Tag Archives: justice

Justice Minister: AI Chatbots Could Reduce Errors in Prisoner Release Decisions

Posted on by
Reply

The Justice Minister informed the House of Lords on Monday that artificial intelligence chatbots could play a role in preventing the accidental release of prisoners from jail.

James Timpson announced that permission had been granted for the use of AI at HMP Wandsworth after a specialized team was assembled to explore “quick-fix solutions”.

This response follows a dual investigation initiated last week after a sex offender and fraudster was mistakenly released from a prison in south-west London.

Opposition MPs have seized upon recent release blunders as proof of governmental negligence amid turmoil in the criminal justice system.

Attorney-General David Lammy is set to address Parliament regarding the number of missing prisoners when MPs reconvene on Tuesday.

It is reported that AI technology can assist in reading and processing paperwork, aiding staff to cross-check names and prevent inmates from concealing prior offenses under false identities. It can merge various datasets while calculating release dates and notifications.

Currently, many of these tasks are performed by untrained staff utilizing calculators and piles of paperwork.

In response to a query in the Upper House on Monday, Lord Timpson remarked: “The frequency of releases from one prison to another varies significantly. At HMP Gartree, the average is just two releases per year, while at Wandsworth it reaches 2,000.”

“That’s why our digital team visited HMP Wandsworth last week to explore potential opportunities for adopting digital solutions quickly.

“We have an AI team in place, and they believe an AI chatbot could provide significant assistance, among other benefits. It can also cross-reference aliases, as we know some criminals may use over 20 different names.”

He further stated: “We have authorized the team to move forward with this.”

Brahim Kadour Sherif, 24, was mistakenly released on October 29 and was re-arrested on Friday following a police operation.

He was serving time for burglary with intent to steal and had a record for indecent assault.


Sherif is believed to have overstayed his visitor visa after arriving in the UK in 2019 and was in the process of being deported.

Another inmate, Billy Smith, 35, who was accidentally released from Wandsworth on Monday after being sentenced to 45 months for fraud, voluntarily returned to custody on Thursday.

The wrongful release of these two individuals heightened scrutiny on Ramy, who had introduced a new checklist for prison staff just days earlier after mistakenly releasing sex offender Hadush Kebatu on October 24.

Kebatu, who arrived in the UK via a small boat, created a disturbance in Epping, Essex, after sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl and a woman. He was improperly released from Chelmsford Prison and tried to return to the prison at least four times before finally being arrested in Finsbury Park, North London, and given funds for deportation back to Ethiopia.

According to government statistics, 262 prisoners were mistakenly released over the 12 months leading to March this year, marking a 128% increase from 115 the previous year. The majority of these incidents (233) occurred in prisons, with the remaining 29 happening in court settings.

Unions and prison governors have cited the complicated early release protocols and reliance on paper systems as contributing factors to the recent surge in errors, with numerous documents going missing between prisons, courts, and the Ministry of Justice.

The chief inspector of prisons remarked that the recent surge in early prisoner releases indicates “a system on the brink of collapse”.

In a recent piece, Charlie Taylor stated that the escalation in erroneous early releases is “concerning and potentially hazardous”.

Last weekend, reports surfaced indicating that four individuals remain unaccounted for following wrongful releases, with two having been released in June this year and two more scheduled for release in 2024.

On Monday, government sources suggested that one of these individuals had been apprehended.

However, in a sign of an ongoing crisis within the prison system, it appears he was never mistakenly released, but was incorrectly listed among those who had been.

The Prime Minister’s official spokesperson commented: “These incidents highlight the nature and extent of the prison crisis this government has inherited.

“It’s evident that these issues won’t be resolved overnight, which is why we are constructing 14,000 new prison spaces, engaging technical experts to modernize systems, and providing immediate support to staff.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Workers in Amazon Warehouses in Saudi Arabia Await Financial Relief: ‘We Demand Justice’

Posted on by
Reply

Asian warehouse employees report that Amazon, recognized as the world’s second-largest employer, has failed to fulfill its commitment to compensate them for financial exploitation tied to the operations of Saudi online retailers.

