Chelsea woman charged in unarmed robbery linked to murder of Saugus man. Authorities recently charged a Chelsea woman in connection to an unarmed robbery linked to the murder of a Saugus man earlier this month.

Kiara Rosario, 26, was arraigned Friday in Lynn District Court on a charge of accessory after the fact of unarmed robbery, the Essex District Attorney’s Office announced. Prosecutors say the charge stems from an investigation into the murder of 26-year-old Michael Norton, who was found dead in his home at 44 Collins Ave. on Dec. 11.

Angjeliki Hodaj, 33, of Saugus, is being held without bail on a murder charge. And a murder warrant has been issued for Jorge Delgardo Medina, who was already charged earlier this month for unlicensed operation, negligent operation and failure to stop following a police pursuit in Saugus. Medina is being held on $10,000 cash bail and an arraignment date for the murder charge has not yet been scheduled, the district attorney’s office said.

Norton’s address listed by officials is that of Essex Landing, a group of apartment buildings by the site of the Orange Dinosaur, a large orange T-Rex that stood over a miniature golf course for decades. While the mini-golf location has since closed, the developers of the Essex Landing apartments pledged to keep the dinosaur, CBS Boston reported in 2016.

A 43-year-old Hyde Park man was struck by a pickup truck and killed as he walked in the travel lane of Route 3 in Billerica Saturday evening.

The Massachusetts State Police reported that troopers responded to a report of a pedestrian accident just before exit 78 at about 7:45 p.m. to find the victim dead at the scene.

Investigators said the man was a passenger in a car traveling north on Route 3 when the car stopped alongside the roadway. For reasons still under investigation, he got out and walked into the travel lane of the multi-lane highway. He was subsequently struck by a Ford pickup truck and was immediately killed. The 25-year-old driver of the truck remained at the scene and was interviewed by police.

The incident remains under the investigation of the State Police Collision Analysis and Reconstruction Section, Crime Scene Services and the Middlesex State Police Detective Unit.

Repeated violations of Twitter’s COVID-19 misinformation policy have gotten Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene booted from the platform.

The Georgia Republican’s personal account, @mtgreenee, has been “permanently suspended” for at least “five strikes” against her for spreading false or misleading information about the pandemic, a Twitter spokesperson told The New York Times.

“We permanently suspended the account you referenced for repeated violations of our COVID-19 misinformation policy,” the company said. “We’ve been clear that, per our strike system for this policy, we will permanently suspend accounts for repeated violations of the policy.”

Five strikes or more result in permanent suspension — part of a policy that Twitter says is meant to “reduce the spread of potentially harmful and misleading information.”

Greene responded on GETTR, a platform founded by former Trump administration aide Jason Miller.

“When Maxine Waters can go to the streets and threaten violence on Twitter, Kamala and Ilhan can bail out rioters on Twitter, and Chief spokesman for terrorist IRGC can tweet mourning Soleimani but I get suspended for tweeting [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] statistics, Twitter is an enemy to America and can’t handle the truth,” Greene said. “That’s fine, I’ll show America we don’t need them and it’s time to defeat our enemies.”

The congresswoman — who was previously flagged by Twitter for misinformation on the pandemic and the 2020 election — still has access to her official account, @RepMTG, according to CNN.

Twitter temporarily suspended her personal account this summer when she claimed that the vaccines failed to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. The vaccines have been proven to reduce the risk of infection, severe cases, hospitalization and death.

On Saturday, Greene claimed without evidence on Twitter that the feds were ignoring an “extremely high amount of covid vaccine deaths.”

The CDC has published studies showing that deaths after receiving a vaccine are incredibly rare, and says that “reports of adverse events … following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is considering another update to COVID-19 isolation guidelines, with Dr. Anthony Fauci saying federal officials may suggest that asymptomatic people should test negative before going out in the public again.

