URBANA, Ill. (WCIA) — Following two successive rounds of severe storms that swept across Central Illinois on Wednesday and Thursday nights, public works teams are diligently working to ensure that essential areas in their cities remain accessible and safe.
The Urbana Public Works Department reported receiving over 100 service calls on Friday as residents began dealing with the aftermath of winds that exceeded 70 mph.
Karmelo Anthony has been sentenced to 35 years in prison for the murder of 17-year-old Austin Metcalf, who was fatally stabbed at a Texas track meet. The courtroom resonated with emotion as Jeff Metcalf, the victim’s father, delivered an impactful statement. Meanwhile, former U.S. Attorney Cully Stimson highlighted potential grounds for an appeal, specifically pointing to a ‘Batson claim’ concerning possible racial bias in the jury selection. Outside the McKinney courthouse, demonstrators gathered to protest alleged racial discrimination in the trial.
The presiding judge, John Roach, has staunchly defended the decision to exclude cameras from the courtroom during the trial, a move that stirred controversy. Judge Roach emphasized that this measure was crucial to maintaining the fairness of the proceedings.
Judge Roach, of the 296th District Court, reiterated his stance this week, affirming that the restriction on cameras and livestreaming was indeed the appropriate course of action for ensuring a just trial.
This decision followed the verdict from a Collin County jury, which found Anthony guilty of murder in the tragic death of Austin Metcalf, a Memorial High School student. The incident took place during a high school track meet in Frisco, Texas, and has since drawn significant public attention and debate.
In a post-verdict interview with WFAA, Judge Roach stood by his controversial decision to keep the trial proceedings out of public broadcast, underscoring his commitment to a fair judicial process.
Karmelo Anthony (left) was convicted of killing Austin Metcalf (right). (Texas Department of Criminal Justice; Jeff Metcalf)
“Yes, it was an easy decision,” Roach told the station. “I’ll tell you why. My primary goal in every case is to make sure the defendant and the prosecution get a fair trial. Period.”
“I know I made people mad but I’m not here to make them happy either,” he added.
The decision to bar cameras and livestreaming drew criticism from reporters and members of the public who wanted greater access to the proceedings.
A court sketch shows Karmelo Anthony during his trial in Collin County, Texas, where he was convicted of murder in the 2025 stabbing death of Austin Metcalf on June 9, 2026. (Pat Lopez)
“I had to balance between the media’s right to know and be able to know what’s going on, which I think is extraordinarily important. I think the public had access to the courtroom and see what is going on,” Roach said.
The Texas judge said his goal was to prevent outside commentary and public pressure from influencing the proceedings or the jury.
“As long as I follow the law, I sleep well at night,” Roach said.
Defense attorney Mike Howard delivers opening statements during Karmelo Anthony’s murder trial in a courtroom sketch from the Collin County courthouse. (Pat Lopez)
Roach also pushed back on claims that he had a personal relationship with the Metcalf family.
“I wouldn’t know Mr. Metcalf prior to this trial if he walked up to me and said ‘hello,’” he said.
When asked whether the jury reached the correct verdict, Roach said he believed they did.
Karmelo Anthony’s grandmother, Toni Hayes, leaves court in McKinney, Texas, on June 9, 2026. Anthony was sentenced to 35 years for the murder of Austin Metcalf at a track meet in Frisco last year. (AJ Skuy for News Media)
“Yes they did because they were picked based upon the law, they listened to the facts, it happened in this courtroom, and they got a verdict,” he said.
Roach also shared his impressions of Anthony following the trial.
“He seems like a nice young man who committed a crime and he understands today more than any day before the consequences of committing a crime like he did,” he said.
<!–>
–>
The New York Knicks are gearing up for another thrilling showdown against the San Antonio Spurs in Game 5 of the NBA Finals. With the best-of-seven series on the line, the Knicks are seeking to reignite their struggling offense to secure a comeback victory.
As the Spurs face a 3-1 deficit ahead of Saturday’s game, their rallying cry of “Remember the Alamo” is being overshadowed by the chants of “Knicks in five!” Enthusiastic Knicks fans have descended upon central Texas, creating a sea of blue and orange at the Frost Bank Center for this crucial encounter.
Back in New York City, the excitement is palpable as locals gather in bars and at public watch parties, eager to witness their team’s first championship glory since 1973. While Saturdays typically offer some reprieve from the city’s rush hour, the influx of Knicks supporters and World Cup tourists has congested trains, subways, and sidewalks, as the city also hosts a Group C match between Brazil and Morocco.
“Never seen Penn Station this packed,” one woman exclaimed on social media platform X, sharing a video of the bustling escalators beneath Madison Square Garden.
The Knicks are hosting their own spirited watch parties outside Madison Square Garden. However, only 3,000 lucky fans with tickets can access the NYPD’s secured “frozen zone” surrounding the arena. Meanwhile, fans at Radio City Music Hall enjoy the game on large screens for a $10 entry fee, with proceeds going to MSG’s Garden of Dreams Foundation.
After blowing a 29-point lead in their historic Game 4 collapse at MSG on Wednesday, the Spurs and superstar Victor Wembanyama entered Game 5 facing elimination
Once again, the Spurs jumped out to an early lead over the Knicks, finishing the first quarter with a 23-13 edge.
But New York’s celebrity fans didn’t seem too bothered by the slow start, particularly after a series of comeback wins over the first four games. Knicks fan Timothée Chalamet was seen standing and applauding in his first row seat, albeit with his influencer girlfriend Kylie Jenner. Actress Sydney Sweeney was also spotted in Knicks gear, as were the usual attendees, such as director Spike Lee, comedian Tracy Morgan, and director/comedian Ben Stiller. Even British royal Prince Harry was spotted at the game, seated alongside NBA commissioner Adam Silver.
Victor Wembanyama is seen at the free throw line with Jalen Brunson standing behind him
Knicks fan Timothée Chalamet was among the New Yorkers in San Antonio on Saturday
Sydney Sweeney watches Game 5 of the NBA Finals with the Knicks leading the series 3-1
New York Knicks fans attend a watch party in Central Park for Game 5 of the NBA Finals
Brooklynites pack local streets to watch their Knicks months after the Nets’ season ended
New York did come storming back in the second quarter to pull within 42-37 by halftime.
Jalen Brunson was particularly strong for the Knicks over the first half, scoring 16 points on 6-of-12 shooting, including three made 3-pointers.
Dylan Harper led San Antonio with 11 points off the bench in the first half, while Wembanyama added nine points, nine boards and a whopping five blocks.
