California man arrested after alleged threat to bomb Coachella
Davis Darvish, from Santa Monica, California, allegedly approached security at the Agua Caliente Casino and made the threat, according to the Cathedral City Police Department.
When he was detained about an hour later, no weapons, explosives, or bomb-making materials were found in his possession or his vehicle, police said.
The casino where the alleged threat was made is located about 17 miles from the Empire Polo Club, where the Coachella music festival takes place. The festival, which draws crowds of tens of thousands, is in the middle of its first weekend.
Police responded to the casino's call shortly before 11 a.m. Saturday morning. Officers were able to quickly identify the Tesla that Darvis was driving and notified law enforcement personnel assigned to the festival to be on the lookout, according to police.
Cathedral City personnel "used FLOCK ALPR (automated license plate recognition) technology to track Darvish's movement throughout the Coachella Valley," CCPD said.
Around 12:11 p.m. local time, Palm Springs police officers located Darvish's vehicle in the city of Palm Springs.
PSPD detained Darvish and CCPD detectives responded to the scene and assumed control of the investigation.
Darvish is currently being held on $1 million bail at the John Benoit Detention Center in Indio.
California man arrested after alleged threat to bomb Coachella originally appeared on abcnews.go.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Brawls, racism and cocaine: Lawsuit reveals life inside Tesla plant where Musk was directly involved with HR decisions
Working conditions at Tesla's manufacturing plant in Fremont, California, have allegedly gone from bad to worse, with sexual assaults aboard company shuttle buses, drug and alcohol use onsite, all-out brawls breaking out between employees and 'prevalent' bigotry – including widespread use of the N-word, a bombshell lawsuit reveals. In a 159-page federal lawsuit filed Thursday and obtained first by The Independent, Ozell Murray, a former Fresno police officer in charge of security at the 22,000-person factory, claims he and his team 'routinely' seized cocaine and fentanyl onsite, confiscated guns discovered in the building, investigated 'acts of sexual deviance' on Tesla grounds, and, at regular intervals, 'pulled employees off the manufacturing line and sent them home for being alcohol-intoxicated and high on drugs.' Those who reported the issues were fired over bogus charges or forced to resign, according to Murray's complaint, to which several of his ex-colleagues signed on as co-defendants. 'Healthy profits have always been more important to the Company than a healthy working environment,' the complaint alleges. 'For Tesla, more bodies on the manufacturing line meant more vehicles flying out the factory door – no matter how unclean the hands were that were assembling those cars.' Tesla's Model Y, Model S, Model 3 and Model X lines are manufactured in Fremont. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Tesla in 2023 over allegations of unbridled racism at its Fremont plant. This spring, Tesla settled a lawsuit brought by a Black employee at the Fremont facility who accused a manager of greeting her by saying, 'Welcome to the plantation,' and, 'Welcome to the slave house.' A Tesla spokesperson did not respond on Friday to a request for comment. The complaint against Tesla, which was brought by Murray and former Tesla HR execs Linda Peloquin, Adam Chow, Tiara Paulino, Sharnique Martin and Gregory Vass, says Tesla CEO, and erstwhile presidential 'First Buddy.' Elon Musk – presently America's least-likable public figure, according to Gallup – was personally involved in many of the Fremont factory's hiring and firing decisions. 'Musk was a frequent visitor to the facility—and not just for high-level photo opportunities, but to take a hands-on approach to managing, directing, and facilitating resolution of the manufacturing and workforce issues at the plant,' the complaint states. 'Musk would frequently visit the plant and conduct issue-resolution meetings with actual line employees, not just upper management bureaucrats. Musk would hold – meetings with line-level employees from every function of the plant – from the manufacturing line to operations to HR – and issue directives right then and there to resolve the issues employees raised.' The complaint goes on to describe a significant portion of the carmaker's 'hastily-hired and poorly-vetted' workforce in Fremont as 'blatant racists and misogynists.' 'Many who have worked there have likened the workplace to the Jim Crow South; an environment in which Black employees and brown-skinned workers are besieged with constant racial abuse, stereotyping, and hostility – including with repeated use of inarguably the most brutal and degrading racial slur in the history of humanity: N****r,' according to the complaint. '... Black Tesla employees have reported regularly encountering nooses on desks and other equipment as well as seeing the word 'N****r' graffitied on walls, in bathroom stalls, elevators – even on new Tesla vehicles rolling off the production line.' The complaint filed by Murray and his former coworkers alleges that the 'use of the 'N-word' was prevalent' at Fremont. In late 2021, one of Murray's direct reports, a Black security officer who was also a former cop, 'was victimized when a Tesla employee called her a n****r,' the complaint states. 'Murray's colleague was so distressed by the incident and the impunity with which the word was used toward her… that she had to take a medical leave from work to recover from the trauma,' according to the complaint. 