Fauci was asked on ABC News’ “This Week” why the CDC did not require a negative test after cutting the isolation guidelines in half from 10 days to five. Fauci acknowledged significant pushback over the issue — which even sparked a meme that saw thousands post imaginary “CDC says” guidelines on social media — and hinted the CDC may come out with updated guidelines early this week.

“The CDC decided that they would cut that down to five days if the person remains asymptomatic, so long as when they do go out in that 10-day period, back to work or back into society, that they diligently wear a mask,” Fauci said. “You’re right there has been some concern about why we don’t ask people in that five-day period to get tested. That is something that is now under consideration. The CDC is very well aware that there has been some pushback about that. Looking at it again, there may be an option that testing is a part of that, and I think we’re going to be hearing more about that in the next day or so from the CDC.”

The Massachusetts Department of Public Health last week adopted the new CDC guidance that shortened isolation and quarantine periods for the general public.

Massachusetts reported two days in a row of more than 20,000 new cases to close out 2021. But vaccines and boosters have kept severe cases, hospitalizations and deaths down compared to last year’s holiday surge.

The CDC unveiled its new isolation and quarantine recommendations for the general public last Monday, just as COVID-19 infections spiked across the nation. The agency said the changes were motivated by studies showing transmission of the virus mostly “occurs early in the course of illness, generally in the one-two days prior to the onset of symptoms and the two-three days after.”

“Therefore, people who test positive should isolate for five days and, if asymptomatic at that time, they may leave isolation if they can continue to mask for five days to minimize the risk of infecting others,” the CDC said.

The CDC also noted that people who are unvaccinated or not yet boosted should quarantine for five days “followed by strict mask use for an additional five days.”

Dear Amy: I have been married to “Bev” for 14 years. She is wonderful. It is a second marriage for both of us.

Her son, “Cliff,” is like a son to me, and I love him very much. The problem is that my wife’s family, who all live locally, seem to think of Cliff as something other than being immediate family. Cliff is a real estate agent. He is part-owner of a company, and a real estate broker.

Cliff works extremely hard to make a living and yet he has several family members who will not use his services.

His first cousin refused to use him while buying and selling numerous houses, to the tune of approximately $225,000 in lost revenue for Cliff.

Cliff has a wife and two children, and certainly could use the money.

The same exact thing happened five years ago, and my wife did not talk to her sister or niece for almost three years because of it. They are very snobbish, and don’t include us in their gatherings.

I am fed up with it and want to unload on the bunch of them; including the parents who I think are partly to blame for this whole situation.

As it stands right now, I do not want any of them in my house at all. Based on this; however, I feel if I did unload, it would mean that my wife would end up losing whatever relationship she now has with her sister and niece.

Dear Furious: I believe your choice to frame this business situation as “lost revenue” is a little misleading. In my opinion, this is not lost revenue (because he never had the revenue to start with), but “potential income.”

This makes a difference, because you seem to see this as business that was taken from “Cliff,” versus business that was not offered to him.

Your loyalty toward him is laudable, but before you choose to unload, you should carefully consider the consequences.

First of all, acting out would not benefit him – and it might actually hurt him.

If this family of snobbish locals chooses to retaliate, they could badmouth his business, which relies strongly on good referrals and great reviews.

Furthermore, your choice to unload would likely damage your wife’s relationship with her family further.

Cliff will have to build up his business through other means, and there might be more positive ways you can help, aside from punishing these family members.

If your wife wants to completely break with her kin, she should make that move on her own, and you should support her.

Dear Amy: Is it ever right to give unsolicited advice to a loved one if you say in advance that they are free to take your advice, or not?

For instance, is it right to offer said advice in a case where you see the train wreck coming and you would never forgive yourself if you did not try to avert it?

– Asking for a Friend

Dear Asking: A few words about advice: Anyone is always free to “take or not take” advice — solicited or otherwise. Keep that very much in mind.

I have a quote scrawled on a Post-It note over my desk: “Unsolicited advice is always self-serving.”

For instance, your desire to warn someone away from a speeding train allays your own anxiety; it might also give you some “told you so” satisfaction later.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.