And largely because of the 7ft 5in Wembanyama’s defensive presence, New York managed just six points in the paint over the first 24 minutes of play. In fact, the Knicks shot just 30 percent from the field in the first half, although that was only marginally better than the 34-percent clip put forth by the Spurs.
As a result, Saturday marked the lowest-scoring first half in NBA Finals history since the Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers tangled in 2010.
Ben Stiller was back in San Antonio for Game 5 after visiting the home of the Alamo last week
One Knicks fan (right) raises a joint and a drink outside Madison Square Garden on Saturday
Knicks fans begin gathering outside Madison Square Garden before Game 5 of the Finals
Fans gather in Brooklyn to watch the NBA Finals with the Knicks eyeing their third ever title
New Yorkers pack together to watch Game 5 on Saturday night in Brooklyn
Native New Yorker Jose Alvarado is seen playing for the Knicks in the first half of Game 5
Devin Vassell dribbles against Jalen Brunson during the first quarter on Saturday
Wembanyama was once again seen with his arms folded during the national anthem before Game 5.
The Spurs star had drawn criticism for his posture during The Star-Spangled Banner in before Games 1 and 2. Later, the 22-year-old Frenchman was conspicuously absent for the song before Games 3 and 4 in New York.
And as has been the case throughout the series, Wembanyama faced online criticism for the perceived slight.
‘He’s trying to prove a point that he’s bigger than the National Anthem,’ one angry fan wrote on X.
‘WTF,’ a second critic wrote. ‘Victor Wembanyama again standing with his arms crossed during the National Anthem!!’
‘It’s extremely disrespectful,’ another added. ‘You’re fortunate to enjoy the fruits of Capitalism in America, the greatest country in the world. Show some gratitude, or Leave!’
Spurs center Victor Wembanyama was once again seen with his arms folded during the national anthem before Game 5 of the NBA Finals on Saturday in San Antonio
The NBA does require all teams to stand in a dignified posture for the national anthem before every game. But like other rules, such as coaching dress codes, the league has taken a more passive approach to enforcement in recent years
Whereas Denver’s Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf was suspended one game for refusing to stand for the anthem in 1996, the NBA allowed its players to kneel in protest of racist police brutality after George Floyd’s murder in 2020.
The Daily Mail previously sought comment from the NBA on Wembanyama’s presence during the anthem and any potential penalty he could face.
On Saturday, Spurs coach Mitch Johnson dismissed the controversy, saying players are often off the court during the anthem.
‘I think there’s plenty of players not on the floor during the anthem, I don’t know if that’s habit, superstition, bathroom… I don’t foresee anyone looking into it at all.’
For countless individuals, cannabis has unwittingly become the go-to remedy for elusive sleep. Yet, while it might appear to offer relief, it could be quietly exacerbating the issue.
Take, for instance, these two scenarios:
A 15-year-old girl finds herself tossing and turning for over an hour. It’s well past midnight, and her mind just won’t settle. With her school bus scheduled to arrive at 6:20 a.m., anxiety mounts as she calculates the dwindling hours of rest left. Despite adhering to all the standard advice—powering down her phone by 10 p.m. and experimenting with melatonin—she’s desperate for a solution. On a friend’s suggestion, she tries a cannabis gummy, and within 20 minutes, she’s sound asleep.
Then there’s a 34-year-old veteran, who, after two tours, battles incessant sleep disturbances. Falling asleep takes him two hours, and even then, he’s plagued by recurring nightmares that disrupt his slumber, leaving him with no more than three hours of rest each night. It’s a struggle that’s wearing him thin. With a lengthy wait for a sleep consultation at the Veteran’s Affairs medical center and a nearby cannabis dispensary open late, the choice seems straightforward, especially after a friend’s endorsement of cannabis as a sleep aid.
Both individuals would attest to the effectiveness of cannabis in addressing their sleep issues. They aren’t entirely mistaken. However, what’s often left unsaid is the intricate dance happening within the brain once the lights are out. It’s a complex process, and for these individuals—as well as many others—it may ultimately lead to an unintended snare.
As a neurologist specializing in sleep and brain performance, I write this not as someone opposed to cannabis but as someone who regularly sees patients whose sleep has quietly unraveled after months or years of use, especially teenagers and veterans.
I believe the public deserves a more complete picture than they currently have due to the limited research that’s available.
From the early teens through the mid-20s, the brain is actively under construction, clearing out weak or redundant connections and reinforcing the circuits responsible for judgment, emotional regulation and stress response.
Tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, the psychoactive component of cannabis, interferes with this process directly by acting on the endocannabinoid system, one of the primary regulatory networks guiding it.
A 2021 brain imaging study of 799 teenagers found that cannabis use was associated with dose-dependent thinning of the cerebral cortex – meaning the more cannabis a teenager used, the thinner their prefrontal cortex became. The prefrontal cortex is the region of the brain responsible for judgment, decision-making and impulse control. Thinning of the cortex in this region has been associated with increased impulsivity, poorer decision-making and reduced inhibitory control.
Another seldom-discussed factor is how puberty affects sleep. Hormonal changes and brain maturation in adolescence shift the internal biological clock, known as the circadian rhythm, toward a later sleep schedule.
And teenagers are far from alone. A 2025 study found that more than 1 in 5 young adults in the U.S. turn to cannabis or alcohol to fall asleep. For teenagers who are already sleep-deprived and facing early school start times, cannabis can become its own nightly fix.
Sleep is not passive. It is well-organized, purposeful and foundational to our physical and brain health.
Every night, the brain cycles through distinct stages, each serving a specific function. All sleep stages matter, but the one that matters most is REM sleep, the dreaming stage. This is when the brain processes the emotional weight of the day, locks in learning and resets the brain circuits that govern mood, judgment and resilience.
THC has a sedative effect at low doses but is stimulating at high doses. Cannabis also contains other cannabinoids – plant-derived compounds such as CBD and CBN that interact with a system in the body that produces its own cannabinoids and contributes to the sedative effects of cannabis.
Here is where it gets complicated.
THC does help people fall asleep faster, but that effect fades quickly as the body adapts to regular use. The same gummy that once helped someone fall asleep quickly does less. They need more to get the same effect.
In addition, falling asleep quicker is not the same as sleeping well. A 2025 review of the research to date found that cannabis does not consistently improve sleep overall, including how long people stay asleep or how restful that sleep is.
In a separate study, chronic daily users spent significantly more time awake during the night and got less restful sleep compared with nonusers; another study found that using cannabis close to bedtime had similar effects.
In other words, the subjective sense of sleeping better does not match what the brain recordings show.
At this point many people are using cannabis not because it is working well, but because stopping feels worse.
