Honduran Illegal Facing Deportation Charged in Crash That Killed College Girl in Virginia
A Honduran illegal alien who arrived to the U.S. as an ‘unaccompanied minor’ and was ordered deported has been charged in connection with a car crash that killed an American teen in Virginia, according to reports.
The deadly wreck unfolded in Chesapeake on February 19, but the suspect’s immigration background just came to light this week in a report published by The Virginian-Pilot.
Authorities say Elvis Jamir Cruz-Ferrera, 18, was traveling southbound on Interstate 664 when his vehicle struck that of Lauryn Ni’Kole Leonard, 19, who was driving in the same direction.
Both drivers lost control and Leonard was killed when her Toyota Solara slammed into a guardrail.
Cruz-Ferrera was injured but later released from hospital.
He was charged with felony reckless driving, driving without a license, driving without proof of insurance, and authorities discovered his vehicle had not been inspected in more than five years.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) immediately lodged a detainer against Cruz-Ferrera with the Chesapeake City Jail, where he is still being held.
Virginia State Police added a charge of involuntary manslaughter some 10 days after the crash.
“Cruz-Ferrera waived a probable cause hearing July 2, with a Chesapeake Circuit Court grand jury scheduled to decide Tuesday whether to indict him on the manslaughter charge,” The Virginian-Pilot reports.
“Prosecutors dropped the other charges when Cruz-Ferrera waived his preliminary hearing, court records show. Assistant Chesapeake Commonwealth’s Attorney Mark McKinney declined to comment on the case last week.”
Chesapeake City, VA: Illegal alien Elvis Jamir Cruz-Ferrera is charged with Involuntary Manslaughter in connection with the crash that killed Lauryn Ni’Kole Leonard in February.https://t.co/OYmOpBr92W pic.twitter.com/eKLG67fT7w
— Illegal Alien Crimes (@ImmigrantCrimes) August 4, 2024
Cruz-Ferrera, a citizen of Honduras, illegally crossed the southern border in 2016 as an 11-year-old ‘unaccompanied minor’ near McAllen, Texas.
He was taken into custody by U.S. Border Patrol at the time and quickly released by ICE with an order to appear before a federal immigration judge in 2018 in Dallas, TX.
Cruz-Ferrera skipped that hearing and was ordered deported in absentia.
However, he remained in the U.S., living with his mother and siblings in Portsmouth, VA, while attending high school.
Cruz-Ferrera was pulled over for multiple traffic violations in the months leading up to the fatal crash, but apparently his immigration status was not investigated.
Lauryn Ni’Kole Leonard’s obituary indicates she was an avid contributor to her community, a hard worker, and had made the dean’s list at Old Dominion University.
When asked about the federal government’s failure to remove Cruz-Ferrera from the U.S, Leonard’s brother Eric Hargrove reportedly said, “I don’t want to say anything that sounds like far right or far left.”
“But I would just say that it’s a possibility that this wouldn’t have happened if the deportation happened when it was supposed to.”
Nick Fuentes on Israeli False Flags and the 2024 Election
Voters Believe Kamala Harris will be Same or Worse than Joe Biden on the Economy — Poll
A poll published Monday conducted by Rasmussen has found that less than a quarter of voters believe Democrat frontrunner Kamala Harris would do a better job on the economy than President Joe Biden.
“The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 45% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the Biden administration’s economic policies have been generally successful, including 21% who see them as Very Successful. Fifty-three percent (53%) consider Biden’s economic policies unsuccessful, including 40% who say Biden has been Very Unsuccessful on the economy,” Rasmussen said Monday.
The poll was taken between July 30 and August 1, just before stock prices dropped massively.
Harris lauded Bidenomics while preforming her famous cackle.
“Bidenomics. Ha ha ha ha! That is called Bidenomics — and we are very proud of Bidenomics!”
— Kamala Harris#KamalaCrash pic.twitter.com/JwXWeePr1m— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) August 5, 2024
Bidenomics is the group of policies responsible for massive inflation and supply chain shortages across the nation, instituted by the Biden administration.
Biden has come to be known as a destructive force against the economy. His actions are blamed for increases in fuel prices, leading to popular stickers being placed on pumps across the nation, including in far left areas and found to be done in good spirit by far left people.
