Excerpts Fantasy Read an Excerpt From Bury Our Bones in the Midnight Soil by V.E. Schwab This is a story about life—how it ends, and how it starts. By V.E. Schwab | Published on May 28, 2025 Comment 0 Share New Share We’re thrilled to share an excerpt from Bury Our Bones in the Midnight Soil, a new genre-defying novel about immortality and hunger by V.E. Schwab, out from Tor Books on June 10th. This is a story about hunger.1532. Santo Domingo de la Calzada.A young girl grows up wild and wily—her beauty is only outmatched by her dreams of escape. But María knows she can only ever be a prize, or a pawn, in the games played by men. When an alluring stranger offers an alternate path, María makes a desperate choice. She vows to have no regrets.This is a story about love.1827. London.A young woman lives an idyllic but cloistered life on her family’s estate, until a moment of forbidden intimacy sees her shipped off to London. Charlotte’s tender heart and seemingly impossible wishes are swept away by an invitation from a beautiful widow—but the price of freedom is higher than she could have imagined.This is a story about rage.2019. Boston.College was supposed to be her chance to be someone new. That’s why Alice moved halfway across the world, leaving her old life behind. But after an out-of-character one-night stand leaves her questioning her past, her present, and her future, Alice throws herself into the hunt for answers . . . and revenge.This is a story about life—how it ends, and how it starts. There is no gentle waking, no state of in-between. One moment Sabine is dead to the world, and the next she is back in the barn, alive. Awake. But not alone. She looks up and sees a man standing several feet away. In one hand he holds a rope, the donkey tethered to the end. In his other hand he holds a pitchfork, the wooden pole hovering over her side. She has the sense that he has prodded her with it. “Get up,” he says. Sabine stands, and sways, still feeling weak, and ill, despite the many hours’ sleep. The barn door is open at the farmer’s back, late-afternoon light slanting in, and she winces at the sight of it. The glare still makes her dizzy. “Are you hurt?” he asks, and in the daylight she can see the stains that paint her gown, the unmistakable shade of long-dry blood. He sees it, too, and yet, he doesn’t flinch. There is no trace of fear around him, and it rankles her. That despite the look of her, he is so certain of his safety, convinced she is the damsel, not the danger. Sabine watches as he takes in her unlaced collar, the ruby at her throat. For a moment, his attention wanders lower, drifting over the bare skin that pitches toward her breasts. A quick flick down to her bare feet, the slippers cast off somewhere amid the hay, before cutting back up to her face. Her hair. The jewel. “Are you hurt?” he said, but there was no caring in the question, only a man trying to gauge the trouble in his barn, deciding whether her presence is an inconvenience or an opportunity. Sabine supposes she could cry, or beg for help, spin some story about scoundrels, make herself small and play the part of helpless maiden. She could, but she doesn’t. Instead she meets his gaze, and holds it, the way she used to when the caravans came through. Her attention is a fishing line, a hook flashing in the stream, and sure enough, he snags, and twitches, can’t seem to tear away. “Tell me, señor,” she says, and there it is again, that new timbre in her voice. A low, almost feline purr. “Are you married?” She lets her own gaze roam over the man, measuring his body the way he just measured hers. He colors, and scowls. “I am,” he says, rough hand tightening around the rope. Sabine takes a small step forward, and even though he is slighter than her husband was—was, what a lovely word that is, a perfect tense—the farmer makes no motion to retreat. Of course he doesn’t. After all, she is just a woman, isn’t she? Half-dressed. Alone. Buy the Book Bury Our Bones in the Midnight Soil V.E. Schwab Buy Book Bury Our Bones in the Midnight Soil V.E. Schwab Buy this book from: AmazonBarnes and NobleiBooksIndieBoundTarget Her fingers drift up, tugging at the laces on her gown, exposing another inch of skin. “Where is your wife?” she asks, and sure enough, she can feel his heartbeat quicken. “Inside,” he mutters, the air around him thick with want. Simple and animal and raw. She takes another step, and then another, until she is right there, close enough to touch, to take, close enough he should notice the amount of blood on her clothes, the fact she isn’t wounded. “Are you a good husband?” she asks. His expression sours. “What?” “Does she love you?” “She is my wife,” he says bluntly. “She does what she is told.” Sabine’s mouth turns down. Her teeth click together. “Is that so?” He only nods. How strange, that he cannot taste her thoughts, the way she has tasted his. That as he grabs her arm, he is so sure that he’s the predator, and she the prey. By the time he realizes, of course, it is too late. She slams him back against the gate, teeth sinking deep into his throat. At some point, he drops the donkey’s rope. At some point, it flees through the open door. At some point, he swings out with the pitchfork, drives the tines into her side, and what she feels then isn’t pain, not as she once knew it. She is aware of the tearing flesh, the metal scraping against her hip, but it is nothing compared to the strength of the blood spilling in, filling her again. Sabine drinks, hoping it will steady the ground beneath her feet, and the farmer tries to scream, but his throat is already open, his voice nothing but a drowning breath. His heart pounds inside her chest, a stolen beat, but it dies there shortly after he does. His body slumps, lifeless, to the floor. Hers stays on its feet. She looks down, then, at the metal prongs piercing her side, driven finger deep. She pulls, and they slide free, like teeth. The blood on the tines is dark and thick, and when she grazes it with her tongue, the taste reminds her of the widow. Earth and ash, the tangle of salt and rotten sweet. No longer living. Far from dead. Sabine lets the pitchfork fall beside the farmer’s body and feels the flesh across her stomach sew itself together, stitch by invisible stitch, with a skill María never had, leaving nothing but smooth skin. She runs her fingers over it, impressed by this newfound resilience. She takes a step toward the barn door, only to feel the ground tip, the world sway. Still, she feels dizzy. Still, she feels sick. She looks accusingly at the open door, the light streaming in. It is thinner now, lower, too, the sky stained pink with the impending dusk, but the sight of it still hurts, more than the pitchfork did. Sabine doesn’t know for sure, but she suspects the sickness and the sun are somehow tethered, so she sinks onto the dead man’s back to wait, plucking bits of straw from her loose hair to pass the time. An hour later, when the sun has safely disappeared behind the hills, there is a tidy pile on the floor, and her copper locks lie smooth and plaited down her back. She rises to her feet and steps outside, and sure enough, as the day retreats, the illness recedes with it. She has not taken a breath—no longer needs to breathe, it seems—and yet, her entire body sighs in relief. She marvels at the change. Her head no longer aches. Her limbs no longer tremble. Across the field, a window glows with light. The farmhouse. She makes her way toward it, savoring the grass on her bare feet. The breeze whispering against her skin. There is no sign of the farmer’s wife, but the door stands open, and Sabine decides to let herself in. But she cannot. She makes it to the threshold, but there her body lurches to a stop. It makes no sense—the door is open wide, and she can see straight into the little house—but no amount of force will let her through. Suddenly she is the fish on the line, an invisible cord holding her back. Sabine hisses at this new obstruction. The widow only ever spoke of freedom, said nothing of these rules. She finds herself wishing she had some manner of instruction, wishing, perhaps, she had not drained the woman dry. But there is no purpose to regret. And Sabine is no lost lamb, in need of shepherding. She will decipher this herself. She is still testing the doorway when, from somewhere in the house, she hears the wife calling for her husband. The footsteps drawing near, and she does at least consider leaving, slipping away into the settling dark. But, despite the emptied body in the barn, she is still hungry. The farmer’s wife appears, a small, tired-eyed woman, who stops right before the door, nothing but the empty frame and half a stride between them. She startles at the sight of Sabine, surprise and suspicion rising off her like steam. Sabine stares back, appraisingly. The woman’s clothes are simple, boring, but they’re clean, and a glance says they will fit. “Where did you come from?” asks the farmer’s wife, glancing past her at the yard, the barn. Perhaps looking for her husband. “I need help,” Sabine answers. “I was robbed.” The woman’s gaze snaps back. Takes in the tattered dress. The bare feet. And then, the ruby glinting at her throat. Sabine curses herself softly, waits to see if the lie is ruined, but the woman only proceeds to ask if she is hurt, and unlike the farmer, there is at least an edge of worry in the words. “No,” she answers. “But if you give me shelter for the night, I’ll see that you’re rewarded.” She reaches up as she says it, unhooks the necklace for the first time since Andrés clasped it there. The jewel sloughs into her palm. The woman looks past her one more time, her thoughts so sharp Sabine can almost hear them. Where is my husband, I should ask him, will he be mad? But then Sabine holds out the necklace, lets the ruby catch the light, makes her fingers tremble for good measure. “Please,” she says. A small word, with so much weight. The farmer’s wife swallows, veins flashing in her throat. “All right,” she says. “Come in.” As soon as the words are out, Sabine feels the hook slip free, the hold give way. She takes a testing step, and this time, when her bare foot meets the threshold, there is no resistance. Nothing but an open door. She smiles, and steps inside the house. “Is that blood?” asks the farmer’s wife as the lamplight catches on her dress. “Don’t worry,” says Sabine as she reaches back to close the door. “Most of it’s not mine.” Excerpted from Bury Our Bones in the Midnight Soil, copyright © 2025 by V.E. Schwab. The post Read an Excerpt From <i>Bury Our Bones in the Midnight Soil</i> by V.E. Schwab appeared first on Reactor.