Even when chronic cannabis users have the willpower to stop, they often face brutal withdrawal symptoms that are more severe than what drove them to cannabis in the first place. Sleep disturbance, including insomnia and disturbing dreams, is described as a common manifestation of cannabis withdrawal. In addition, two-thirds of users report other symptoms such as anxiety, depressed mood, restlessness, irritability, decreased appetite or a combination of these symptoms that often persist for weeks after stopping use.
The discomfort of withdrawal drives many people to keep using it.
This is the trap – it’s quiet and insidious, which makes it harder to see.
Cannabis works just enough to feel like a solution. Night after night it dulls the problem without fixing it, until stopping feels unthinkable. When someone finally tries to quit, their sleep falls apart. So they go back. The original reason they could not sleep has not been identified or treated, and it hasn’t gone away.
The developing brain is one kind of vulnerability. The traumatized brain is another.
Post-traumatic stress disorder affects an estimated 12% to 23% of post-9/11 veterans, compared with 6% to 8% of the general population. Sleep disturbances affect 70% to 90% of military personnel with PTSD. People with PTSD commonly have nightmares that are visceral, relentless and exhausting. They might be jolted awake with a pounding heart, multiple times a night, for years.
As a result, many veterans turn to cannabis to help them sleep. It’s understandable, especially when it can take weeks or months to get an appointment with a mental health practitioner.
But the data on outcomes for veterans is sobering. Those with cannabis use disorder – meaning cannabis use they struggle to control despite negative consequences, which affects roughly 1 in 4 veterans who use cannabis nonmedically – have higher rates of depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation and respond much more poorly to evidence-based PTSD treatments.
And then there is withdrawal. When a veteran tries to stop, the same symptoms that cannabis seemed to quiet come roaring back in potentially dangerous ways – rebound insomnia and nightmares, worsening depression and, in some cases, thoughts of suicide.
Because these withdrawal symptoms so closely mirror PTSD itself, many veterans interpret the return of symptoms as their condition worsening, not as withdrawal, so they go back to cannabis. And the cycle continues.
Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia, or CBT-I, is considered the first-line treatment for persistent insomnia. Research shows that it outperforms every sleep medication, cannabis included.
This therapy works by modifying sleep habits, regulating sleep-wake schedules, reducing arousal and reframing unhelpful beliefs about sleep. A form of treatment known as image rehearsal therapy, in which patients rewrite the storyline of a recurring nightmare and mentally rehearse the new version while awake, has been shown to be effective for veterans with trauma-related nightmares. But trained CBT-I providers are scarce, wait times are long, and most primary care settings do not offer it.
In other words, the people most vulnerable to the sleep-related harms of cannabis use are the least likely to have access to treatments that address the underlying problem, and the most likely to get caught in a negative cycle.
For those already caught in that cycle, quitting abruptly rarely works and often makes things worse. Research shows that CBT-I can reduce both insomnia and cannabis use at the same time – treating the root problem so cannabis no longer feels necessary.
Sleep is the foundation on which memory, mood, judgment and recovery are built.
The 15-year-old who cannot fall asleep and the veteran who wakes gasping at 3 a.m. both deserve evidence-based information about what is happening in their brains, and real access to care that treats the root cause.
Trigger Warning: This article discusses events that may be distressing to some readers.
Zuhria Al Hattab endured a night of sheer terror when her grandmother’s home in northern Gaza came under attack.
Clinging to hope, she navigated her way south, holding a white flag high and keeping her hands raised, traversing a path the Israeli military had marked as a ‘safe route.’ Her journey, however, was abruptly shattered when bombs began to fall once more.
Zuhria recounted to SBS News the horrific scenes she witnessed following the bombardment that took place during a supposed daytime truce. “The entire road was filled with blood, martyrs, and dismembered bodies,” she said, her voice heavy with emotion.
Despite the overwhelming fear and chaos, she pressed on, tears streaming down her face. “We had no choice but to keep moving, never stopping, and avoiding any glance to the sides,” she recalled of her harrowing escape.
Your trusted source for staying up-to-date with the world around you. Get free daily news updates and analysis, straight to your inbox.
Al Hattab and her wounded brother, Mohammed, survived the journey out — a $10,000 passage through Rafah into Egypt, brokered by her sister, already safe in Australia.
They reached Perth in 2024. But most of the relatives her sister had applied to bring to Australia — including their father and younger brothers — never made it out.
More than two years later, the 34-year-old primary school teacher is still struggling to rebuild her life. She now finds herself caught in a political reckoning over whether people like her should be allowed to stay.
For many Palestinians who escaped Gaza and made it to Australia, the journey to safety did not mark the end of upheaval. It was the beginning of a different kind of uncertainty.
Al Hattab holds a Temporary Humanitarian Concern visa, subclass 786, offered to Palestinians who fled to Australia after the conflict in Gaza escalated in October 2023.
The three-year visa — issued only on a case-by-case basis following mandatory health, character, and security checks — is the second step of the Australian government’s Temporary Humanitarian Stay program.
It allows her to work, study and access Medicare, but expires in early 2028. Unlike the version offered to Ukrainians in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion, it provides no pathway to permanent residency.
She is one of around 1,700 Palestinians who have arrived from Gaza, mostly on initial 12-month visitor visas — a cohort prioritised based on prior travel to Australia or strong family connections.
The federal government has issued about 3,000 visitor visas in total to Palestinians since October 2023.
However, like Al Hattab’s relatives, hundreds of visa holders have been unable to leave Gaza, with Israel’s siege and the closure of the strip’s land crossings preventing their departure.
SBS News has spoken to others who have since secured permanent residency through separate migration pathways, but they say they still have little power to help family members left behind.
The Gaza cohort in Australia has become the leading edge of a tougher immigration argument from the Opposition.
Outlining the first instalment of the Coalition’s long-awaited immigration crackdown in April, Liberal leader Angus Taylor singled out the group, calling them high-risk and “entirely” in need of reassessment “with far greater scrutiny”.
In the speech delivered at the Menzies Research Centre, attended by former prime minister John Howard — long associated with a hardline stance on immigration and border control — Taylor cast the Gaza arrivals as a symptom of what he called a “naive” immigration system.
“We must dispense with the naive thinking that has dominated our immigration policy for too long,” he said in April.
“Our nation has paid the price for believing that anyone, from anywhere, will embrace our way of life.”
From that, he drew three pillars: putting Australian values first, shutting the door on those who “abuse the immigration system”, and “showing a red light to radicals”. The reassessment of the Gaza cohort, he suggested, was where that tougher approach would begin.