All the gas pumps lately have a little sticker of Joe Biden pointing to the gas prices saying “I did that”
And I am in the SF bay area. lol pic.twitter.com/NeNEvAyiVb— Marxist Mark & The Socialist Bunch (@MarxistBunch) December 9, 2021
Harris has spoken on the massive inflation rates, caused by Bidenomics, which she praised. Her response to Bidenomics is Kamalnomics, a system that is not well understood, including by it’s namesake herself.
Bidenomics is working, but Kamalnomics will be EVEN better.
— Breanna Morello (@BreannaMorello) August 5, 2024
How do I know?
Take a look at this video of Kamala Harris detailing how the regime is combating inflation. pic.twitter.com/w9Bf2382a7
“She hasn’t presented an economic plan other than her past bragging on Bidenomics, a phrase the administration abandoned as inflation took off. And in her focus on friendly audiences, such as black sorority conventions, she hasn’t revealed her financial agenda,” The Washington Examiner said Monday.
It appears the ambiguity of Harris’s economic agenda coupled with her cackling praise of ill-fated Bidenomics has not done wonders for inspiring confidence within her constituency.
Family of Boy Who Was Force-Covid-Vaxxed at School Asks Maine Supreme Court to Hear Case
A Maine family has appealed the dismissal of a lawsuit alleging a clinic set up at a school gave their son a COVID-19 vaccine in November 2021 without the parents’ consent.
J.H., a minor, was given a dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine on Nov. 12, 2021, at Miller School in Waldoboro, Maine.
The lawsuit — against Lincoln Medical Partners, MaineHealth and Dr. Andrew Russ, a pediatrician — challenges the liability shield given to medical practitioners under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act).
J.H.’s parents, Siara Harrington and Jeremiah Hogan, who said they did not consent to their son’s vaccination, sued the defendants in May 2023 in Lincoln County Superior Court.
The defendants filed a motion to dismiss in August 2023, arguing they were immune under the PREP Act. In April, the Maine Superior Court granted the defendants’ motion.
The family appealed the dismissal to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court on Aug. 1, arguing that the PREP Act does not protect medical practitioners from liability in cases involving non-consensual medical interventions and that the PREP Act does not reconcile with laws governing drugs administered under emergency use authorization (EUA).
The appeal references the Project Bioshield Act of 2004, which states that, for products issued under EUA, people must be informed of the “option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks.”
Yet, under the PREP Act, immunity applies to anyone who has “a casual relationship with the administration … of a covered countermeasure,” including “the design, development, clinical testing or investigation, manufacture, labeling, distribution, formulation, packaging, marketing, promotion, sale, purchase, donation, dispensing, prescribing, administration, licensing, or use of such countermeasure.”
Informed consent ‘fundamental to our liberty’
Ron Jenkins, one of the lawyers representing the family, said the human right to informed consent is at stake in this case. He told The Defender:
“What is at stake here is the legal doctrine, entrenched in our common and constitutional law, and fundamental to our liberty, that human beings must provide informed consent to medical interventions. If Congress had intended to abolish this bedrock legal doctrine in the PREP Act, then surely it would have done so in very clear and precise language.
“Failure to obtain informed consent is not on the list, probably because the legislators responsible for the PREP Act knew that effectively abolishing it by removing meaningful civil remedies in the tort system would not garner support. Average, common sense Americans would never agree to medical interventions effectively forced on them by the State, and would insist on remedies for the wrongdoing, whether or not death or serious physical injury was the result.
“Consent is meaningless, if there is no meaningful recourse for failing to obtain it. The courts are simply wrong to accomplish judicially, what Congress could not legislatively.”
Attorney Ray Flores, senior outside counsel to Children’s Health Defense (CHD), told The Defender the PREP Act has been difficult to challenge.
“The PREP Act preempts State law relating to the administration of a covered countermeasure by a qualified person,” Flores said, noting this creates “an incredible, yet not completely insurmountable obstacle.”
“For the most part, PREP was intended for covered persons to literally get away with murder. The whole point of the PREP Act is to provide blanket immunity,” Flores said.
Boy vaccinated at school despite lack of written or verbal consent
According to the appeal, the defendants “promoted the vaccine clinic through letters and text messages sent to parents” in October 2021. These letters said “COVID-19 vaccination was optional” and included a registration form and a consent form which stated, “most important [sic] this must be signed by a parent.”
The letter and the two accompanying forms were again sent to parents, this time by text message, on Nov. 9, 2021, three days before the school vaccination clinic was scheduled to operate.