Military historian and classicist Victor Davis Hanson, speaking Wednesday at The Heritage Foundation, drew striking parallels between the empires of the past and the modern United States. Hanson, a Daily Signal contributor, contended that, contrary to the assertions of the Left, “walls do work,” and that the United States is in need of cultural cohesion and consolidation. “When we look at borders in antiquity, walls do really work, in the sense that they’re never designed for impenetrability,” he said. “They’re designed to allow fewer people to defend territory more efficiently.” In Hanson’s view, empires and world powers occasionally go through periods in which they need to consolidate their realms in order to create stability at home. Hanson spoke of a period in the Roman Empire when “the great expansion had ceased, and it was the consolidation of Rome,” referencing Edward Gibbon, an 18th century English historian who authored a six-volume “History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.” “It’s what Gibbon called the greatest period of human prosperity and safety, the so-called ‘five good emperors,’” he explained. During that period, the Romans cut back on conquest and marked limits for expansion, such as Hadrian’s Wall in Scotland. Hanson also suggested that the United States, much like the empires of the past, has to bring cultural solidarity and order to its own territory if it’s to be capable of sustained global influence. He used the rapid expansion of the British Empire across the globe as another example, speaking of how its foreign policy achievements were in stark contrast to the low quality of life experienced in parts of London. “The capital and the manpower that was all over the world was not reflective of what the inner city of London was like at that time,” he said. “I think that if anybody today looked at our 650 military installations, and they looked at the rural San Joaquin Valley or downtown Fresno [in California], they would think that this society has no economic, cultural, social ability to project this power all over the world when these cities … seem to be failing or dying, while we’re exporting this wonderful culture.” “In conclusion,” he said, “borders have always mattered through antiquity. Walls do work, immigration has always been a … political issue, and most people in responsible positions of power have understood that open borders do not work, and if you have a culture … then it has to have a definable space to be protected.” The post Historian Victor Davis Hanson Lays Out Ancient Lessons on Borders: ‘Walls Do Really Work’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Left is nothing if not persistent. While Congress has been exhaustively debating the tax cut and spending details of President Donald Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill,” Senator Bernie Sanders, Vermont’s independent socialist, and his House Democratic allies are again honing their comprehensive health policy agenda: the abolition of all Americans’ private and employer-sponsored health insurance and the creation of a “single payer” system of government-run national health insurance. Along with Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.), Sanders recently reintroduced the Senate and House versions of the “Medicare for All Act of 2025.” The legislation has attracted 16 cosponsors in the Senate and 104 cosponsors in the House—almost half of the entire House Democratic caucus. As noted in analyses of earlier versions of the House and Senate legislation, it would create a government monopoly over the financing and delivery of American health care. Under this system, one would have no alternative to the government health plan, creating a “No Choice, No Exit” scenario. Sanders and his House colleagues routinely argue that their proposal for government-run health care will be universal, comprehensive, cheaper, and overall superior to Americans’ current public/private mixture of coverage. According to Robert Weissman of Public Citizen, a prominent supporter of the bill, “Medicare for All would ensure everyone in America can get the care they need throughout their lives.” Well, no. Behind its simple name, the blanket claim that “everyone” will get the care they “need” throughout the course of their lives is pure, unadulterated nonsense. The real-life operations of “single payer” countries demonstrate the bitter truth, with countries like the United Kingdom and Canada showcasing the delays and denials of care year in and year out. Today, according to the British Medical Association, the U.K. has 7.4 million patients awaiting medical care. And Canada has one of the worst waiting times in the entire Western world. In a 2020 study in the Canadian Family Physician, researchers concluded that “long wait times have become a defining characteristic of the Canadian health care system.”   In single payer health systems, wait times secure “cost savings” and are thus a “feature, not a bug,” observes Michael Baker, a health policy analyst with the American Action Forum, a Washington-based think tank. Consider also access to specialty care, a crucial issue when it comes to deadly disease conditions like cancer and heart disease.   The U.S. excels in medical specialization relative to other high-income countries. According to data compiled by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, over 88% of American physicians are specialists. American patients thus have access to a wide range of clinicians who can address specific, often serious, medical conditions in a timely and effective fashion. While British and Canadian patients have access to a proportionately larger base of primary care physicians, or general practitioners, they have far less access to medical specialists. In 2023, for example, the U.K.’s Royal College of Radiologists reported a 30% shortage of radiologists.  The British and Canadian physician workforce has a much heavier concentration in primary care than the United States. Today, an estimated 25.5% of the U.K.’s doctors are general practitioners, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development data, and in Canada that number rises to 47.4%. Even so, there’s no guarantee of timely access to care or an escape from waiting lists. According to a 2024 Fraser Institute study of nine countries with “universal coverage,” 47% of Dutch patients—who are enrolled in a system of largely private health insurance coverage—were able to secure same day or next day appointments when sick. That’s compared to 39.6% of British patients—and just 22.3% of Canadians.   America’s high concentration of highly skilled specialists, along with its superior access to advanced medical technology, are key contributing factors in its comparative success combating cancer, the world’s deadliest killer. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development reports that each year 183 people per 100,000 inhabitants die in the U.S. from cancer.  For Canada, that number is 197, while in the U.K., it’s 222. Consider breast cancer specifically. A mammography can detect cancer early, helping to reduce mortality. According to 2021 the organization’s data, the U.S. has 70.7 mammography machines per 1 million inhabitants, while Canada registered only 17.47 machines per 1 million inhabitants. Similarly, they report a greater availability of CT scanners, MRI machines, PET scanners, and gamma cameras in the United States than in most other peer nations. The U.K. did not report their data on these items to the organization—but the number of such diagnostic technologies available in Canada per million inhabitants is roughly just one-third of what’s available in the U.S. While congressional champions of government-run health care often concede that the U.S. outpaces single payer countries in medical technology, breakthrough pharmaceutical development and medical specialization, they nonetheless insist that an American version of single payer health care will be simpler, generate larger savings, and operate with greater economic efficiency. Not a chance. The House and Senate bills allegedly model themselves on the existing Medicare program—meaning they come with reams of mind-numbing regulations, bizarre rules governing provider payment, and detailed edicts concerning what patients can and cannot have and the conditions in which they can have them. The current Medicare fee-for service program is anything but simple, and it is generating tens of trillions of dollars in long-term debt. But the House and Senate bills would make Medicare’s current flaws worse. While they would repeal the existing Medicare and Medicare Advantage programs, they would replace them with an even more top-heavy, debt-ridden system of government-run national health insurance. While single payer champions in Congress and elsewhere claim that the administrative costs of private coverage generate waste, sapping the time and energy of medical professionals, they routinely ignore the tens of billions of dollars lost each year in “improper payments,” as well as the enormous administrative costs of provider compliance with regulatory and reporting requirements of the Medicare bureaucracy. All those are “paperwork” costs that don’t show up on the government’s books.     This misplaced, almost childlike, faith in the alleged efficiency and efficacy of government central planning is impervious to the facts. Dingell recently commented, “We‘ve been fighting this fight since the 1940s, when my father-in-law helped author the first universal health care bill. It’s time to get this done.” No, it isn’t.   The post Congressional Leaders on the Left Just Relaunched Their Government Health Care Takeover appeared first on The Daily Signal.