Told of Taylor’s comments for the first time, Al Hattab could scarcely take them in. The idea that her place in Australia might be reopened for negotiation seemed, to her, almost unimaginable.
“Oh my God, we can’t go back ever, because there is no house,” she says, her voice catching as she speaks.
There is nothing there. Now, Gaza is not safe. It’s not a safe place.
In Gaza, her remaining 16-member family is surviving on little: a porous tent, scarce drinking water and festering illness.
“If we go back — oh my God, there is no place to stay there,” she says.
To the suggestion that people like her could pose a risk to the country that took her in, her answer is plain.
“We are civilians. We are all civilians.
“We don’t do anything bad.”
The Gaza arrivals are only one flashpoint in a system being squeezed from several directions at once.
At the centre of that system is Australia’s Humanitarian Program — the 20,000-place annual allocation that serves as the country’s main avenue for offering refugees a permanent home.
In the decade to mid-2024, the program accounted for 6.6 per cent of Australia’s net overseas migration.
Refugees can reach Australia by other means — through skilled-work or family visas, community sponsorship, or, in rare cases, ministerial intervention — but these largely sit outside the capped humanitarian intake, leaving the 20,000 places as the main measure of Australia’s annual refugee commitment.
Those places are split three ways: refugees referred from overseas by the United Nations refugee agency on the basis of protection need, refugees sponsored by communities already in Australia, and people granted permanent protection onshore after being found to have refugee status. Because all three streams compete for the same pool of places, growth in one category can reduce availability in another.
Now the program — and the wider asylum framework it sits within — faces pressure not only from the Opposition, but over its future size.
Sources present at a ministerial roundtable earlier this year told SBS News that Assistant Immigration Minister Julian Hill, who hosted it, reportedly indicated the annual intake would hold at 20,000 places for 2026–27, but could fall to 13,750 the following financial year — a cut of more than a quarter.
Such a reduction would mark a sharp retreat from Labor’s own ambitions. The party’s 2023 national platform committed to gradually lifting the Humanitarian Program to 27,000 annual places.
The Department of Home Affairs did not confirm the figure reportedly discussed at the roundtable. In a statement to SBS News, a spokesperson said the program had been “maintained at this level through 2024–25 and 2025–26” and that the government “will maintain the program at 20,000 places in 2026–27”.
Asked about future years, the spokesperson said: “Settings for future program years remain a matter for government.”
Behind the program sits one of the more remarkable threads in Australia’s modern history.
Since the end of World War Two, the country has granted one million permanent humanitarian visas — a milestone built on bipartisan support, with every government since 1947, Coalition and Labor alike, backing refugee resettlement.
Australian delegates helped draft the 1951 Refugee Convention, and the country’s signature brought it into force in 1954.
The Refugee Council of Australia (RCOA) says that history is a source of pride — and a reason to worry about what comes next.
“People who were refugees have come to Australia from nearly every corner of the world and contributed to all aspects of our nation’s life,” its director of policy and research, Rebecca Eckard, tells SBS News.
“Today, millions of Australians have a direct connection to the refugee program personally or through their parents, grandparents or great-grandparents.”
Eckard warns the program is as precarious as it is celebrated — and that its weakness is structural. Onshore protection is folded into the same 20,000-place cap as resettlement from overseas, forcing the two to draw from one pool — and last year, about 4,000 places, roughly a fifth of the program, went to people granted protection after arriving in Australia.
The arrangement also creates a bottleneck. As the financial year ends and the cap fills, grants slow to a crawl: in June 2025, monthly protection grants fell to 89, down from an average of 359 in the months before.
By global standards, the program is small. More than 42.5 million people are refugees worldwide, according to the UN Refugee Agency, and fewer than 0.2 per cent are expected to be resettled anywhere this year.
It has also shrunk from its own past. According to RCOA, Australia’s humanitarian intake peaked above 89,000 visas in 1949–50. It rose past 21,000 again twice more: during the Fraser government’s resettlement of Indochinese refugees, and under the Coalition’s additional Syrian and Iraqi intake in 2016–17.
That is the context in which Eckard frames any cut as a withdrawal at the worst possible moment.
Australia’s Humanitarian Program is a vital lifeline.
“We should be doing everything we can as a country to find ways to grow this lifeline at a time of unprecedented need,” she says.
For those still waiting, Eckard says resettlement is often the only safe option left — offering “hope and practical alternatives” to people who might otherwise risk dangerous journeys in search of safety.
Successive governments, however, have argued that maintaining a capped program helps preserve public confidence in the refugee system and ensures settlement services can keep pace with arrivals.
Why a Labor government that once spoke of lifting the program towards 27,000 places would reportedly be considering a reduction is a question Abul Rizvi, a former deputy secretary of the Department of Immigration, traces to three pressures.
The first is fiscal. The onshore program, Rizvi says, is “a significant negative” on the budget, “whereas most other permanent visas have a positive budget impact”.
The second is scale. At 20,000 places, the program is at its largest in decades and delivering proper settlement services for an intake that size is difficult.
The third is political arithmetic. The government, he says, “desperately needs to find a way to clear the massive backlog of partner visas without increasing overall permanent visas” — and trimming the humanitarian program would help make room.
The pressures Rizvi describes are budgetary and administrative. For the people caught inside the system, though, the cost of a stalled program is measured differently — in years.
Sidiqa Faqihi was a teenager when her family fled Afghanistan, her father telling his children it was for their safety and a future they could not have at home.
The Faqihis are Hazara, a mostly Shia ethnic and religious minority that has faced more than a century of persecution in Afghanistan.
Many rights groups and scholars have described the treatment of Hazaras as genocidal, citing mass killings, systemic discrimination and exclusion from public life. There has not yet been an international court ruling that has made a legal determination of genocide in relation to the Hazara community.
In Afghanistan, Faqihi’s father had campaigned for Hazara rights. It was dangerous work, and in the end, it was what forced the family to leave everything behind.
In 2013, the Faqihis flew to Indonesia and registered with the UN Refugee Agency, expecting to wait at most 2 years before resettlement.
They waited nearly a decade.
Indonesia has never signed the UN Refugee Convention, and offers those seeking protection no right to work, study or settle.
The then-19-year-old Faqihi had pictured enrolling at university within her first week of arriving. She instead found herself in what she describes as an “escape room” with no way out.
“Any door you knock, you end up with another disappointment,” she tells SBS News.
“Years of my life where I could not only have a place to call home, get [an] education, use opportunities, but contribute to social and economic growth.”
The reason the wait stretched so long lay in a shift unfolding around her.
For years, Indonesia had been treated as a transit country: a place asylum seekers passed through, registering with the UN before being resettled onwards, most often to Australia.