In 2023, Amazon announced it would refund recruitment fees to Asian contract workers who were compelled to pay substantial amounts to secure jobs in the warehouses of Saudi companies. Since then, the company has disbursed over $2.6 million in compensation to approximately 950 workers from various nations.

However, two years later, numerous immigrants are still awaiting reimbursement of their recruitment fees, with uncertain prospects for financial relief. Of the 67 workers interviewed by the Guardian, 36 indicated they had yet to receive payments from Amazon, despite having paid significant fees to gain employment in the company’s Saudi Arabian operations.

“I want to tell Amazon: If you intend to repay your debt, do it now,” stated Rameshwar Sharma, a worker from Nepal, who reported not having received any compensation. “Don’t treat us like fools. We are not begging. We seek justice.”

In a statement, Amazon spokesperson Margaret Callahan remarked that the company was “working swiftly and diligently to identify individuals entitled to reimbursement for employment costs incurred at third-party vendors that violated supply chain standards.”

She further noted that “we are aware that our work is not complete,” and that Amazon will “persist in issuing refunds as swiftly as possible.”

Labor rights advocates from Amnesty International, a human rights organization that scrutinized Amazon’s labor practices in Saudi Arabia, condemned the delays in processing worker payments as unacceptable.

“Too many individuals are still in limbo, and every delay prolongs their suffering,” commented Ella Knight from Amnesty International. “For one of the wealthiest companies globally, the sum involved is a mere drop in the ocean. However, for workers, timely justice can transform lives.”

Amazon, she insisted, “must act promptly to uphold its full human rights responsibilities.”

Some of the workers interviewed expressed concerns that the issue extends beyond mere delays. They reported being deemed ineligible for payments despite having paid substantial recruitment fees and having worked in Amazon’s Saudi Arabian operations.

Mithra Lal Sapkota, a Nepali worker, mentioned that he was informed he would not be refunded because his employment with Amazon ended in October 2023. Impactt staff, acting as Amazon’s intermediaries for compensation, left messages for Nepali workers stating that payments were only for those who ended their employment with Amazon in 2023 or later.

“Why are dates so crucial to them?” questioned Mithra Lal Sapkota. Impactt informed him that his job at Amazon ended in 2022, making him ineligible for a refund of his recruitment fees.

“What Amazon is doing feels disingenuous,” he remarked.

Amazon did not respond to inquiries regarding whether October 2023 was a cutoff date for payment eligibility, nor did they clarify the criteria for determining payment recipients.

Concerns about the treatment of vulnerable workers in Amazon’s Saudi warehouses gained significant attention following a survey released on October 10, 2023, by the Guardian, NBC News, and the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists along with the Arab Reporter for Investigative Journalism. The reporting revealed that workers were charged recruitment fees ranging from approximately $830 to $2,300 to secure jobs in Amazon’s Saudi warehouses, violating Supply Chain Standards.

In response to media inquiries and an investigation by Amnesty International, Amazon committed to enhancing its labor practices and reimbursing recruitment fees for workers involved with its Saudi Arabian operations.

By February 2024, Amazon had compensated over 700 workers with approximately $1.9 million. Nevertheless, the pace of payments has since dwindled, with numerous workers claiming they remain excluded. Among the 44 current and former Amazon contract workers interviewed for the Guardian’s report in December 2024, 33 stated they had yet to receive any refund from the company. “These are intricate and prolonged processes, and we do our utmost to expedite refunds,” Amazon explained at the time.

Since the follow-up report, Amazon has distributed over $330,000 in compensation to roughly 100 workers.

The migrant workers involved in this story hail from Nepal, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Kenya.

Bangladeshi worker MD Foisal Mia reported paying a recruitment company over $3,500 for a contract position in Amazon’s Saudi operations. He mentioned he has yet to receive any indication of compensation from Amazon or Impactt. He hopes that a refund for his recruitment fees would significantly impact his family’s circumstances.

“My family is in need. It’s challenging to manage a household,” stated Mia, who currently works at a vegetable store in Kuwait. “Please return my fee. This money means little to you, but it is everything to me.”

Nepali worker Sonu Kumar Mandal sought employment in the Amazon warehouse in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia, in 2021. To afford the costs, he secured a loan from a local moneylender with an exorbitant annual interest rate of 36%.