CNN chief media analyst welcomed NPR’s lawsuit “hitting back” at the Trump Administration on Tuesday as the outlet argues that removing their federal funding via executive order violates the First Amendment. Stelter’s first swing at the matter came during The Situation Room when he reported, “NPR says in the suit, quote, "The executive order violated the expressed will of Congress and the First Amendment's bedrock guarantees of freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of association and also threatens the existence of a public radio system that millions of Americans across the country rely upon."     CNN has the First Amendment right to be a liberally biased network, but NPR is required by law to maintain “strict adherence to objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature.” Nevertheless, Stelter echoed NPR’s lawyers, who claim that it also has a First Amendment right to broadcast whatever it wants, “Now, Trump accused the networks of liberal bias. NPR denies that charge. But that charge is at the heart of this lawsuit. Basically, the White House reiterated that charge again this morning. But that is what the Theodore Boutrous, one of the lawyers hired by NPR to fight this attack, that's what they say is viewpoint discrimination. Boutrous told me just a few minutes ago that viewpoint discrimination is so clear in this case, because the White House is accusing NPR of bias, even though NPR denies that charge. So that's at the heart of this case. It's a First Amendment case. And it may not be the only one, Wolf. PBS has also been considering legal action, and it may follow up in the days to come." NPR denying the charge doesn’t mean anything. If Fox News received federal funding, Stelter would not claim that self-assessments of neutrality were proof of neutrality. Regardless, a few hours later, Stelter was back, this time on CNN News Central where he was more excited in his depictions of the suit, “NPR did not ask for this fight, but now that they're being attacked by the White House, they are hitting back. And this lawsuit is going to have ramifications possibly for PBS as well, because Trump is trying to strip funding both from NPR as well as its TV counterpart at PBS.”     Stelter did manage to provide a quote from White House spokesman Harrison Fields, “He says, outlets like NPR are, quote, ‘creating media to support a particular political party on the taxpayer's dime. Therefore, the president is exercising his lawful authority to limit funding for NPR and PBS.’” However, he did not seem convinced. After making the same viewpoint discrimination argument he made earlier, Stelter tried to boost NPR’s argument with third-party expertise, “Here's the Knight Institute, for example, saying, quote, ‘It's a bedrock principle of the First Amendment that the government may not censor speech or skew public debate by imposing punitive financial measures based on a speaker's viewpoint or editorial decisions.’ So the Knight Institute, other advocacy groups, they say NPR should prevail, but we'll find out what a judge thinks.” Of course, there are experts on the other side as well, because if a judge does rule in Trump's favor, it does not mean the judge is anti-First Amendment, because if National Public Radio wants to change its name and continue doing the same old liberal programming, it can do so, but there is quite simply no First Amendment right to federal money. Here are transcripts for the May 27 shows: CNN The Situation Room 5/27/2025 11:45 AM ET WOLF BLITZER: Also new this morning, NPR is now suing the Trump administration over the president's executive order to cut its federal funding. Several member stations joined the lawsuit, alleging Trump's actions are a clear violation of the First Amendment. The White House has targeted both NPR and its television counterpart, PBS, claiming they are biased. I want to go to our chief media analyst, Brian Stelter, right now. First of all, Brian, tell us more about this lawsuit. BRIAN STELTER: Yeah, Trump has tried several different maneuvers to take the public out of public broadcasting. Most recently, he signed an executive order demanding that NPR and PBS lose all the federal funding. But here's the thing. That federal funding was included in a law that was passed by Congress and signed into law by Trump earlier this year. And yet Trump on May 1 signed this executive order. There's the title, Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media. That is what he is trying to have happen. But NPR is suing to try to stop him. Here's part of the lawsuit's statement from earlier today. NPR says in the suit, quote, "The executive order violated the expressed will of Congress and the First Amendment's bedrock guarantees of freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of association and also threatens the existence of a public radio system that millions of Americans across the country rely upon." Now, Trump accused the networks of liberal bias. NPR denies that charge. But that charge is at the heart of this lawsuit. Basically, the White House reiterated that charge again this morning. But that is what the Theodore Boutrous, one of the lawyers hired by NPR to fight this attack, that's what they say is viewpoint discrimination. Boutrous told me just a few minutes ago that viewpoint discrimination is so clear in this case, because the White House is accusing NPR of bias, even though NPR denies that charge. So that's at the heart of this case. It's a First Amendment case. And it may not be the only one, Wolf. PBS has also been considering legal action, and it may follow up in the days to come. *** CNN News Central 5/27/2025 3:50 PM ET BRIANNA KEILAR: National Public Radio is suing the Trump administration, calling the president's attempt to cut its funding a clear violation of the Constitution. Several NPR member stations in Colorado joined the lawsuit, which says the administration's actions violate, quote, “the expressed will of Congress and the First Amendment's bedrock guarantees of freedom of speech.” Today's litigation follows an executive order the president signed earlier this month, instructing the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to defund NPR and PBS for alleged bias in their reporting. CNN's chief media analyst Brian Stelter is with us now. Brian, what can you tell us? BRIAN STELTER: Yeah, NPR did not ask for this fight, but now that they're being attacked by the White House, they are hitting back. And this lawsuit is going to have ramifications possibly for PBS as well, because Trump is trying to strip funding both from NPR as well as its TV counterpart at PBS. The White House's argument here, as has been expressed [technical difficulties] outlets are biased, they are favoring the left. Here's today's statement from White House spokesman Harrison Fields. He says, outlets like NPR are, quote, “creating media to support a particular political party on the taxpayer's dime. Therefore, the president is exercising his lawful authority to limit funding for NPR and PBS.” There is already litigation underway about whether Trump actually has this lawful authority, because the way that public broadcasting was set up by Congress in the 1960s, it was set up to make sure that no president could interfere in this way. So there are already legal battles underway on that side. Now, here you have NPR saying it's a First Amendment violation. You might be wondering why, how is it a First Amendment violation? Well, it has to do with something called viewpoint discrimination. I spoke with one of NPR's lawyers earlier today. They say that because the White House is alleging bias, which NPR denies, but because the White House is alleging bias, it's a form of viewpoint discrimination. And we've heard advocacy groups today take that position as well. Here's the Knight Institute, for example, saying, quote, “It's a bedrock principle of the First Amendment that the government may not censor speech or skew public debate by imposing punitive financial measures based on a speaker's viewpoint or editorial decisions.” So the Knight Institute, other advocacy groups, they say NPR should prevail, but we'll find out what a judge thinks.