Tens of thousands made the next leg by boat — more than 50,000 reached Australia by sea between 2009 and 2013, and hundreds — by most estimates, more than a thousand — died trying.
The boats became the central question of Australian politics. In 2013, a Labor government declared that anyone arriving by sea would never be resettled in Australia, then lost the election weeks later to a Coalition promising to “stop the boats”.
Within weeks of taking office that September, the new government launched Operation Sovereign Borders, a military-led campaign to turn boats back towards Indonesia.
Its message was broadcast into the transit countries the boats left from: a poster of a vessel on a churning sea, stamped with the words: “No Way. You Will Not Make Australia Home.”
The materials were aimed at asylum seekers travelling through the region, including a large number of Hazaras from Afghanistan using the Indonesia route at the time — people like the Faqihis.
In November 2014, the door closed almost entirely. The then-immigration minister Scott Morrison announced that anyone who registered with the UN Refugee Agency in Indonesia on or after 1 July that year would no longer be eligible for resettlement in Australia — a move he described as “taking the sugar off the table”.
Australia, which had once resettled more refugees from Indonesia than any other country, all but stopped: fewer than 100 in the years since.
The Faqihis had registered in 2013, just inside the line — a matter of months that would decide the next nine years of their lives.
Several rights groups, including RCOA, are urging for the 2014 ban to be lifted, so refugees stranded in Indonesia — some for more than a decade — face the same protection considerations as those anywhere else.
A door in Faqihi’s labyrinth finally opened in 2022. Australia resettled her entire family — her parents and six siblings — permanently, in Melbourne.
For the first time since she was a child, she says, Australia had given her “not only a place to call my permanent home, but somewhere that I can live with safety, stability and dignity”.
Now 31, Faqihi has completed a diploma in community services and works at the RCOA, coordinating a program that collects the stories of refugees.
“This program is very close to my heart,” she says, reflecting on what she acknowledges as a rare, full-circle moment.
She is clear about what the years of waiting nearly cost her.
“My life would have looked very different,” she says.
Living with constant uncertainty, fear, and mental distress.
Mark D’Souza arrived in Australia in the same season the country stopped turning people like him away.
He was about 20 in 1972, at university in Uganda, when Idi Amin, then Uganda’s military dictator, announced that God had come to him in a dream and instructed him to expel the country’s Asians.
More than 50,000, including the D’Souzas, were given three months to leave. His family had come from India when he was two, into a Uganda then full of opportunity.
“We were pretty shocked. There was no forewarning,” he tells SBS News.
Asians were ordered to carry red identity cards, which D’Souza still keeps.
“It reminds you of what was happening in Germany during the time of the Jews,” he says, referencing the persecution Jews faced under the Nazi regime in the 1930s and 1940s.
As the violence spread and friends began to vanish, his father resolved to get the family out.
The question was where they could go. Canada took thousands of those expelled, Britain took tens of thousands more, but Australia took comparatively few. A family friend — a London-trained agriculture lecturer — was rejected on the grounds that his skills were not needed.
To D’Souza, the reason was unmistakable: the White Australia policy, a system of discriminatory laws that had governed entry to the country since federation.
The Immigration Restriction Act 1901 was among the first laws of the new Commonwealth, designed to keep Australia white and British.
It did not say so outright — Britain disapproved of explicit racial wording — and instead relied on a 50-word dictation test, administered in any European language chosen by officials, and after 1905 in “any prescribed language”. A migrant Australia wished to exclude was tested in a tongue he could not know and inevitably failed.
For more than half a century, the test held the door shut against almost all non-European migrants.
By 1972, it was collapsing. The Whitlam government, elected that December, moved to strip the remaining racial criteria from migration law.
Weeks before the family was due to fly to Britain, the Australian embassy relaxed its rules and began granting visas to Asians. The D’Souzas were recognised as refugees and, by his account, caught one of the last flights out.
The welcome D’Souza had been warned against never came. Officials met the family at the airport and drove them to a migrant hostel. They received unemployment benefits, medical cover, and, he says, kindness.
D’Souza finished his degree, became a financial controller, and bought a home.
He has watched the country test the same questions since. In 1996, he heard new MP Pauline Hanson tell parliament that Australia was “in danger of being swamped by Asians” and waited for then-prime minister Howard to repudiate her. That never came.
Decades on, in the Sydney suburb where the now 73-year-old has settled in retirement, residents fought to stop a mosque being built.
He hears today’s debate — the talk of values, of who belongs — and finds it familiar.
“It does concern me that we’re going to see this happening again,” he says.
“To see governments now changing their policy and the values they had, all for the sake of votes — it is sad.”
At the heart of Australia’s immigration framework sits a question that has never really changed: who gets to stay, and who is left waiting.
Palestinian Zuhria Al Hattab has reached safety, but not permanency.
Of the 18 visas her sister in Australia applied for, only five were granted. Al Hattab and her brother Mohammed — separated from the rest of the family the night the bombing scattered them from their grandmother’s home — were among the names approved, and the two who made it out.
The other three visas, granted to her father and brothers who remain in Gaza, expired before they could be used. Her sister has reapplied but has not received a response from the department.
Her mother is not waiting with them. She died in an earlier cycle of violence, years before this one.
In Perth, Al Hattab is studying English so she can retrain as a teacher’s aide. She is grateful and says so plainly — not for status or comfort, but for the most ordinary things: that here, she can find food, drink clean water, sleep through the night.
“This is simple things for all people — to get food, to sleep well.
“This is what we were wishing for in Gaza. Nothing more.”
Then the message she keeps returning to:
We are civilians. We just want to live in peace.
For the latest from SBS News, download our app and subscribe to our newsletter.
A 50-pound sulcata tortoise from Missouri, named Liam, has finally returned home after an adventurous nine-day escapade, much to the relief of her worried family and community.
Liam, who is 13 years old, embarked on a remarkable journey covering 1.8 miles. Her path took her through creeks, construction sites, and dense foliage before she was eventually discovered in a nearby development. This heartwarming tale was shared by her owner, Liz Wheelihan Friese, on Facebook.
Upon her homecoming on June 3, Liam appeared content and relieved to be back in familiar surroundings. Friese recounted that the tortoise indulged in a well-deserved bath and devoured a large head of lettuce freshly picked from the garden. Soon after, Liam retired to her cozy indoor enclosure, dubbed the “tort court.”
Expressing gratitude, Friese wrote, “We can’t thank everyone enough for working so hard to find our girl and get her home safely!” The community’s efforts to reunite Liam with her family underscore the power of collective action and concern for our animal companions.