However, he was unable to meet his repayment obligations as his earnings were directed towards supporting his financially struggling family.

“I don’t have the funds to pay interest at present. I’m unemployed,” he lamented. “If Amazon were to refund the money, I would be able to settle the loan.”

Several workers denied compensation expressed that if Amazon genuinely wanted to reimburse them, they could have informed them about the refund process.

“Amazon has my phone number, my email, my passport, everything,” said Kishor Kumar Chaudhary, another Nepali worker. “If they wanted to reach me, they could easily do so. But why haven’t they?”

Pradip Kumar Mahato, a former Amazon employee from Nepal, filled out an online compensation form and sent a voice message to Impactt staff in July. In a reply, the staff conveyed: “[money] Very slim…we’re trying, but there’s no guarantee.”

Callahan, the Amazon spokesperson, expressed that the company is establishing a comprehensive complaint resolution mechanism for workers to voice their concerns. Amazon provides a web page where individuals, including former employees, can file complaints in various languages regarding the company’s employment and environmental practices.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Justice Department Attorneys Advocate for the Dissolution of Google’s Ad Technology.

Posted on by
Reply

On Friday, the Justice Department unveiled a strategy aimed at dismantling Google’s advertising technology empire. This marks the second time within a year that authorities are urging the company to divest parts of its business, potentially altering the landscape of the $2 trillion giant.

These comments were made during a hearing led by Judge Leonie M. Brinkema at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Last month, she determined that Google holds a dominant position in specific segments of the vast advertising system associated with its website. She is now tasked with deciding on a relief measure to address these concerns.

Lawyers from the Justice Department expressed hopes that the government will compel Google to force online publishers to sell their ad space exclusively to them. In the original lawsuit, the government had sought the court’s intervention to make Google enforce its ad technology acquired over the years.

“It’s frankly too risky to allow Google to control 90% of publishers,” stated Julia Tarver Wood, the lead attorney for the government.

In response, Google’s legal team argued that dissolving the company’s advertising division contradicts established legal precedents and threatens privacy and security measures.

The Justice Department’s request represents another blow to Google during an ongoing second hearing discussing its search monopoly in federal courts in Washington. In that instance, the government asked the judge to mandate the sale of Chrome, a widely-used browser, as part of various measures.

Collectively, if approved, these two governmental requests could signify the most significant restructuring of a powerful corporation since the 1980s, when AT&T was split into several companies as a result of an antitrust agreement with the Justice Department.

It remains uncertain whether the judges will impose such a breakup, which many antitrust experts deem the most extreme solution.

In the AD Tech lawsuit initiated in 2023, government attorneys contended that Google dominated the nearly invisible technology responsible for providing advertisements across the internet, conducting auctions for available ad spaces as web pages are loaded.

The government alleged that Google illegally controlled three critical aspects of its advertising system, namely the tools used by websites to display open ad spaces, the instruments that advertisers utilize to purchase these spaces, and the software that facilitates transactions between the two.

Last month, Judge Brinkema concluded that Google had violated the law to maintain its monopoly over publishing tools and the software that links sellers of ad spaces, referred to as Advertising Exchange. However, she noted that the government had not substantiated claims that Google monopolizes the tools used by advertisers.

During a hearing on Friday, Judge Brinkema indicated that she would reconvene in September to explore the relief package.

To address the issues, the Justice Department revealed plans to compel Google to divest its ad exchanges.

The government is also looking to create an open-source version of Google’s publisher advertising tools that manage auctions for available ad spaces, potentially allowing publishers and other ad tech firms to benefit. The hope is that Google will sell tools that support other functionalities for publishers, such as record-keeping.

Karen Dunn, Google’s lead attorney, argued that the proposed plan would not align with existing legal precedents. She further stated that even if the court seriously considers dissolving Google’s advertising technology division, the government’s recommendations are impractical.

There are limited buyers for this technology, with the few that could afford it being “massive tech companies.” Additionally, the essential security and privacy measures currently provided by Google would likely be lost.

“It’s highly probable that what they’re proposing is entirely unfeasible,” she remarked.