The appeal states that J.H.’s parents “made a conscious decision against vaccination, accordingly neither completed, signed or delivered the consent form or registration form, and neither of them ever provided any consent of any kind, verbally or in writing, to J.H.’s participation in the vaccine clinic or to J.H. being injected with any COVID-19 vaccine.”
Yet, Russ, who “had served as J.H.’s pediatrician since birth” according to the appeal, “injected J.H. with a Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine” at the school vaccination clinic on Nov. 12, 2021.
In granting the defendants’ motion for dismissal in April, Judge Daniel I. Billings ruled that Russ, Lincoln Health and MaineHealth, are “covered persons” under the PREP Act, who are “entities authorized to prescribe, administer, or dispense vaccines” and are therefore “immune from liability as to Claimants’ claims for loss.”
“The fact that Claimants allege a failure to obtain consent does not vitiate that immunity. This finding is supported by the plain language of the PREP Act. The Notice of Claim does not allege facts sufficient to find relief under the sole exception to immunity, for death or serious physical injury,” the ruling states.
Maine lawsuit one of several challenging the PREP Act
Flores said this case is one of several that are attempting to challenge the PREP Act’s immunity provisions.
“The Appellants’ brief was filed one day after the Vermont Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of a similar case,” Flores said. “However this case, and particularly the North Carolina Supreme Court case, raise novel issues that could finally put an end to this abrogation of parental rights.”
In the Vermont case, a 6-year-old was mistakenly administered a COVID-19 vaccine after name tags at the child’s school were mixed up. The court, however, ruled that the PREP Act affords blanket legal immunity to the state and school district.
In the North Carolina case, the parents of a 14-year-old boy sued practitioners and their local school district after he was administered a dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine without his or his parents’ consent.
That lawsuit, filed in August 2022, was dismissed by a North Carolina trial court in February 2023 on the basis of PREP Act immunity. The dismissal was affirmed by the North Carolina Court of Appeals, leading the boy’s family to appeal to the North Carolina Supreme Court. CHD filed an amicus brief in support of the appeal on July 30.
Several other lawsuits challenging the PREP Act are pending. In June, Moms for America and several plaintiffs who were injured by a COVID-19 vaccine, or whose loved ones were injured by or died following a COVID-19 vaccine, sued the federal government, alleging the PREP Act’s immunity provisions are unconstitutional.
In October 2023, React19, an organization advocating on behalf of vaccine-injured individuals and their families, and several individual plaintiffs, sued the federal government, alleging the PREP Act’s immunity provisions and the requirements of the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program are unconstitutional.
And in May 2023, the family of a 24-year-old man who died of COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis sued the U.S. Department of Defense and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin III citing “willful misconduct” under the PREP Act, alleging the military continued to administer EUA versions of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine even after a different vaccine, Comirnaty, received full approval.
Flores said these cases “clearly spell out in great detail the unconstitutionality of the PREP Act,” but “are not without significant hurdles as well.” He said the May 2023 lawsuit is the first-ever case challenging the PREP Act on the basis of willful misconduct.
Referring to the Maine lawsuit, Flores said, “No court, through appeal, has ever found a vaccinator of a minor liable in a case such as this. On the other hand, if people see blatant false advertising, contractual fraud and battery of a minor being protected by the PREP Act, hopefully the people will have had enough and things could begin to change.”
“A victory would narrowly nibble away” the PREP Act’s immunity provisions “by declaring battery of a minor unlawful,” Flores said.
Watch Live: Kamala Harris Announces Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz As Running Mate
“The American Journal” is live every weekday from 8-11 am CST.
Follow The American Journal on Telegram:
County in New York Makes Masks Illegal, Removes Maskies from Meeting
Republicans in Nassau County, New York passed a bill against wearing masks (aka face diapers) in public places Monday.
Proponents of the ordinance argued the ban would help combat crimes committed during protests.
According to the Gothamist, the debate preceding the vote was described as being ‘raucous’.
“Presiding Officer Howard Kopel said the Mask Transparency Act was introduced in response to “antisemitic incidents, often perpetrated by those in masks” since Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel. Progressives called the measure part of a “culture war” that targets demonstrators supporting Palestine in the ongoing war,” the Gothamist said on Monday.
When it came to a vote, the bill passed 12-0 with all seven Democrats abstaining.
The bill makes it a misdemeanor offense punishable with a $1,000 fine and up to one year in jail.
Ironically, the bill was sparked by Muslim and Islamist sympathizers protesting for Palestine, a religious group known to wear masks for religious reasons.