“We can’t thank everyone enough for working so hard to find our girl and get her home safely!!!!”
Friese said the heavy rains made it easy for Liam to break out of her enclosure.
Liam is recognizable because her shell scutes — the hard, typically geometric scales that form a protective layer of a turtle or tortoise shell — are not uniform, and she has a dent on the side of her shell due to her previous owner’s neglect.
She weighs 50 pounds, the Friese family told FOX4KC.
Friese told KVS12 that she was grateful Liam could bring people together.
“Talk about bringing people together that a little rescue tortoise with a screwy shell could bring so many people,” she said.
Brazil maintained their impressive record of avoiding defeat in their World Cup openers since 1934, but it was only the exceptional display by Real Madrid’s Vinicius Junior that spared them in New Jersey.
During the first 30 minutes at the MetLife Stadium, AFCON champions Morocco dominated, putting Brazil—the five-time world champions—in a precarious position, much to the dismay of coach Carlo Ancelotti.
Ancelotti, the seasoned Italian manager, took a calculated risk by fielding the 34-year-old Casemiro alongside Newcastle’s Bruno Guimaraes in midfield, despite the sweltering 90-degree temperatures at kickoff.
Trailing by a goal, Brazil appeared beleaguered until Vinicius Junior delivered a spectacular strike. Cutting inside, he unleashed a powerful shot into the far corner, igniting cheers from the numerous Brazilian supporters in the 32nd minute.
In an attempt to stabilize the team, Ancelotti made strategic substitutions at halftime. The second half unfolded with fewer dramas, and Brazil’s performance improved. Considering the rocky start, securing a draw was a respectable result, keeping their hopes alive for securing the top spot in this crucial group stage.
Morocco are a good side and shouldn’t be under-estimated. They were semi-finalists in Qatar back in 2022 and played with a confidence and freedom here that served notice that they could move quite some way into this tournament themselves.
Brazil will have to be an awful lot better than this if they are to make an impact of their own, though. This was not the opening effort of a team that can have a realistic shot at winning the World Cup for the first time since 2002.
Brazil and Morocco shared the spoils in a thrilling World Cup contest in New Jersey
Morocco took the lead through an exceptional Ismael Saibari finish before Vinicius Jnr’s equaliser
The great Brazilian forward will celebrate his 26th birthday eight days before the end of this tournament and it feels as though he will have to be at his best if he is to get to enjoy it in America with his team-mates.
Vini Jnr said at a press conference to preface this game that he felt this was his time to shine and he duly took the contest by the scruff of its neck to drag his team-mates from the brink of World Cup catastrophe.
Afterwards Ancelotti paid his own tribute and said: ‘I think he has everything in his power to have a great World Cup.’
Certainly Vini Jnr’s goal was as beautiful as it was important.
Brazil were a goal down after Ismael Saibari’s 21st minute strike and Morocco were pouring forward seemingly at will. But just when the Brazilians in the crowd were growing restless, Vini Jnr took control of the ball on the left, cut inside Neil El Aynaoui and curled the ball powerfully across the goalkeeper and into the top corner.
It was a goal to save a game and rouse a nation and there were other moments of inspiration from a player who looks and sounds like he has come to America to be anointed as the world’s best player.
The problem he has got is that he will need another ten players to help him.
Vinicius Jnr scored a sensational solo goal to rescue his side after a torrid first half display
Ancelotti admitted afterwards that his team had been nervous and predicted that improvement will come.
‘I think it was a tough match, especially in the first half,’ said the great Italian coach.
‘Maybe the team was a bit anxious and the nerves were all over the place. The second half was better but it was still tough and I’m sure we’ll get better.’
But the fact that Ancelotti arrived at this tournament saying that his players must forsake individual accolades for the sake of the team perhaps spoke volumes for the flaw that runs through the heart of this Brazilian side.
This is a lop-sided Brazilian squad. It is overflowing with forward players and there clearly isn’t enough of a secure spine. They made some basic mistakes here and that can happen.
It was possible to point the finger at both central defenders and a goalkeeper Alisson who looks past his best for the Morocco goal but on this evidence Brazil lack a collective will also. That is the real worry.
During that frightening early spell when Morocco had Ancelotti’s team pinned in their own half there were troubling signs of Brazil players not tracking runners, not anticipating danger and frankly not committing to the hard stuff that all champion teams must do.
Perhaps not surprisingly, the former West Ham midfielder Lucas Paqueta was among the worst culprits and he only lasted an hour before he was replaced by Manchester United’s Matheus Cunha.
Paqueta is wonderfully talented but he has form for this and a tournament played in climatic conditions like this is not one in which a team can carry passengers.
‘We have to accept criticism,’ said Ancelotti.
‘The starting XI was well thought of. I won’t take any criticism of the individual players who started the match. There is criticism for the entire team which did not play well in the first half.’
Carlo Ancelotti’s team had a frightening opening to the match and his Brazil side appeared lop-sided
The one thing Ancelotti can’t do is inject quality and youth into the centre of the pitch. He just doesn’t have it available to him.
It always felt like a gamble to play veteran Casemiro in this game and it was one that failed. He and his midfield partner Bruno were given the first-half run around in midfield to the extent that was quite embarrassing.
Morocco poured through the gaps during an opening 25 minutes that could easily have seen them score three times. It was no surprise when the former United player was hooked at half-time but the fact his replacement was another eminent player past his prime – 32-year-old former Liverpool general Fabinho – said everything about where this Brazil team are ahead of a long tournament in hot and humid conditions.
Close your eyes for a moment and imagine the England duo of Declan Rice and Elliot Anderson playing in this Brazil team and the immediate improvement is obvious. This is a World Cup that will require endurance and durability and at times cussedness to get through games. On this evidence the five-times champions don’t have it where it matters.
It may take a change of tactics to change things but Ancelotti has been wedded to 4-2-4 for a while even if he admitted after this one that there are some basic flaws.
‘What we have to do better is clear, we need to be a more balanced team,’ he said.
Playing Casemiro was a gamble from Ancelotti that failed and the Italian may have to alter his tactics if Brazil to are have a chance of success
It was quite something to see a Brentford striker playing up front for Brazil at a World Cup and it says everything for the London club’s incredible recruitment model that Igor Thiago was here on the back of his 22 Premier League goals last season.
That said, it was a really big decision by Ancelotti on a day when everybody expected him to go with Cunha. It’s hard to say it was a decision that paid off.
Thiago fluffed a really good chance early on when superb work by Vinicius Junior set him up with what seemed a straight forward header. He hardly made contact with the ball at all.