Mark Griffin was trying to caution police at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 against firing more rubber pellets and explosive munitions into the massive crowd when a police sergeant shouldered a munition launcher and shot Griffin in the left leg with 40mm hard-rubber baton rounds. The point-blank blast likely from Metropolitan Police Department Sgt. Frank Edwards came seconds after Griffin explained he hadn’t touched the bicycle-rack barrier on the West Plaza as Edwards claimed. “Calm down,” Griffin said. 'You’ve got a video that shows him deliberately, from three feet away, "Bang!"' The officer lowered the weapon slightly, video showed, and shot Griffin. “What are you doing?” the officer spouted. He popped the smoking empty shell out of the barrel and hustled off to reload. Griffin was in blinding pain. As he bent over in shock, video showed, Griffin was blasted in the face with pepper spray by an MPD officer who reached over the barricade to deliver insult to injury. Griffin hobbled away with what he later discovered was a massive break of his left femur. The injury cost him nearly a year in recovery. Griffin long suspected that Sgt. Edwards was the one who shot him. A Blaze News investigation of video appeared to confirm this in late 2024. Bodycam evidence strongly suggested that Sgt. Edwards fired the shot, but no publicly available video was conclusive. A U.S. Department of Justice trial exhibit — overhead video shot by a journalist — later showed clearly that Edwards most likely was the trigger man. Just seconds earlier, MPD Inspector Robert Glover — armed with the same type of munition launcher — most likely shot another protester some two feet away from Griffin. The protester had his back to the police line when he was shot. His legs buckled to near collapse as he staggered away. Video evidence uncovered by Blaze News shows Edwards fired hard-rubber baton rounds from a 40mm shell at Griffin at 1:57 p.m., splitting his left femur — an injury requiring multiple surgeries to repair. Metropolitan Police Department/Mark Griffin, graphic by Blaze News The new video “made the whole thing a slam dunk,” Griffin told Blaze News. “I assume that would be the only thing that they’re going to throw anything out on [in a lawsuit] is like, ‘Oh, you can’t prove who did it.’ “So it could have been some cop that was shooting at somebody else and you got in the way or something,” Griffin said. “But no, you’ve got a video that shows him deliberately, from three feet away, ‘Bang,’ completely in violation of the specifications for using that weapon as a non-lethal weapon.” As Griffin limped for blocks to the tour bus his group rode from Pennsylvania, he didn’t know his leg was broken. The leg swelled so much that it essentially created its own splint. He used his wooden cane for support on the long walk. When he was nearly there, he collapsed. Bystanders helped him to his feet. Once he planted himself on a seat in the bus, the pain became intense, he said. 'If they hit someone in the face or chest with that, it would have killed them.' Griffin, 66, a self-employed dump truck operator from Canadensis, Pennsylvania, has a foot-long scar on his leg as a painful remembrance of Jan. 6. He said his medical bills topped $200,000, much of it covered by insurance. More than four years after Jan. 6, Griffin said he is looking for justice for what he believes was a reckless and unlawful use of force against him. Griffin filed a $3 million civil rights lawsuit against the District of Columbia and its police chief and several unnamed officers in January 2024. The U.S. district judge overseeing the case in 2025 ruled that the lawsuit cannot include Sgt. Edwards due to the statute of limitations. The judge removed Edwards from the suit. When Griffin first came forward in mid-2022 with his story of being badly injured on the Capitol’s West Plaza, there was no public video footage that showed the shooting. Most MPD bodycam and Capitol Police CCTV security footage was buried under strict court protective orders. Metropolitan Police refused to release any bodycam footage, citing “privacy.” Jan. 6 defendants could not share video evidence in their cases without violating court orders. A careful search of bodycam video, DOJ case evidence, and third-party footage by Blaze News uncovered aerial video appearing to clearly showing Edwards firing a munition shell at Griffin from just feet away. 'It’s just not right to let them get away with that.' “You have to wonder about the mentality of shooting someone with some ‘less lethal’ weapon from three feet away,” Griffin said in a 2022 interview. “If they hit someone in the face or chest with that, it would have killed them for certain.” Metropolitan Police Department Sgt. Frank Edwards fires a 40mm munition launcher into the dense crowd on the U.S. Capitol’s West Plaza on Jan. 6, 2021.Metropolitan Police Department Griffin’s lawsuit complaint initially included several unknown officers listed as John Does. Edwards’ name was later added to the suit to replace one of the John Does after Edwards’ identity became clear. In January 2025, Senior U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell ruled that Griffin could not sue Edwards because his name was added to the suit after the three-year statute of limitations expired. The lawsuit was filed a day before the statute of limitations expiration for civil rights charges, but the judge ruled that Edwards could not be added in an amended complaint months later even if his identity was not known at time of filing. She referred to Griffin’s well-documented injury as “alleged.” '"They’re all going to panic." That was what I told them.' “Sgt. Edwards seeks dismissal of plaintiff’s claims as untimely because the applicable three-year statute of limitations started to run from the date of plaintiff’s alleged injury and the amended complaint, substituting Sgt. Edwards for a John Doe defendant, does not relate back to the original complaint,” the judge wrote. “Plaintiff counters that the statute of limitations did not start running on the date of his alleged injury on January 6, 2021, but rather when he learned the identity of the person who shot him. “Plaintiff’s arguments do not overcome the chorus of authority to the contrary,” Howell wrote. “As such, plaintiff’s claims against Sgt. Edwards are time-barred, requiring grant of the pending motion to dismiss.” Griffin is considering an appeal. “It seemed like a real stretch, what the judge came up with there,” Griffin said. “She was really just trying to find a reason to make this go away.” Griffin said he hopes publicity from his case prompts others to come forward who were injured by the concussion grenades, hard plastic pellets, beanbag rounds, tear-gas canisters, multiple-projectile Skat shells, rubber bullets, tasers, or other crowd-control weapons wielded by police at the Capitol. “The reason that I really wanted to pursue this is because there’s got to be a dozen other people just like me that got hurt,” Griffin said. From peacemaker to victim Griffin was filmed by Blaze News’ Steve Baker standing at the police line on the West Plaza close to 1:30 p.m. Griffin said he explained to officers that protesters had concerns about election fraud but were not there to attack or harm anyone. He showed one officer his driver’s license and a copy of the U.S. Constitution printed on his cap. “Here is my bill of sale to this country — you know, my birth certificate,” he told the officer. “I said, ‘It’s your bill of sale, too. It’s our country. It’s not their country. And what they’re trying to do inside that building in there is just not right. And everybody knows it’s not right.’ “And he just said to me, ‘Well, you voted. Go home.’ And I told him, ‘You know I’m from Pennsylvania. I can’t go home, because we have all kinds of questions about the election. Our legislature sent the House of Representatives a letter asking that they not recognize the electors that were sent. That’s why I’m here.’” Bodycam footage and third-party video showed Griffin tried to keep the peace at the bicycle racks that separated police from angry protesters. When the police line pushed protesters back, Griffin returned and urged calm. He chastised protesters who tried to shake or steal the bike racks. He asked police for calm. 'Oh s**t, I think we’re going to lose.' The first use of so-called “less lethal” force was ordered on the West Plaza at 1:05 p.m. by Capitol Police Deputy Chief Eric Waldow, who broadcast over police radio, “Launch, launch, launch!” At 1:06 p.m., protester Joshua Black was shot in the cheek by police with an impact projectile, leaving a gaping hole that bled all over the concrete. Five minutes after a large cadre of MPD officers arrived on the West Plaza, a Capitol Police officer ordered an escalation of munitions. “We need the munitions,” he broadcast over police radio. “Unload! Unload it all. Take 'em out!” A short time later, the same officer urged, “Less-than-lethal needs to keep deploying! Keep deploying!” By the time Griffin came face-to-face with Sgt. Edwards, police had been bombarding the crowd with flash-bang grenades, rubber-ball grenades that released tear gas, pepper balls, beanbag rounds, multiple-canister chemical-infused projectile shells, and other munitions for a half-hour. The crowd grew increasingly angry, but Griffin said he did his best to de-escalate things before violence spread. Video shows that at 1:56 p.m., Sgt. Edwards loaded his orange munition launcher with a 40mm shell containing several rubber baton rounds. The rounds are about 1.6 inches in diameter. They are designed for “pain compliance,” to force protesters to flee. But they are not designed to be fired at point-blank range due to the risk of serious injury or death, according to peer-reviewed research studies in the United States. Edwards pushed through the crowd of police officers, shouting, “Fold!” as he approached the bicycle racks. He responded to a man heckling him from a few rows back. “You come here, you’re going to get it!” Edwards shouted. Sgt. Frank Edwards aims his 40mm munition launcher at protesters along the police line on the West Plaza of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.U.S. Department of Justice Griffin told him, “We’re not going to hurt anyone,” and Edwards replied, “Then don’t push the fence! Stop pushing the fence!” Griffin had not touched the bike racks, much less pushed them, video showed. “I’m just standing there talking to the cops,” Griffin said. Shortly before Edwards appeared, Griffin said he was struck in the foot by a .60-caliber plastic pellet fired from another officer’s munition launcher. He picked up the projectile and showed it to the officers. “I said, ‘Officer, officer, please don’t do that,’” Griffin said. “‘They’re all going to panic.’ That was what I told them.” 'We have all kinds of questions about the election.' After Edwards began shouting at the crowd, Griffin held up the plastic pellet that struck his foot and tried to talk to Edwards. The officer was not interested. “Stop pushing the fence!” Edwards repeated, followed by a near scream, “Stop [unintelligible] the fence!” “Calm down,” Griffin said, then pitched the pellet forward to the ground near the police line. Almost immediately, Edwards appeared to aim his weapon at Griffin’s legs and fired. “What are you doing?” Edwards shouted, according to his bodycam video. Edwards quickly turned and left the police line, while Griffin nearly collapsed in pain. Video shows him hobbling away from the bike racks and nearly falling. A bystander helped to steady him. Griffin said he is frustrated at how security video, bodycam footage, and even protester-created video seized by the FBI were covered up for years. It was only after Congress began publicly posting Capitol Police CCTV and media outlets had obtained a critical mass of bodycam video that a visual investigation started filling in the blanks. “The whole thing with all this stuff, which nobody talks about, is they suppressed the evidence for three years. They didn’t release anything. You couldn’t get any information. And even if I had been hot to go sue somebody the day after this happened, who was I going to sue? I had no way of finding out who even did it.” Griffin’s case raises a long-simmering issue about police use of force at the Capitol on Jan. 6. Bodycam video shows officers numerous times shooting munitions at protesters who stood mere feet away. Protesters reported being burned in the legs, face, and hair by exploding flash-bang grenades. The firing of 40mm munitions likely by Edwards and Glover from point-blank range was “improper and excessive,” according to Karen Laser-Garrett, a former police SWAT commander in Oceanside, Calif., who runs a consultancy specializing in law-enforcement practices. Metropolitan Police Department Officer Tara Tindall fills a shoulder bag with crowd-control munitions at the U.S. Capitol at 1:18 p.m. Jan. 6, 2021.Metropolitan Police Department “Kinetic energy projectiles (40mm) are to be used with the frequency, intensity, and in a manner that is proportional to the threat and objectively reasonable,” Laser-Garrett told Blaze News. “Mr. Griffin was not a threat. Not only were the tools utilized improperly, but also against the manufacturer’s recommendations and the officer’s training. “Indiscriminate firing of the 40mm into the air, as displayed by Sgt. Edwards, is dangerous, as it may strike the head of a subject, causing severe injury or death,” Laser-Garrett said. Griffin posed no obvious threat to police, since he is seen on bodycam video trying to de-escalate things, said Laser-Garrett, who has worked in law enforcement for 35 years. “Mr. Griffin was attempting to communicate and de-escalate the situation with the officers. He was not verbally threatening or carrying any visible weapons,” she said. “Mr. Griffin was not resisting any attempt to take him into custody when he was struck with the 40mm. He then collapsed and was sprayed in the face with a chemical irritant. To what end?” Stan Kephart, a policing and use-of-force expert who has testified in court more than 350 times during his 40-plus year career, said what happened to Griffin is “clear and convincing evidence” that fails a four-prong test on use of force. The weapon discharge was not needed because the line was not being breached at the time, he said. The force used was “grossly disparate and excessive.” The injury inflicted was potentially life-threatening, he said. Lastly, the force used was “malicious and sadistic, not used in good faith,” Kephart said. 