and election administration.

Those policy choices inevitably raise questions about how confidence in the system is sustained.

California’s election laws are built largely on trust. That trust may be well placed, but trust alone is not a substitute for verification.

Asking whether additional verification is appropriate should not be treated as political heresy. It does mean that reasonable people can ask whether additional verification would strengthen public confidence.

Instead, those questions are loudly dismissed as the ravings of conspiracy theorists or deemed politically unacceptable.

Anyone who calls for greater transparency is accused of trying to suppress votes.

Anyone who suggests comparing databases or verifying eligibility is portrayed as attacking democracy itself.

That’s backward.

Confidence in elections doesn’t come from demanding blind trust. It comes from demonstrating that reasonable safeguards are in place and that officials are willing to explain how they work.

The federal government has legitimate interests at stake, too. Congress sets qualifications for federal elections, federal agencies help enforce election laws and USPS delivers millions of ballots through the national mail system. 

It is hardly radical to argue that federal officials should be able to work cooperatively with states to ensure that election mail is delivered through a secure, well-administered process. 

Whether this proposal is legally permissible is ultimately for the courts to decide, but seeking greater transparency is not an unreasonable objective.

A federal judge has already blocked implementation of the current USPS proposal while challenges proceed, underscoring that the legal questions deserve judicial resolution rather than political slogans.

Americans routinely accept verification across nearly every important aspect of civic life. We verify identities to board airplanes, receive government benefits, open bank accounts, fill prescriptions and purchase firearms.

Verification isn’t an insult or a threat.

It’s an acknowledgment that important systems deserve protection.

Voting deserves at least that same level of protection.

Our democracy functions when citizens believe elections are both accessible and trustworthy. Expanding access and strengthening verification are not mutually exclusive goals. In fact, they reinforce each other.

Americans should reject the false choice that we must either trust every election process without question or undermine democracy itself. The stronger principle is simpler: trust is earned through transparency, accountability and verification.

That’s not voter suppression.

That’s good government… and it certainly shouldn’t be partisan.

Matthew Klink is the owner and president of Klink Campaigns, Inc., a Los Angeles-based public affairs firm.