Instead, Google proposed that the company focus on amending or discarding certain practices identified by the court as solidifying its dominance, and take steps toward enhancing the transparency of its ad auction bidding system to benefit publishers.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Medical Journals Face “Harassment” Allegations from the Department of Justice

Posted on by
Reply

At least three medical journals have received correspondence from the U.S. Department of Justice, raising questions about their editing practices and urging them to maintain their independence.

The Lancet, a prominent British medical journal that did not receive one of these letters, published an editorial condemning the inquiries as “harassment” and threats, stating that American science has been “harshly detached” under the Trump administration.

Recently, Interim U.S. Attorney Ed Martin for the District of Columbia contacted the Chest Journal, which focuses on chest medicine, suggesting it has a partisan bias. The letter included inquiries about measures needed to combat misinformation, incorporating various perspectives.

This communication sparked outrage from the First Amendment group and several scientists, who expressed concerns that such law enforcement actions could undermine academic freedom and free speech. The letter encouraged the journal to clarify that its publisher, the American College of Chest Physicians, “supports the journal’s editorial independence.”

This week, the New England Journal of Medicine confirmed to NBC News that it had also received a similar letter from an interim U.S. attorney.

In a response shared with NBC News, the journal’s editor-in-chief, Dr. Eric Rubin, defended its rights as an independent publisher, emphasizing their strict peer review and editing process to ensure the objectivity and reliability of the research published. “We uphold their First Amendment rights to editorial independence and free expression in medical journals,” Rubin stated. “The journal remains committed to fostering academic scientific dialogue and supporting authors, readers, and patients.”

The third journal, Obstetrics and Gynecology, also confirmed receiving a letter from Martin.

“Obstetrics and Gynecology editorially operates independently from ACOG, although we share the mission of improving outcomes for individuals needing obstetric and gynecological care,” a representative from the American University of Obstetrics and Gynecology remarked in an emailed statement. “We take pride in our journal’s focus on scientific data and patient-centered, respectful, evidence-based care.”

MedPage Today, a medical industry news outlet, first reported the existence of a new DOJ letter.

The DC office of the Department of Justice did not respond to NBC News’ request for comment.

Meanwhile, The Lancet, which has been publishing for over 200 years, adopted a more assertive tone. In a scathing editorial in solidarity with other journals, it described the letter from the Justice Department as “harassment” within the broader context of the Trump administration’s “systematic dismantling of U.S. scientific infrastructure.”

“This is a blatant attempt to intimidate journals and infringe upon their rights to independent editorial oversight. The Lancet and other medical journals are being targeted by the Trump administration,” the editor remarked. “Medical journals should not expect to be spared from the administration’s attacks on science, as institutions like the NIH, CDC, and academic medical centers are also being affected.”

Scientific journals are essential for disseminating new discoveries and insights among colleagues. Some journals are managed by specialized experts, while others are published by organizations with a focus on science. A reputable journal ensures that research undergoes thorough peer review, where external experts appraise it for errors and research quality.

The scrutiny of scientific journals occurs as the Trump administration has faced reductions in funding and staffing.

NBC News inquired with several major scientific and medical journal groups regarding whether they received similar letters from the Department of Justice.

Representatives from Science, Elsevier, Nature, and JAMA, the medical journal of the American Medical Association, did not reply to requests for comment.

Wiley Publishing Company acknowledged receipt of the letter from an interim U.S. attorney but did not provide further details.

“We remain committed to the highest standards of editorial independence, academic rigor, and publication ethics,” a Wiley spokesperson stated. “Our journal evaluates submissions based on their scientific merits and collaborates closely with social partners to ensure a wider perspective contributes to the advancement of knowledge.”

Source: www.nbcnews.com

EPA initiates staff reductions for environmental justice workers

Posted on by
Reply

The Environmental Protection Agency has initiated significant staffing changes by beginning the process of reducing hundreds of staff through a “power reduction” process.

Last month, the agency announced a large-scale rollback of environmental regulations, including key components of the Clean Air Act, with administrator Lieseldin vowing to undermine the fight against climate change.

In February, the EPA placed environmental justice staff on administrative leave and terminated some probationary workers. Many employees are now working remotely or engaging in telework.

