James' World 2

Click the link below the picture

.

Santa Fe County Sheriff Adan Mendoza told reporters at a Friday afternoon press conference that Hackman’s pacemaker last recorded an event on Feb. 17, though that doesn’t mean the pacemaker was implicated in his death.

Mendoza said an “initial interrogation” of the pacemaker showed “that his last event was recorded on Feb. 17, 2025,” which strongly suggests “that was his last day of life.”

The sheriff also confirmed earlier reports that authorities removed a handful of items from the legendary actor’s Santa Fe, New Mexico, home while executing a search warrant.

They include two green cellular devices, records from a medical diagnostics and health tracking company called MyQuest and a 2025 monthly planner. Officials also removed three types of medicine from the house: Diltiazem, typically used to treat high blood pressure; a thyroid medication; and Tylenol.

Mendoza declined to identify who was prescribed which medications, citing HIPAA laws.

The items were enumerated in a search warrant return released Friday and obtained by the Santa Fe New Mexican.

Hackman, 95, and Arakawa, 65, were found dead in the home Wednesday during a welfare check, along with one of their dogs. It’s unclear who died first, Mendoza said.

While the sheriff said there were “no apparent signs of foul play,” the circumstances were “suspicious enough in nature to require a thorough search and investigation.”

According to the affidavit, Hackman’s body was found in a mudroom near his cane, and he appeared to have fallen, while authorities found Arakawa in a bathroom with a space heater near her head.

A countertop near Arakawa had an open prescription bottle and pills scattered on its surface.

.

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. — The private Athena lunar lander is on its way to the moon.

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket lifted off shortly after sunset this evening (Feb. 26), carrying Athena and NASA’s ride-along Lunar Trailblazer orbiter aloft against a darkening sky here at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC).

Athena — which was built by the Houston-based spaceflight company Intuitive Machines — carries 10 NASA science instruments, many of which are designed to hunt for signs of water ice. Lunar Trailblazer will do similar work from its higher perch. That’s a big priority for NASA, which aims to establish one or more human settlements on the moon via its Artemis program.

“I’m very excited to see the science that our tech demonstrations deliver as we prepare for humanity’s return to the moon and the journey to Mars,” Nicky Fox, associate administrator of NASA’s Science Mission Directorate, said during a prelaunch briefing today.

The Falcon 9 launched at 7:16 p.m. EST (0017 GMT on Feb. 27) this evening from KSC’s Launch Complex-39A. About 8.5 minutes later, the rocket’s first-stage booster came back to Earth for a landing on SpaceX’s A Shortfall of Gravitas droneship as planned. This was the ninth launch and landing of the Falcon 9 booster (B1083) supporting the IM-2 mission.

The Falcon 9’s upper stage rocketed onward. It deployed Athena into translunar injection orbit about 43.5 minutes after liftoff and Lunar Trailblazer four minutes later, as planned.

Athena’s mission is called IM-2, because it’s the second launch to the moon in as many years for Intuitive Machines. IM-2 is part of NASA’s Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program, which seeks out commercial partnerships to deliver science and technology gear to the moon.

Athena’s ambitious mission focuses on the abundance of water ice and other resources near the moon’s south pole, and the prospect for future missions to utilize those resources for sustainable habitability in space — a process known as in-situ resource utilization (ISRU). To fulfil all IM-2’s objectives, the lander is carrying two secondary vehicles: a mini rover named MAPP (Mobile Autonomous Prospecting Platform) that was built by the Colorado company Lunar Outpost and Grace, an Intuitive Machines “hopper” robot that will explore the region around the landing site via a series of leaps.

IM-2 follows Intuitive Machines’ historic first mission, IM-1, by just over a year. The IM-1 lander, “Odysseus,” launched in February 2024, also on a CLPS flight. Odysseus managed to make it to the surface, pulling off the first-ever soft lunar landing by a private spacecraft. But the probe came in too fast and broke one of its landing legs, which caused it to tip over during the touchdown. As a result, the spacecraft’s high-gain antenna was blocked, preventing the transmission of some of the data that NASA had hoped to collect.

.

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

Maternity-Leave Moola

My wife is a clinical social worker and therapist at an integrated health clinic in Massachusetts. This year, like other years, the staff recently received their year-end bonus. This bonus is a relatively paltry $1,000 and is standard across the staff, with no fluctuations based on merit. Everyone gets $1,000 (minus taxes). However, this year my wife took short-term medical leave. Her bonus was prorated to account for the time that she was on leave. Another woman, who was on maternity leave for part of the year, also received a prorated bonus. Is this discriminatory on the part of their employer or just unfair? Both these types of leave are perfectly legal and necessary and, speaking for my wife, enabled her to provide the best care that she could for her patients upon her return. Do these hardworking, dedicated women have any recourse to recoup the rest of their well-deserved bonuses?

— Disgruntled Husband, Massachusetts

It’s unfair, in my opinion, but in this case my opinion carries little weight. This is a legal question, and a very interesting — albeit complicated — one.

I spoke to Inimai Chettiar, president of A Better Balance, a nonprofit legal advocacy organization, to get her take. Ms. Chettiar says that if there’s a prorated bonus and it’s clearly based on performance, then what your wife and her colleague experienced was legal.

But what does “performance” mean? Does going on medical or maternity leave mean a person has demonstrated a lesser performance than, say, someone who didn’t? The additional wrinkle here is that you say in general everyone gets the same bonus, so it’s unclear that it is in fact a performance-based bonus.

This is one of those gray-area examples where it comes down to interpretation of the law and the individual circumstance, and whether your wife is being treated the same as other people who took leave. For example, if workers who took leave for something other than disability or medical reasons did NOT have their bonuses prorated, Ms. Chettiar says, that would clearly be discrimination under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which make it illegal to retaliate against workers for being pregnant or because of pregnancy-related needs. In this case, however, it seems that your wife is being treated the same as her nonpregnant colleague.

Marylou Fabbo, an employment lawyer in Massachusetts, your home state, said it was important to know that there’s also the Family and Medical Leave Act, a federal statute that entitles

employees to take unpaid leave for specific medical or family-related reasons, which include a birth, a relative with health issues that require employee care or, as the website of Department of Labor says, “a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the essential functions of his or her job.” Massachusetts has a fairly new paid-leave law that is similar to that federal law, Ms. Fabbo added.

In this circumstance, she said, while the prorated bonus didn’t sound strictly discriminatory, it didn’t sound particularly fair.

She suggested that it would probably in your wife’s best interest to consult an employment lawyer just to be sure. A statute like the Family and Medical Leave Act would probably require an employer “to pay the full amount, depending on the laws that are applicable to the particular employee,” Ms. Fabbo said.

And if you’re worried that the legal fees would exceed the bonus amount, she pointed out that many employment statutes, including those related to discrimination or failure to pay wages, required the employer to pay the employee’s legal fees if the employee won the case.

.

Credit…Photo illustration by Margeaux Walter for The New York Times

.

.

Click the link below for the complete article:

https://www.nytimes.com

.

__________________________________________