'Yet, instead of offering encouragement, Murray's supervisor… counseled him that Murray should be informing all new Black security personnel that the use of the 'N-word' was simply engrained [sic] in the culture at Tesla and, so, Murray should only be bringing aboard that are willing to accept and acquiesce to the prevalence of that word in the workplace.' In another incident indicative of the 'racial tension and toxicity' at Tesla's Fremont plant, the complaint says a Black assembly-line employee working on a vehicle called out a warning after he spotted a coworker about to do something that could potentially damage the car. According to the complaint, the coworker, who was white, 'responded by angrily yelling back, 'Do you want to hang by a tree?'' Supervisors were also known to abuse Tesla's 'zero tolerance' policy at the time for drug and alcohol use on the job, the complaint goes on. It says that if a higher-up suspected an employee was under the influence, they could report the person to security and Murray or someone from his team would then escort them off the premises 'without question.' However, in 'many instances,' the supposedly intoxicated employee did not appear that way to the security officer tasked with removing them, according to the complaint. 'As it turned out, many supervisors and managers were merely using the policy as a means to retaliate against their subordinates – and, in particular, when a line employee had turned down the supervisor or manager's sexual advances,' the complaint states. 'Or, when the manager or supervisor wanted to retaliate against someone because of their race or ethnicity. Or, when the manager or supervisor wanted to retaliate against someone because of a complaint an employee had lodged against them.' Yet, the complaint claims incidents such as these were swept under the rug by one specific Tesla manager who had 'an irrational fixation on fostering the delusion that the environment and culture at Tesla is one of tolerance and innovation, rather than racism and retaliation.' Because of sky-high demand for Tesla vehicles at the time, if a violent or racist Tesla employee were to actually get fired for cause, they were regularly 'loopholed' back in via a temp agency, according to the complaint. This, the filing says, allowed them to bypass the usual background check, and 'oftentimes' meant an employee who had been previously victimized 'had to actually resume working with their attacker and tormentor.' One loopholed employee who had been let go for workplace violence returned to Fremont and promptly attacked another colleague, the complaint states. For his part, the complaint says Murray 'was outspoken' with Tesla management about safety and security concerns in Fremont. For that, he wound up 'summarily fired under the pretextual guise of 'poor performance,'' even though he had never once been disciplined and was promoted five times in his six years with Tesla. Murray's co-defendants all endured similar experiences, being drummed off the payroll for supposed 'poor performance,' according to the complaint. Each of them had brought up serious concerns about issues at Tesla, or had investigated and substantiated employee wrongdoing, and were subsequently 'outright fired' for doing so, or resigned before they could be terminated, the complaint alleges. None had ever received any negative performance reviews, according to the complaint. Murray and his co-defendants are suing Tesla on five causes of action, including retaliation, wrongful termination and failure to prevent unlawful discrimination. They are seeking compensatory damages, emotional distress damages, punitive damages and exemplary damages to be determined by a jury, plus attorneys' fees and court costs.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
"This Will Open the Floodgates": Tesla In Trouble as Jury Orders It to Pay $329 Million After Autopilot Death
Tesla just got handed one of its biggest legal blows yet — one that could have seismic implications for its future operations. On Friday, a Miami jury ruled that the Elon Musk-owned automaker's Autopilot driver assistance software was partially at fault for a horrendous collision that killed a 22-year-old woman in 2019 and severely injured her boyfriend. In total, the jury ordered Tesla to pay $329 million to the surviving family of the victims, Naibel Benavides and Dillon Angulo, including $200 million in punitive damages and $129 million in compensatory damages. It was not considered to be primarily at fault: the driver of the Tesla Model S involved in the crash, George McGee, was found to bear 66 percent of the blame for the crash. Tesla shoulders the remaining 33 percent. "Tesla designed Autopilot only for controlled access highways yet deliberately chose not to restrict drivers from using it elsewhere, alongside Elon Musk telling the world Autopilot drove better than humans," Brett Schreiber, counsel for the plaintiffs, said in statement on Friday, as quoted by CNBC. "Tesla's lies turned our roads into test tracks for their fundamentally flawed technology, putting everyday Americans like Naibel Benavides and Dillon Angulo in harm's way." The tragic incident took place while McGee was driving his Tesla while Enhanced Autopilot was enabled. When he bent down to pick up his phone after dropping it, the Model S careened through an intersection at nearly 60 miles per hour and smashed into a parked SUV, which Benavides and Angulo were standing behind. Benavides died at the scene, and Angulo survived with horrific injuries. While on the witness stand, McGee said he believed Autopilot would protect him and brake on its own to prevent a crash. Schreiber accused Tesla of running a "misinformation campaign" that vastly overstated Autopilot's capabilities, per the New York Times. "I feel