The latest action by the agency involves the beginning of the termination process for around 280 workers who were involved in environmental justice and diversity, equity, and inclusive programs. Additionally, 175 EPA employees have been reassigned to new roles.

“Today, the EPA has informed employees focusing on diversity, equity, and inclusion and environmental justice of the agency’s necessity to reduce personnel through the handbook and federal regulations governing the RIF procedure,” said EPA spokesperson Molly Vaseliou in an email statement. “Certain employees have also been notified of their reassignment to different offices as part of this process.”

NBC News has obtained a memorandum sent to employees affected by the power reduction, indicating that the reduced staffing levels at the EPA will come into effect on July 31st.

“President Trump’s election was a call to action from the American people, which includes issuing executive orders for significant changes within the federal bureaucracy to benefit American families, workers, taxpayers, and the government as a whole,” the memorandum explains. “We appreciate your understanding and cooperation during this transitional period.”

Source: www.nbcnews.com

The Department of Justice to disband cryptocurrency enforcement unit

Posted on by
Reply

The Trump administration has disbanded Justice Department troops responsible for investigating cryptocurrency crimes, criticizing the Biden administration for being too aggressive towards the fast-growing industry.

In a memo issued late Monday, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche denounced his predecessor for investigating cryptocurrency operators in a way that he was called “pregnant and not executed properly.” He instead directed the department to narrow the focus of cryptocurrency investigations into crimes such as fraud, drug trafficking and terrorism.

The directive coincides with President Trump’s broad embrace of the crypto industry during his campaign and as he moves to ease enforcement.

The Trump family expanded business profits in the industry, including establishing a crypto venture, World Liberty Financial. Just before he took office, Trump issued his own memo coin. Trump Media & Technology Group, a social media company whose majority shareholder, also said it plans to introduce many digital asset investment products this year.

The Department of Justice directive follows a similar move in the Securities and Exchange Commission. This dismissed lawsuits and pending investigations that included issues that the crypto company had not registered as an exchange. Many SEC attorneys in these cases have left the regulatory authority.

The SEC has also significantly reduced staffing for crypto enforcement units. On a policy issue, the SEC says it will not attempt to regulate memokine because novelty digital assets are not securities.

In its memo, the Justice Department accused the Biden administration of “a reckless regulatory strategy through prosecution” towards the world of digital currency.

Going forward, Blanche writes that prosecutors should only pursue cryptocurrency cases that “include the actions of victim investors,” and that fund fraud, hacking, and other crimes such as fentanyl and human trafficking. The prosecution said “is important to restore stolen funds to customers and build investors’ trust in the security of the digital asset market and the growth of the digital asset industry.”

He ordered a group of prosecutors investigating market integrity and major fraud to halt the pursuit of cryptocurrency enforcement and instead focus on immigration issues and contractor fraud.

He also disbanded the National Cryptocurrency Enforcement team, a group within the Department of Justice headquarters that was recently created to handle such cases. Blanche writes that the office of a personal lawyer may still pursue cases that include cryptocurrency investigations.

This new approach appears to be aimed at preventing cases like those submitted in 2023 against Binance founder Changpeng Zhao, a violation of the Bank’s Secret Act. The company has agreed to pay a $4.3 billion fine as part of its guilty plea.

During the first days of the administration, Trump officials signaled their dissatisfaction with such cases when they effectively demoted the prosecutor who founded the cryptocurrency enforcement team, Eun Young Choi.

The team was created in 2022 to help prosecutors penetrate the frequently vague world of cryptocurrency as cross-border criminals began to use digital money more and more to promote crime.

Matthew Goldstein Contributed with a report from New York.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Justice Department argues in court filing that Google must sell Chrome to end search monopoly

Posted on by
Reply

U.S. prosecutors have told a judge that Alphabet Inc.’s Google should take steps to end its monopoly on Internet search by selling off its Chrome browser and sharing data and search results with competitors.

This would result in a decade of heightened regulation for Google, as ruled by a Washington federal court that found the company maintained an illegal monopoly on online search and related advertising.

Google currently controls about 90% of the online search market.

In a court filing, the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) stated, “Google’s illegal conduct not only deprived competitors of important distribution channels but also hindered their entry into these markets through new and innovative ways, eliminating potential distribution partners.”