'We’ve deployed about 500 already.' Edwards told a colleague as of about 4 p.m. on Jan. 6, MPD went through 500 munition rounds at the Capitol. Many of those salvos were fired into the massive crowd on the West Plaza beneath the inauguration stage. Some of the munitions exploded at head and chest level, creating a risk of serious injuries or fatalities. Each explosion that sprayed 0.60-caliber pellets across the crowd or released clouds of tear gas only enraged protesters. These “less lethal” weapons not only did not cause the crowd to disperse, they played a significant role in the eventual collapse of the police line, video showed. The tear gas swirled in the 30-mph winds and often blew back into the faces of police officers, who were left gasping for air. Heavy use of high-velocity pepper-spray tanks often had a similar result, with over-spray blown back that coated the faces of officers, most of whom did not have gas masks. This was made worse by rioters and agitators at the police line who fired potent bear spray at police. “We’ve deployed about 500 already,” Sgt. Edwards told a fellow officer. “The wind f**ked us.” He warned another officer, “Watch the wind if you’re throwing munitions 'cause we all got gassed like a motherf**ker.” According to his bodycam video, minutes later Edwards told another police grenadier, “We got the s**t kicked out of us. We deployed everything. … We ran out. Two trucks ran out.” Civil rights concerns Civil rights groups says these types of munitions are often indiscriminate when they explode in a crowd. Groups have called for tighter regulations and state laws to force investigations of every use of crowd-control force that results in injury or death. “Stun grenades are — as explosive devices — by nature indiscriminate,” according to “Lethal in Disguise,” a report of the International Network of Civil Liberties Organizations and Physicians for Human Rights. “When they are used either as distraction devices to facilitate entry or as a means of crowd dispersal, the limited control users have over their placement may expose unintended targets to the risk of serious injury. “When used indoors or in dense crowds, these risks are amplified, and stun grenades can also create hazards through fires, as well as the psychological panic they may provoke,” the report said. Crowd-control weapons don’t tend to achieve the goals of dispersing crowds, the report said. MPD Sgt. Frank Edwards fires crowd-control munitions into the packed West Plaza crowd at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.U.S. Department of Justice / Metropolitan Police Department “Upon detonation, distraction devices may — unintentionally or by design — disperse dozens of metal or plastic shards as shrapnel in a spherical radius without any control over what is hit,” the report said. “These weapons are therefore fundamentally indiscriminate impact weapons when used in the context of crowd control.” A study in BMJ Open (formerly the British Medical Journal) said in the cohort research studies reviewed, 15% of those injured by kinetic impact projectiles had permanent disabilities. “We find that these projectiles have caused significant morbidity and mortality during the past 27 years, much of it from penetrative injuries and head, neck, and torso trauma,” wrote Rohini J. Haar, M.D., of the University of California-Berkeley and four co-authors. “Given their inherent inaccuracy, potential for misuse and associated health consequences of severe injury, disability, and death, KIPs do not appear to be appropriate weapons for use in crowd-control settings.” Haar and her associates reviewed research literature from 3,228 sources, eventually settling on 26 that met the study criteria. Those articles gathered injury data on 1,984 people harmed by KIPs between 1990 and 2017. Fifty-three of the injured died from their wounds, and 300 people suffered permanent disability, the study said. Deaths and disability “often resulted from strikes to the head and neck.” Penetrating injuries caused 56% of the deaths. Above: Joshua Black bleeds after being shot in the left cheek with a police projectile. Below: As word of Black’s injury spread, fighting broke out at the police line. Capitol Police responded by firing pepper balls.Special to Blaze News Of the 2,135 injuries reported from the 1,984 victims, 71% were severe. Injuries to skin and the extremities were most common. Almost all — 91.5% — of head and neck, ocular, nervous, cardiovascular, pulmonary and thoracic, abdominal, and urogenital injuries were severe, the study said. While manufacturers provide guidelines on safe distances from which to fire munitions, the study said many of the injured were fired on from much closer. 'You come here, you’re going to get it!' “Exact distance was impossible to assess in most cases, but forensics and case data suggested that the firing distances were less than those recommended by manufacturers,” the study said. The authors concluded that crowd-control weapons were ineffective at dispersing protest crowds or groups of rioters. “To prevent severe injury, most protocols for the use of KIPs instruct law enforcement to use the weapons from a ‘safe distance’ and to aim at soft musculature of the lower limbs,” the study said. “Safe shooting distances are not well validated, however, and are highly variable among weapons, countries, and manufacturers. In practice, deployment of KIPs may occur from distances much closer than deemed safe.” A study from the University of Texas at Austin said the lower muzzle velocity of crowd-control weapons compared to firearms does not necessarily equate to safe usage. Metropolitan Police Department “While KIPs have a significantly lower muzzle velocity and thereby may be expected to decrease risk of serious injury, recent reports of injuries from KIPs include neurosurgical emergencies, blunt trauma to the chest, penetrating ocular trauma, and testicular rupture,” reported Sanjana Ravi from Dell Medical School at the University of Texas and four study co-authors. The muzzle velocity of a rubber bullet ranges from 394 to 459 feet per second, the study said. A beanbag round has a muzzle velocity of 295 fps. By comparison, a 9mm bullet has a velocity of 1,155 fps, while a Remington 0.30-30 rifle’s velocity is 2,390 fps. 'Mr. Griffin was not a threat.' One of the victims in the study came to the emergency room with a beanbag round embedded in her cheek. Removal of the beanbag left a gaping hole in her right cheek. The injury caused facial nerve damage that healed after eight months. Another patient cited in the study was struck below the left eye by a rubber bullet, causing nasal and jaw fractures. He required surgery to graft bone to the area with a titanium-reinforced implant to reconstruct the orbital floor, the study said. Police chiefs release guidance The International Association of Chiefs of Police, a 34,000-member organization based in Alexandria, Va., warned police grenadiers in a 2023 paper, “Impact projectiles cannot be used against a crowd indiscriminately and can be used only in response to an identified act of violence.” The IACP developed a model policy on crowd control in 2019 to “establish guidelines for managing crowds, protecting individual rights, and preserving the peace during demonstrations and civil disturbances.” Police should consider alternatives to impact projectiles for those who are only passively resisting, pregnant, elderly, frail, or children, the IACP said. Only officers who are trained in the use of crowd-control weapons should use them — with each officer required to re-qualify every two years, the paper said. Supervisors should receive advanced training. Officers need to lend aid if the weapon discharge causes injury to the crowd member, the report said. Metropolitan Police Department Inspector Robert Glover lobs a grenade (left) while protesters react to a fiery explosion in the massive crowd on the West Plaza at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.Metropolitan Police Department/Steve Baker, Blaze News “Although impact projectiles are designed to reduce the potential for death or serious physical injuries, protective measures are still necessary,” the paper said. “Thus, as soon as the subject has been satisfactorily subdued, the officer must take immediate steps to care for the subject and account for the force used. When applicable, appropriate medical personnel should be summoned for treatment and/or evaluation.” Each discharge of an impact projectile must be reported as a use of force, the IACP said. “A use of force review shall be conducted in any situation involving the discharge of an impact projectile,” the paper said. “The depth of any investigation shall be determined by designated departmental authorities based on the extent of suspect injuries and a review of the circumstances surrounding the incident.” Blaze News filed a Freedom of Information Act request with MPD for a record of all Jan. 6 use-of-force complaints. The department returned a spreadsheet listing a single complaint having to do with “shoving.” Jacqueline Hazzan, legal counsel for the MPD Office of Police Complaints, said the details of that complaint would not be released because they would “reveal information about the agency’s internal deliberative process before it was completed” and “cause an unwarranted invasion of others’ personal privacy.” 