The 24-year-old did bring a sharp save from the Morocco goalkeeper early in the second half with a rising shot but this was an unconvincing display on a day when he just couldn’t seem to get the ball to stick.
Only his fifth cap, Ancelotti will hope for better if he picks him again against the group’s whipping boys Haiti in the next game.
Brentford’s Igor Thiago earned the nod up front ahead of Matheus Cunha, but had an unconvincing display
There has already been criticism of the drinks breaks that will be a feature of this World Cup. Introduced supposedly in the name of player welfare, they have also allowed the host broadcasters to cram two more commercial breaks into each 90 minutes of action.
More than that, they can be crucial in changing the flow of a game and the one in the first half certainly played in to Brazilian hands here. They were a goal down and drowning when play was called to a halt.
Morocco had crafted a lovely goal – helped by some dreadful defending and goalkeeping – in the 21st minute and were threatening to score the second that may well have killed the game.
But a drink and a few words from Ancelotti and his staff managed to change the flow of the game a little and as Brazil settled themselves, Vini Jnr scored the goal that ultimately saved his team from an opening game disaster.
Which England star has 7 GCSEs? Who has lost half of his finger? Test your knowledge of Thomas Tuchel’s squad with our exclusive quiz HERE
It’s not every day that the hallowed halls of London’s High Court echo with tales of “vodka chasers” and fireside regurgitations. Yet, in 2017, the court’s commercial division became an unlikely stage for just such a story, involving an unforgettable night hosted by Sports Direct tycoon Mike Ashley.
On this particular evening, Ashley had orchestrated a drinking competition at a country pub, culminating in his consumption of a dozen pints and several shots of vodka—only to later deposit the contents into the pub’s fireplace.
This colorful incident found its way into one of the nation’s most esteemed courts as it was used to illustrate Ashley’s unconventional approach to business dealings.
The case arose when banker Jeffrey Blue sued Ashley, alleging that the businessman had failed to honor a £15 million bonus pledge purportedly made during another night of heavy drinking at a London pub, The Horse and Groom.
Despite claims that Ashley frequently conducted business in informal settings over drinks, the court ruled in Ashley’s favor. Mr. Justice Leggatt concluded that while there may have been a verbal promise, it amounted to nothing more than “banter,” lacking the legal gravitas to enforce a binding agreement.
Nine years on, it is difficult to imagine a corporate back story less suited to the polished world of European fashion. And yet it is precisely there that Ashley now appears to have set his sights.
Last week it emerged Frasers Group, the retail empire overseen by the 61-year-old billionaire has mounted a £1.7billion takeover of the German fashion giant Hugo Boss.
Founded in 1924, the brand has built its reputation on sleek tailoring and premium formal wear.
The Sports Direct founder Mike Ashley mounted a £1.7billion takeover of the global fashion brand Hugo Boss (pictured with his wife Linda in 2016)
In other words, an image miles away from the mass-market trainers with which Ashley – a brash, larger-than-life old-school tycoon – made his name, not to mention the tracksuit bottoms he favours for his personal wardrobe.
Little wonder that news of Ashley’s attempted takeover – ‘unsolicited’ and ‘not coordinated with the company’ in the dryly corporate language of Hugo Boss’s management board last week – has met with raised eyebrows.
Although not, it must be said, with surprise. ‘He has zero respect for the norms of business behaviour,’ one City expert told The Mail on Sunday, describing Ashley as ‘pure Marmite’.
‘He has been nepotistic and has no time for niceties. Ruthless is his middle name. At the same time, he is bold and prepared to put his money where his mouth is.’
The move seems typical of a man who has made a habit of crashing through the conventions of corporate Britain to build up one of the country’s largest retail empires.
Frasers Group employs more than 30,000 staff, has 1,500 stores in 20 countries and its most recent accounts showed net assets of around £2.4 billion.
Yet if Ashley has spent a lifetime confounding expectations, perhaps the first surprise is that he never set out to be a retailer at all.
Ashley, who hails from Burnham, Berkshire, initially dreamed of becoming a squash player. A promising junior, his dreams were curtailed by injury aged 16. The teen who had left his local grammar school with not a single qualification, instead found himself helping out in a local sports shop.
He was just 18 when he used a £10,000 family loan to open a sports store in Maidenhead in 1982. Few would have imagined that the boy behind the counter would one day become one of Britain’s richest men, said to be worth £3.44billion, yet the qualities that would define his career were already becoming apparent.
‘When he looked at numbers, it was like watching Rain Man,’ one person who worked with him said. ‘He could pick figures out and immediately see where an issue needed fixing.’
He also possessed an appetite for risk: throughout the 1980s and 90s, Ashley expanded, opening stores across London and the South East before rebranding the growing chain as first Sports Soccer, then Sports World (its name when the company floated on the stock exchange for £3.3 billion in 2007) and finally Sports Direct.
Along the way a rumoured confrontation with one of the industry’s most powerful figures helped define Ashley’s reputation.
According to industry folklore, Dave Whelan, founder of JJB Sports, once warned Ashley that he was entering territory dominated by established northern operators. ‘There’s a club in the North, son, and you’re not part of it,’ he is reputed to have said.
Alas, if Whelan intended it as a warning, he appears to have misjudged his audience: in 2000 Ashley walked into the Office of Fair Trading to whistleblow on football shirt price fixing, setting in train a series of investigations that saw JJB slapped with an £8million fine.
David Beckham pictured modelling his first-ever BOSS collection in 2025, which he also co-designed
The German fashion giant has been modelled and worn by several A-listers including Kendall Jenner
Whelan never forgave him, although he was not the last rival to discover that Ashley could be extraordinarily ruthless.
‘Most people in business focus on operating the best they can but Ashley also focuses on destroying the competition,’ one insider recalled. ‘It is war to him.’
For years, while most focused on High Street expansion, Ashley pursued a different strategy. He started acquiring brands (among them Slazenger, Dunlop and Everlast) whose best days appeared behind them. He made them more profitable by shifting manufacturing to cheaper destinations.
As retailing evolved and many established chains stumbled, Ashley increasingly positioned himself as the man waiting in the wings when trouble struck. Today Frasers Group spans everything from Sports Direct and House of Fraser to Evans Cycles and Missguided, as well as stakes in retail giants ASOS and Currys.
To many observers, his strategy has looked random – as, at face value, has the thought of the pugnacious Brit taking on understated brand Hugo Boss in its entirety. In fact, Frasers has held a stake in Hugo Boss since 2020 when it bought 5 per cent of the shares. And the move is part of what the company describes as an ‘elevation’ strategy for the brand.