There are exceptions for religious and health reasons, but generally bars groups from wearing masks in public, regardless of if they’re engaging in criminal activity or not.
With the exceptions for religious and health reasons, it may be hard to prosecute protestors for wearing masks as proving a motive of why they’re wearing them may be impossible.
The main goal of the legislation is so that people cannot conceal their identities.
Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman is expected to sign the bill into law.
Democrats proposed a similar bill, which aimed to enhance charges against those wearing masks in the commission of a crime, not a blanket ban.
“Our bill respects individual freedoms by not imposing blanket prohibitions on wearing masks in public. Law-abiding citizens could wear masks for health, safety, religious, or celebratory purposes without fear,” Minority Leader Delia DeRiggi-Whitton said. “Unlike the broad and punitive Republican bill, our approach avoids unconstitutional overreach and respects personal liberties.”
The debate turned raucous as maskies and bare-facers clashed in a heated argument.
“Debate on the bill became volatile as both those for and opposed lined up to speak, and police arrested one woman opposing the bill, carrying her out of the room in handcuffs,” the Gothamist said.
There has been a historical precedent in banning masks due to the crimes normally associated with it.
“Proponents of banning masks in public point to an 1845 state statute aimed first at insurrections by Hudson Valley tenant farmers who used disguises to attack police. The law was later used to combat the Ku Klux Klan. It has mostly been enforced as disorderly conduct, a violation punishable by $250 and up to 15 days in jail,” the Gothamist said.
More Knife Attacks in Germany Committed by Syrians
A Syrian migrant with a Dutch passport is alleged to have committed a knife attack against a four-year-old girl in a supermarket in the southern German city of Wangen im Allgäu in April, and seriously injured her. The perpetrator and the victim did not know each other. The girl was in the supermarket with her mother when the incident happened and had to be operated on after the stabbing.
A psychiatric report was ordered to check the 34-year-old man’s mental state. The prosecution has accused him of attempted murder and dangerous bodily harm.
The motive of the perpetrator remains unclear but the man was already known to the police, as he had acted aggressively before. He is said to have come to Wangen im Allgäu in 2023 to visit his sister and her family. A few months before the knife attack, he had been in the same supermarket and acted violently towards his relatives, including the children.
The family threw him out of the house, after which he spent the night in various places in the city, including in an underground car park and in the forest. During this time, he again attracted the attention of the police. He temporarily stayed in a homeless shelter and the police were alerted again after he punched a fellow resident in the face.
Another Syrian citizen, a 17-year-old man was arrested at the weekend for stabbing a family of five last week in Stuttgart. One of his victims, a 37-year-old man, was in critical condition in hospital. The perpetrator and two other migrants first started insulting the family. When their attempts at provocation went unanswered, they took out their knives, and the Syrian man followed up on his threats with violent action.
This case is particularly disturbing, as the attacker had apparently committed 34 criminal acts in 31 months—but the police have kept letting him go. The serial offender, who was born in Syria and came to Germany as a refugee, has been accused of, among other things, bodily harm, robbery, coercion, damage to property, credit fraud, and fraudulently obtaining benefits.
His temporary residence permit in Germany was only valid until November of last year. He has applied for an extension, and as long as that is not approved, he can legally stay in Germany.
The two stabbing incidents not only highlight how crimes committed by migrants are not being taken seriously enough by law enforcement, but also how dangerous foreigners are allowed to stay in the country.
Support for resuming deportations to both Syria and Afghanistan has increased after a spate of violent knife attacks in recent months, and the murder of a policeman by an Afghan failed asylum seeker. However, despite the leftist-liberal government vowing to deport dangerous criminals, it hasn’t followed through with actions.
A German court ruled last month that there is no longer a general danger to all civilians in Syria, which in theory means that dangerous Syrian criminals could legally be deported back to their home country. The ruling could significantly impact deportation cases, because the German government has so far classified Syria as an unsafe country of origin and rejects deporting failed asylum seekers there.
Authorities should “consistently deport all those who have no reason for asylum and no right to be here, who are criminals and abuse our hospitality. They have to return to their home countries as quickly as possible, including to Syria and Afghanistan,” the prime minister of the state of Saxony, Michael Kretschmer told Die Welt in an interview.
Responding to a question, he said the government should not shy away from negotiating with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, or the president of war-torn Syria, Bashar al-Assad, in order to speed up deportations. He added that the goal should be to reduce the number of immigrants “from the current 300,000 to 50,000 or 30,000” per year.