'You’re on camera the whole time! Lie again on camera!' The department’s 2001 report on use of force has more detail about Jan. 6. According to that report, issued in mid-2022, the Use of Force Review Board made 38 decisions on five use-of-force incidents from Jan. 6. Thirty-six of those were deemed justified and two were not justified. Both non-justified incidents involved use of riot batons. The review board made 29 determinations regarding the Civil Disturbance Unit’s uses of force on Jan. 6. All were deemed justified. Five of those involved use of oleoresin capsicum (pepper spray), one was a “tactical takedown,” and the rest were for a combination of mechanical force, physical force, and OC spray. Two uses of a taser were deemed justified, the report said. No mention is made in the report of crowd-control munitions being fired directly at protesters. On May 11, 2025, Blaze News filed a FOIA request for all officer-produced Use of Force Incident Reports for Jan. 6. The request was assigned to a FOIA officer, but the department has not yet responded with documents responsive to the request. Blaze News asked MPD multiple times over weeks to comment on Sgt. Edwards’ use of force against Griffin and whether it comports to the department’s force policy, but did not receive a reply. Issue is complex for police An MPD officer who was among the hundreds stationed along the police line on the West Plaza told Blaze News there was a lot more to the crowd dynamics than is evident on bodycam footage. He was not involved in or aware of the Griffin use-of-force incident. Officers were worried about what would happen if the huge crowd plowed through the police line, he said. “If they broke through the middle, my other fear is we’re going to get the f**k beat out of us because this crowd we’ve been fighting that’s just getting worked up has now gotten the upper hand, and we’re done,” said the officer, speaking on the condition of anonymity. “I mean, I hate to be an alarmist, but there was some fear for my life on some points of that, where I’m like, ‘I don’t think this is going to work out well, guys.’ I’m not saying I’m going to die, but this could be the end.” The officer said he never before came upon a protest or riot scene where defeat seemed assured. “From before I even went down the steps, when I went onto the upper platform of the Upper West Terrace, I said, ‘Oh s**t, I think we’re going to lose.’” Police on the West Plaza were shellacked by rioters with projectiles — from a fire extinguisher to metal tines from a decorative fence, one of which drew blood from the officer at right.Metropolitan Police Department It’s too easy to misread situations based on someone’s video analysis, he suggested. “Everyone’s blinded by the bulls**t,” he said. “Dissecting body-camera footage and finding a street cop saying something stupid isn’t going to change the narrative of January 6. Great, you embarrassed somebody. That doesn’t change it. “Even if he said some really heinous stuff or one guy’s actions, that didn’t start this,” the officer said. “What we need to think about is how did we get here with such lax security, and what brought that angry element to the front? That’s what needs to be discussed.” While there is no evidence Griffin did anything more than talk to police, plenty of others in the massive crowd turned to rioting. One man whipped an iron tine from the West Plaza decorative fence that was torn down by rioters. The three- to four-foot hollow metal rod sailed into the crowd of police like a javelin, striking an MPD officer directly between the eyes. He collapsed, bleeding profusely on the concrete before fellow officers hurried him away. Rioters threw water bottles, megaphones, pieces of fence, pieces of furniture, smoke bombs, a fire extinguisher — different from the false report that Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick had been “bludgeoned” with a fire extinguisher — pieces of lumber, garbage cans, and flagpoles. Numerous rioters sneaked from hidden positions in the crowd to blast police officers in the face with potent, orange-color bear spray. Focusing on bodycam footage too much or finding video that shows an officer uttering off-color remarks does not make for an accurate report of Jan. 6, the officer said. 'It isn't right.' One example of that on Edwards’ bodycam was a remark he made about a protester on the Upper West Terrace at 4:50 p.m. Officer Tara Tindall pointed at someone off camera. “That man,” she said, to which Edwards replied, “I want to spray him so bad.” Tindall’s rejoinder: “Tase him.” About 20 minutes later, Edwards bellowed at a protester who had fallen down the concrete steps below the Lower West Terrace Tunnel. Another officer grabbed hard on the woman’s elbow, then pulled her toward him, video showed. She tripped and tumbled. When she blamed the officer for pushing her, Edwards let her have it. “Somebody help me!” the woman said, lying in an awkward position and visibly in pain. “Don’t worry about it,” Edwards said. “Stay there, and we’ll get you medical.” The other officer “pushed me down the steps,” she said, in tears. “I can’t move my back.” A woman who was grabbed roughly by a Metropolitan Police Department officer tumbled down the stairs and injured her back. When she accused the officer of pushing her, MPD Sgt. Frank Edwards called her a liar.Metropolitan Police Department “You’re on body-worn camera right here,” Edwards shouted. “Nothing happened like that. The camera’s right here. Say it again! ... Say it! “Say it! You’re on camera the whole time! Lie again on camera. Then say what you just said!” “You didn’t see it,” the woman told Edwards. “It’s on camera! You’re on camera from when you broke into the [Capitol] office. You might get charged with a felony!” “I don’t care,” the woman cried, prompting Edwards to reply, “OK, good!” Edwards walked away toward the tunnel entrance. When he saw Virginia State Police tactical officers stop to help the woman at 5:13 p.m., Edwards shouted, “We’ve got medical coming for her.” The Virginia police medics were still tending to the woman at 5:16 p.m. when Edwards’ bodycam cut off. Griffin hopes for justice Griffin said he suspects most people who were injured by police force on Jan. 6 stayed quiet for fear of being arrested by the FBI and subjected to heavy-handed prosecution by the Biden DOJ. He hopes they will come forward now that the Jan. 6 indictment machine has been shut down. Judge Howell criticized Griffin and his attorney for not more quickly moving to use the legal discovery process to identify the officers listed in the suit as John Does. Griffin’s attorney withdrew from the case in March, so Griffin is looking for new legal help to appeal Howell’s order and continue his suit. “I just don’t know if I could get another lawyer that would appeal this thing pro bono,” Griffin said. “I mean, because I don’t have a hundred thousand dollars in the bank to throw at this.” Griffin hopes he hasn’t run out of options. He worries there will be no accountability for the shooting. As for justice? “I’d like to see it happen,” Griffin said. “It’s just not right to let them get away with that. It isn’t right.” Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Two illegal immigrants have been arrested in a deadly jet ski hit-and-run crash in Texas over Memorial Day weekend that took the life of a teen Air Force recruit. The governor of Texas has called for the suspect to face the death penalty in the tragic case. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced in a press release on Tuesday that an illegal alien was involved in the jet ski accident that killed the teenage woman. 'Ava Moore’s senseless death was caused by an illegal alien who should have never been in our country in the first place.'"On Sunday, Daikerlyn Alejandra Gonzalez Gonzalez — an illegal alien from Venezuela — struck and killed an 18-year-old woman, Ava Moore, on Lake Grapevine with a jet ski," Paxton stated in the news release. According to authorities, the 21-year-old Gonzalez was riding a jet ski when she mowed over Moore while she was kayaking on Lake Grapevine.KDFW-TV obtained the arrest affidavit, which claimed that the jet ski was "traveling at a high rate of speed and dangerously close to other people in the water," according to a summary from the outlet. Witnesses allegedly told investigators that the victim attempted to paddle away from the speeding jet ski before she was violently struck from behind by the speeding personal watercraft. The news outlet reported that Gonzalez fled the crime scene with fellow illegal alien — 21-year-old Maikel Coello Perozo. Meanwhile, the female passenger who was on the jet ski with Gonzalez remained at the scene and was interviewed by first responders, according to a statement from the Texas Game Wardens. The pair drove away in a vehicle, then Perozo committed a hit-and-run after striking another car while attempting to leave the area, the Grapevine Police Department stated. RELATED: Texas police arrest illegal immigrant in teen cheerleader's murder, mother 'praying for justice' for her slain childGonzalez and Perozo — who are both reportedly in the U.S. illegally — were reportedly tracked down by Attorney General Paxton’s Fugitive Apprehension Unit and arrested around 11 a.m. on Tuesday at a Dallas-area home. The residence was allegedly surrounded by officers and agents with the Grapevine Police Department, the Dallas Police Department, the Texas Game Wardens, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Homeland Security.The New York Post reported that Moore suffered severe head trauma after being struck by the jet ski, and later died at a local hospital.Gonzalez has been charged with second-degree felony manslaughter, and her bond is set at $500,000, according to KDFW. Texas Game Warden Captain Joseph Quintero stated that Gonzalez could face more charges as the investigation continues. The Texas Game Wardens are handling the investigation into the jet ski accident fatality, while the Grapevine Police Department is investigating the related automotive hit-and-run incident.Joshua Johnson — the acting field office director for ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations in Dallas — confirmed that Gonzalez and Perozo are Venezuelan nationals in the United States illegally, according to MySanAntonio.com. Johnson noted that both illegal aliens crossed the U.S. southern border in 2023 or 2024. He added that the duo were arrested at the time of illegal entry, processed for a notice to appear in immigration court, and then released.Johnson also said that Gonzalez and Perozo will have to appear in front of an immigration judge to determine whether they will be deported back to Venezuela. RELATED: Illegal immigrant charged in brutal rape and murder of Rachel Morin, 10 months after Maryland mother of 5 was murderedPaxton stated, "Ava Moore’s senseless death was caused by an illegal alien who should have never been in our country in the first place. My heart breaks for Ava’s family and friends, and my prayers are with them as they face this tragedy."Paxton stressed, "My office will continue to work with local, state, and national law enforcement partners to secure justice for Ava.”Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott shared a news video clip of the jet ski hit-and-run incident on the X social media platform with the caption: "Welcome to Texas. Here’s your Death Penalty."Moore's family emphasized that "forgiveness" will be paramount in moving forward following the tragedy. “This is a difficult time for all involved, but also an opportunity for our beautiful girl to continue to impact our community,” Moore's family said in a statement that was shared during a press conference on Wednesday, according to NewsNation. “Out of this tragedy, God will make good — and that only can be accomplished through forgiveness,” the family added. According to a GoFundMe campaign launched to financially assist Moore's family with her funeral, the teen graduated from Timber Creek High School in 2024, where she was an "outstanding student and athlete."As of Wednesday afternoon, the GoFundMe campaign had raised more than $35,000. Moore reportedly had just returned to Texas from Colorado to visit her parents after graduating from the U.S. Air Force Academy Preparatory School just over a week before the tragic accident. Moore was purportedly just weeks away from starting basic training before she was killed on Sunday.Moore’s former basketball coach, Ke’Sha Blanton, said she was "a four-star general in the making.""Ava was everything this country would want to represent it," Blanton told KRDO-TV.The U.S. Air Force Academy said in a statement that Moore had "accepted an appointment to join the Academy as a member of the Class of 2029."Academy Superintendent Lt. Gen. Tony Bauernfeind said, "We lost an exemplary teammate this weekend — cadet candidate Ava Moore, whose passion for leadership and service left an impact on everyone she met.""Ava’s constant happiness and attitude helped her squadron get through the challenges of the prep school, and her drive to excel was on display as she sought out leadership positions to improve herself and her team," Bauernfeind continued. "Our team is focused on providing support to Ava’s family, her prep school squadron, the prep school women’s basketball team, and the entire academy family."You can watch a local newscast from KDFW regarding the jet ski hit-and-run incident here. RELATED: 'Disgusting': AP torn to shreds for dismissing illegal immigrant murder suspect in Laken Riley killing, blaming toxic masculinityLike Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

It's a bit surprising that we haven't seen more projects that put together two genres as massively popular as deckbuilders and strategy games. The former style of design has given us everything from Monster Train 2 to Slay the Spire while the latter includes Against the Storm, Total War: Pharaoh, Age of Empires 4, and so much more. As We Descend takes notes from both types of game, blending them into something new that you can now check out for yourself with its Early Access launch on Steam today. Continue reading Valheim publisher launches deckbuilder and strategy game hybrid As We Descend MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Best card games, Best strategy games, Best roguelike games

There are a number of roguelikes that continue to provide an excellent time even after having spent dozens of hours with them over the years. Darkest Dungeon and Hades, for example, or, more recently, Balatro and Vampire Survivors. There's also FTL: Faster Than Light, a spaceship simulator that's easy to approach, incredibly difficult to complete, and endlessly playable. It's also available for less than $3 on Steam right now, making now a great time to try it out for yourself. Continue reading One of the greatest roguelikes of all time is now less than $3 MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Best roguelikes, Best space games, Best strategy games

Milwaukee Public Schools Plans 'Pride Week of Action' Instead of Teaching Kids Reading and Math

HE DIDN'T KNOW: Energy Advocacy Group Says There's NO EVIDENCE Biden Knew of Green EO's His Admin Issued