like we were experimented on," Angulo told NBC6 South Florida in 2023, "and this technology was out on the road before it was safe." The ruling could drastically impact Tesla's autonomous vehicle efforts — which it's been increasingly leaning into as its sales falter — and perhaps reshape the self-driving landscape at large. These are enormous damages, and the prospect of being on the hook anytime the experimental software kills or injures a bystander could dampen investor enthusiasm for the tech. It also comes at a critical moment for Tesla, which launched a limited robotaxi service in Austin, Texas, in June, and expanded its driverless fleet this week to San Francisco. Musk is hoping that a pivot to robotaxis could rake in the company trillions of dollars. Prior to the launch, he estimated that Tesla could have a million robotaxis on American roads by the end of 2026. In light of the ruling, that's a lot expensive legal liabilities waiting to happen. "This will open the floodgates," Miguel Custodio, a car crash lawyer not involved in the lawsuit, told the Associated Press after the ruling. "It will embolden a lot of people to come to court." This may have been a long time coming for Tesla. Its self-driving software — which are actually driver assistance features, regardless of their overconfident brand names — have been involved in multiple deadly crashes. The automaker has frequently been criticized for exaggerating how autonomously its cars can operate and has been repeatedly investigated by federal regulators and sued by state authorities. Tesla says it will be appealing the decision. "Today's verdict is wrong and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology," the company said in a statement. More on Tesla: Tesla Rolling Out Robotaxis With Human Drivers in the Driver's Seat, Defeating the Purpose of a Robotaxi Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Axios
a day ago
- Axios
Deepfaked after death: Some don't want it
Former CNN anchor Jim Acosta's interview with an AI-generated avatar of a Parkland shooting victim has reignited debate on the ethics of creating deepfakes of the dead. Why it matters: As cheap and free generative AI tools become capable of replicating voices, faces and personalities, some people are adding clauses to their wills to prevent the creation of their digital likeness after they die. Catch up quick: Acosta, who's now an independent journalist, aired an interview last week with an AI-generated avatar of Joaquin Oliver, one of the teenagers who was killed at age 17 in the 2018 mass shooting in Parkland, Florida. Viewers found the video disturbing, exploitative and bad journalism in need of an editor. What it wasn't? Illegal. Oliver's father, Manuel Oliver, is the executor of his son's estate, so he can use his son's name, image and likeness (NIL) — including creating an AI version of him. This is known as a post-mortem right of publicity, which is recognized in the state of Florida. How it works: Digital twins are created by uploading photos, videos and writings of a person into a large language model. The models then spit out "twins," which can range from video avatars with audio to text chatbots. Generative AI can roughly simulate tone and personality and predict how a person might respond. The big picture: Celebrities have been planning for what happens to their digital NIL after death at least since rapper Tupac Shakur's hologram posthumously "performed" at Coachella in 2012. But in a world where everyone has an online footprint, it's no longer just a celebrity problem. Case in point: The viral video of two concertgoers from last month's Coldplay concert was quickly fed into AI tools that used the couple's likeness to create deepfakes. State of play: It's easy enough to put a clause in your will stating you don't want to be reanimated by AI. "It would let families know the decedent's wishes and obligate the executor to carry them out as best they can," said Denise Howell, a technology lawyer and host of the podcast Uneven Distribution on the Hearsay Culture network. But enforcing that wish could mean expensive lawsuits, especially in states without clear laws on posthumous AI rights. "Our right of publicity laws weren't written with this situation in mind or designed to deal with it. They vary from state to state and many states don't have them at all," Howell said. The other side: Not everyone wants to opt out. Chatbots based on a person's likeness are a way that some loved ones grieve. Joaquin's father says he created the AI version of his son both to deal with his loss and also to bring more attention to gun control. "If the problem that you have is with the AI, then you have the wrong problem. The real problem is that my son was shot eight years ago." Oliver said in an Instagram video. Follow the money: While few people are planning for posthumous AI rights, many are already building digital versions of themselves to monetize and control now and after death. AI rights management platform Vermillio now offers this service to everyone for free. 2wai allows celebrities (and soon everyone else) to create their digital avatars on their phones. But even if you train an AI avatar yourself, it may say things you never would. "For me, it's a consent issue," Johnni Medina, manager of content and digital engagement at Pace University, told Axios. "I know how I feel about things. I don't know that my loved ones know exactly how I feel about things." "If I were tragically murdered, I would hate to think that my likeness could be used to advocate for the death penalty for my aggressor," they said. In May, the sister of a man who was killed in a road rage incident used AI to generate a video of her brother giving a victim impact statement.
