sent around the united states and around the world, actually and have proven to be safe in the past. in this case however, this was a shipment of at least one case live anthrax that was labelled inactive anthrax so that does raise concern. as of this morning, they have raised the number of people is receiving antibiotics as a precaution against any potential health threat. now it s up to 26 people. four in a civilian lab in the united states and 22 military and civilians at a military base in south carolinakorea south korea. again as a precaution against any health threat. the centers for disease control has fanned out today to military and civilian labs across the u.s. to determine if they received live anthrax from the military. the cdc is also at the army s
that they re the right thing for the country as well as people affected by this. so he want to make sure we can get to a place where we can implement this policy and provide the people coming forward with the certainty they will know this policy will stick. that s the theory undergirding the legal strategy that the justice department announced yesterday. the president will continue to fight for this vigorously because it s the right thing for the country, because it s absolutely within his authority under the law and it s also the right thing for keeping families together and upholding values in this country. the white house has said it will not appeal directly to the supreme court to kind of fast track this to the supreme court. why? because it s very important to provide certainty that if people are going to be coming forward to apply for something, they ll need to know it won t get tangled up in the courts. we have an argument to make on the merits of this case the first week of
shakespeare and put their face on it. take a look at this. this is boston. next hour a status conference in the tsarnaev case. when the bomber will be sentenced. more on that after a quick break on the rundown. building aircraft,
correct determination. there were many of us that were worried based on the fact that motive was very sketchy in this case. the judge could not would not allow in prior information about why hernandez was upset with odin lloyd. the judge also if you recall originally wasn t going to let in the text message that odin lloyd sent before he was killed to his sister saying by the way nfl. she didn t let anyone expound on the fact of what it might mean. it indicates they didn t buy anything that hernandez s fiance said. when she took the stand and said she thought the box contained weed and couldn t remember where she threw the box out and box i m referring to is the one that the prosecutors allege contain the murder weapon that he was getting rid of. clearly they didn t believe her. so i feel a great sense of relief based on this verdict because i was extremely worried
i swore i saw aaron hernandez s fiance in the middle of that huge crowd of reporters and they got into that white van and drove away. i also paul passed me a vital question to ask. take it away. i think one of the interesting things about this case is this charge this first-degree murder charge it requires finding of extreme cruelty or atrocity. now, how could they know what went on since there s no eyewitness who testified to the murder? you only have gunshot wounds that were confirmed by autopsy. there was a finding here of extreme cruelty and atrocity. i was just looking at the massachusetts law to see how they define it and they say if the defendant was indifferent or if he took pleasure in the death, the consciousness and degree of suffering of the deceased the extent of injuries to the deceased so we could look at the number of gunshot wounds