Until 2019, Sports Direct was a decidedly downmarket chain but, when in 2019 Ashley bought the struggling House of Fraser, in a £90million deal, he rebranded his empire as Frasers Group.
It now owns premium brands including Jack Wills, designer retailer Flannels and luxury tailor Gieves & Hawkes.
Two years ago, Ashley tried to move even further up the fashion chain with an £83million takeover bid for luxury British handbag maker Mulberry. He was rebuffed by the owners, although he still owns a 37 per cent stake.
Yet as we have seen, despite Ashley’s apparent desire to take on more ‘prestige’ brands, he remains almost wilfully indifferent to conventional expectations of what a billionaire should look like.
While he may have acquired all the trappings of the wealthy – there is the 33-room mansion in north London complete with indoor and outdoor swimming pools and cinema, alongside international properties – day to day he favours leisure wear and meetings conducted in pub back rooms.
Indeed, former associates have described meetings stretching into the early hours over endless rounds of beer, fuelled by kebabs and fish and chips.
In the 2017 High Court hearing in which it emerged he had vomited into a pub fireplace, Ashley described himself as a ‘power drinker’. ‘I like to get drunk,’ he added.
His appetite for alcohol has been matched by his predilection for gambling.
In one 2008 incident he made bets to the tune of £480,000 all centring on his lucky number, 17, at the now defunct Fifty St James Casino in Mayfair, walking away with a £1.3 million win.
While on another occasion he settled a £750,000 legal fees dispute during a City meeting by playing a round of the pub gambling game ‘Spoof’, in which players guess how many coins are held in total in the clenched fists of the group. He lost and paid the bill.
Ashley’s takeover of Hugo Boss has been met with raised eyebrows as the management board say it was ‘not coordinated with the company’
A drop in the ocean compared with his losses in 2008 when, during the financial crisis, he used high-risk spread bets and Contracts for Difference to speculate on a rapid recovery for the bank HBOS. When its share price plummeted, it resulted in a personal loss estimated between £129million and £300million.
In 2019, having set his heart on acquiring Debenhams, he also suffered a crushing defeat when the chain crashed into administration, wiping out his investment. He is reported to have lost £150million.
Then there’s his £134million buyout of football team Newcastle United in 2007, following which the initial optimism of fans was replaced with criticism that he was starving the club of both decent investment and managers.
By the time he sold the club to a Saudi consortium in 2021 for £300 million, he had become one of its most unpopular owners.
They have not been the only the brickbats in his career. In 2016, Ashley was summoned in front of a Parliamentary Select Committee following revelations about working practices at Sports Direct’s Shirebrook warehouse in Derbyshire, which exposed how conditions and pay were so poor the facility was known as ‘the gulag’.
A subsequent report by a committee of MPs said the practices were ‘closer to that of a Victorian workhouse than that of a modern, reputable High Street retailer’.
Ashley subsequently admitted that the company had ‘outgrown’ his ability to manage it, and initiated a series of internal reviews to improve conditions.
It must be said, too, that those at Frasers’ HQ are fiercely loyal. ‘He’s a brilliant boss’ one employee told the MoS. ‘There’s no airs and graces, he’s at the pub with you and he’ll remember what’s going on with your family.’
Ashley’s own private life, meanwhile, has always remained closely guarded: in 1989 he married Swedish-born economics graduate Linda Jerlmyr, but the union ended in 2002 prompting what was widely believed to have been one of the biggest divorce settlements of the time.
Ashley reportedly handed over multiple properties and assets with a total worth of £50million.
Yet in 2013, by which time Linda had had a relationship with businessman Simon Brodin, with whom she had a now 20-year-old son, the pair were spotted together again enjoying intimate dinners.
In 2016, they publicly re-emerged as a couple when Linda accompanied Mike to the Parliamentary Select Committee hearing into the working conditions at his Sports Direct warehouses, a highly public signal of support. It is understood they are still together.
The couple have three children. Matilda, 29, is a director of Mash Holdings, which controls her father’s stake in Frasers Group and other companies.
And while son Ollie, 35, is a music promoter, in 2022, Ashley appointed the husband of elder daughter Anna, 34, Michael Murray, then aged just 32, as CEO of Frasers, an appointment seen as one of the City’s most brazenly nepotistic.
But then, as we’ve seen, Ashley doesn’t much care about what people think.
‘He has obvious flaws, he falls out with people, he plays to win and if people get hurt he is not particularly worried,’ as one City insider said.
‘And with the High Street on its knees and Rachel Reeves hammering retailers with her tax hikes, you have to admire his guts.’
On a memorable Friday night, a pivotal soccer match unfolded 2,800 miles from the buzzing excitement of the Rutherford, a bar nestled just opposite Madison Square Garden, where the Knicks’ success had electrified New York City.
The U.S. men’s national team kicked off their World Cup Group D match against Paraguay in Los Angeles by gaining an early advantage. A Paraguayan defender’s own goal in the seventh minute sparked a chorus of “U-S-A, U-S-A, U-S-A” chants from the bar, resonating through Plaza33 beneath the Rutherford’s roof deck.
As the match progressed, Brooklyn-born striker Folarin Balogun energized the atmosphere further. His first goal came in the 31st minute, contributing to the U.S. team’s commanding 4-1 victory and amplifying the synchronized cheers of “U-S-A” from the enthusiastic crowd.
By halftime, the U.S. team was leading 3-0, bolstered by Balogun’s striking left-footed shot that found the top left corner of Paraguay’s net in extra time. The bar erupted into jubilant celebration, with patrons savoring the sweet taste of impending victory.
James Harden has found himself entangled in legal issues.
The prominent NBA player was apprehended and charged with unlawful weapon possession in Houston, Texas, on June 13, as revealed by Harris County court documents accessed by various news outlets.
Harden, aged 36, was taken into custody at approximately 3:40 a.m. ET after being stopped by police in downtown Houston. During the stop, officers discovered a handgun in his vehicle, which was openly visible and not secured in a holster, according to the documents. The Cleveland Cavaliers’ point guard was subsequently detained and charged with a misdemeanor. Reports from the Houston Chronicle indicate that he was released on bond a few hours later.
As part of his bond conditions, Harden is prohibited from possessing firearms, ammunition, or any other weapons, according to the court records. Moreover, as he awaits his court appearance scheduled for June 22, he must undergo random urine tests and is forbidden from using or possessing alcohol, drugs, or any controlled substances unless they are medically prescribed.
E! News has reached out to Harden’s representative for a statement but has yet to receive a response.
We have a curated list of the most noteworthy news from all across the globe. With any subscription plan, you get access to exclusive articles that let you stay ahead of the curve.
Copyright Newsfinal Publications.
