Report viaBBC -- A 27-year-old Indian man plans to sue his parents for giving birth to him without his consent.
Mumbai businessman Raphael Samuel told the BBC that it's wrong to bring children into the world because they then have to put up with lifelong suffering.
Mr Samuel, of course, understands that our consent can't be sought before we are born, but insists that "it was not our decision to be born."
So as we didn't ask to be born, we should be paid for the rest of our lives to live, he argues.
A demand like this could cause a rift within any family, but Mr Samuel says he gets along very well with his parents (both of whom are lawyers) and they appear to be dealing with it with a lot of humor.
In a statement, his mother Kavita Karnad Samuel explained her response to "the recent upheaval my son has created."
"I must admire my son's temerity to want to take his parents to court knowing both of us are lawyers. And if Raphael could come up with a rational explanation as to how we could have sought his consent to be born, I will accept my fault," she said.
Mr Samuel's belief is rooted in what's called anti-natalism - a philosophy that argues that life is so full of misery that people should stop procreating immediately.
This, he says, would gradually phase out humanity from the Earth and that would also be so much better for the planet.
"There's no point to humanity. So many people are suffering. If humanity is extinct, Earth and animals would be happier. They'll certainly be better off. Also no human will then suffer. Human existence is totally pointless."
Mr Samuel says he remembers first having anti-natalist thoughts when he was five.
"I was a normal kid. One day I was very frustrated and I didn't want to go to school but my parents kept asking me to go. So I asked them: 'Why did you have me?' And my dad had no answer. I think if he'd been able to answer, maybe I wouldn't have thought this way."
As the idea grew and took shape in his mind, he decided to tell his parents about it. He says his mom reacted "very well" and dad too "is warming up" to the idea.
"Mom said she wished she had met me before I was born and that if she did, she definitely wouldn't have had me," he says laughing and adds that she does see reason in his argument.
"She told me that she was quite young when she had me and that she didn't know she had another option. But that's what I'm trying to say - everyone has the option."
Styles P links up with frequent collaborator Whispers to drop an official music video for "Welfare." This is off of Styles' "G-Host" album. Available now on iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/g-host/1370715282
Fly Man gets lyrical and brings the backing of some hard ass beats on his new project. The 10 track album is seasoned with something for everybody. From the streets to the clubs, even a little something something to ride to on date night, all corners are covered. Fly Man's lyrical delivery is quickly catching, clear and definitely full of vocabulary. He brings an above average flow to the mic when compared with many of today's self proclaimed rappers. "World Domination" is with out a doubt a classic album that the genre just hasn't heard in a while. Check it out today, now available on Spotify for streaming, and iTunes for purchase.
Artist Name: PurpMan Kash EP Name: "Cant Ban The PurpMan"
Description: PurpManKash aka Pmk is an indie hip-hop artist out of the St. Petersburg, Florida. PurpManKash is working on his debut EP titled “Cant Ban The PurpMan” which is set for release July 17th, 2018. PMK is a hip-hop artist that has the versatility to breakthrough genres and deliver words (rhymes) that have meaning and can move any listener. Set to drop his lead single "Jeezy" PurpManKash plans to keep his foot on the pedal with bringing you quality street music.
(AP) Jurors who awarded only 4 cents to the family of a black man fatally shot in his home by a deputy expressed confusion about the court’s instructions as they struggled to reach a verdict.
Notes sent to the judge show the jurors said they couldn’t reach a unanimous decision before finally finding 30-year-old Gregory Hill Jr. 99 percent responsible for his death, because he was drunk when a St. Lucie County Sheriff’s deputy shot him.
Hill’s fiancee called the verdict a “slap in the face,” and the family’s lawyer is preparing an appeal, saying he can’t tell whether the jury was angry, or just confused.
Hill was in his garage in the South Florida city of Fort Pierce, listening to loud music when a parent picking a child up from an elementary school across the street called in the complaint in 2014.
According to court documents, deputies responded and Hill eventually raised his garage door to answer them, then lowered it again. A deputy then fired through the door, hitting Hill three times. Deputies testified that they saw Hill holding a weapon. An unloaded gun was found in the dead man’s back pocket.
The sheriff’s office called in a SWAT team, who tear-gassed the home before officers went in and found Hill’s body.
A sheriff’s statement said Deputy Christopher Newman, who fired the fatal shots, was “placed in a very difficult situation, and like so many fellow law enforcement officers must do every day, he made the best decision he could for the safety of his partner, himself, and the public given the circumstances he faced.”
A grand jury in Florida brought no charges, so Hill’s family turned to federal court, filing a civil rights lawsuit against Newman and his department.
Attorney John Phillips said the jurors -- one black man, two white men and five white women -- seemed receptive to the family’s case during the trial, but confused by the instructions the judge gave for their deliberations last week.
“The jury smiled, cried and showed anger during the trial. They were normal, reactive people and seemed to understand both sides of the case,” Phillips said.
There were two claims the jury had to decide: a federal civil rights claim, and a state-law claim of negligence. Phillips suggested that the wording of the instructions may have confused the jurors.
The instructions said they could award $1 in “nominal damages” to the family if Hill’s injuries weren’t clearly the result of unjustifiable force. But that part of the instruction was supposed to apply only to the federal civil rights claim, which the jury decided entirely in the deputy’s favor. On the state-law claim, they decided -- in a very small way -- in favor of the family by finding the sheriff’s department 1 percent negligent.
Hours before the verdict, the jury sent the judge a note with a question: “If we find minimal negligence, can the courts overrule monetary amounts presented by the jury?”
The judge replied that she did not understand, and asked them to clarify. They never did.
At another point, they said they were struggling to reach a unanimous decision. The judge told them to keep trying.
Finally, the jury awarded Hill’s relatives $1 for funeral expenses and $1 for each of Hill’s three children. That $4 was then reduced to 4 cents - or 1 percent, representing the sheriff’s liability. The other 99 percent was blamed on the dead man, under a Florida law that enables such decisions if a victim was under the influence of alcohol.
Hill’s fiancee, Monique Davis said she had to leave the courtroom during the verdict so she wouldn’t have an outburst.
“It was basically a slap in the face. You value someone’s life as one dollar?”
Phillips said he’s baffled. He’s planning to ask for a new trial, and to file an appeal if that’s denied.
“A finding of no negligence and no civil rights violations is one thing, but the series of one-dollar awards for these kids was shocking, upsetting and confusing.”
University of Miami law professor Osamudia James says the option of nominal damages is given to juries as a way to acknowledge a wrong, even if they don’t believe large damages are warranted. It’s one tool juries are given to facilitate the difficult process of assigning monetary awards for injuries.
“In cases like this with nominal awards, juries are saying ‘We don’t like what happened, but we’re not awarding a lot (of money) to it,’” James said.
Hill and Davis were high school sweethearts, engaged to be married. He had two kids with Davis and a third with another woman.
Davis called him a family man who loved working and fishing, and always provided for his children.
“He wasn’t running the streets doing bad things,” she said. “He was not perfect but he wasn’t a bad guy.”
The one and only Lloyd Banks is back with another fire freestyle from his "At Your Request" series. This time he borrows Ghostface Killah's classic "Mighty Healthy" instrumental.
Here's a new heater from Jadakiss and D-Block's Nino Man. They call this one "I Hate You." Like this collaboration? Let us know in the comment section below.
With his "I Got Samples" project set to drop on December 18, Rigz of Da Cloth, releases an official music video for "RearView." The track was produced by Chup.