The recently filed court papers further detail the U.S. government’s plan to break Google’s monopoly, which Google considers radical and harmful to American consumers and businesses.

Google intends to appeal the proposal.

The Justice Department’s demands include prohibiting Google from rejoining the browser market for five years and potentially requiring the sale of its Android mobile OS if competition is not restored through other means.

Additionally, the department seeks to prevent Google from acquiring or investing in search rivals, query-based artificial intelligence products, or advertising technology.

The Justice Department and a group of states have asked U.S. District Judge Amit to terminate Google’s exclusive contracts paying Apple and other device vendors to make its search engine the default option on tablets and smartphones.

Google will have an opportunity to present its counterproposal in December, with a trial scheduled for April, subject to potential interference by President-elect Donald Trump and the Justice Department’s incoming antitrust chief.

Source: www.theguardian.com

US Justice Department advises court to dismiss TikTok’s appeal

Posted on by
Reply

The Department of Justice has requested an appeals court to dismiss a lawsuit challenging a law that mandates China-based ByteDance to sell TikTok’s U.S. assets by January 19 or risk a ban.

TikTok, along with its parent company ByteDance and a group of TikTok creators, have filed lawsuits to oppose the legislation that could potentially ban the app used by 170 million Americans.

According to a senior Justice Department official, the government will provide classified documents to the court which will outline additional security concerns regarding ByteDance’s ownership of TikTok, along with statements from the FBI, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the Justice Department’s national security division.


The department is expected to argue that Chinese-owned TikTok poses a significant national security risk to the United States due to its access to vast amounts of personal data on American citizens, enabling China to manipulate information used by Americans through the app covertly.

President Joe Biden signed the law on April 24, giving TikTok and ByteDance until January 19 to separate or face a ban. The White House’s stance is to end Chinese ownership for national security reasons without banning TikTok.

The department clarified that the law is aimed at addressing national security concerns rather than speech issues and intends to address China’s potential misuse of TikTok to access sensitive personal information of Americans. It denies all arguments put forth by TikTok, including claims that the law violates the free speech rights under the First Amendment of Americans using the video app.

The government plans to accuse TikTok of insufficiently safeguarding the data of its U.S. users.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is set to hear oral arguments on September 16, placing TikTok’s fate in the midst of the final week of the 2024 presidential election.

Despite previously signing an executive order threatening to ban the app, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump stated in an interview in June that he would not support a ban. Additionally, US Vice President Kamala Harris, who is running for president, recently joined TikTok.

The law would prevent app stores like Apple and Google from offering TikTok and prohibit internet hosting services from supporting it unless it is divested by ByteDance.

The bill received strong support from the US Congress amid concerns expressed by lawmakers that China might exploit the app to gain access to Americans’ data for spying purposes.

Reuters

Source: www.theguardian.com

Families of Texas heatstroke victims from Hurricane Beryl demand justice for unnecessary deaths

Posted on by
Reply

Two days after Hurricane Beryl struck Texas, Janet and Pamela Jarrett’s Houston home was still without power and a heat watch was in effect.

They spent the evening playing Pamela’s favorite game, Connect 4. All seemed well.

But early the next morning, Janet found Pamela, 64, who is disabled and in a wheelchair, struggling to breathe.

“I could hear her gasping for air and breathing heavily,” Janet said. “It’s something you never forget. It never goes away. I can hear it even when I’m lying down to sleep. It feels like I’m going through it all over again.”

Pamela Jarrett died on July 11 from hyperthermia due to environmental heat exposure.
Courtesy of Janet Jarrett

Pamela died on the way to the hospital on July 11. The official cause of death was: Environmental Heat Exposure.

Of the 21 confirmed deaths in Texas from Hurricane Beryl, one-third died the same way: not from typical storm threats like flooding or downed trees, but as a result of extreme heat caused by widespread power outages during and after the storm. Heat indexes, or “feels like” temperatures, rose into triple digits in the days following the storm.

These tragedies highlight how ill-prepared Texas (and much of the rest of the country) is for the increased frequency and intensity of extreme weather events caused by climate change, especially when multiple hazards overlap. The death toll also shows how easily the line can become blurred between one type of deadly environmental hazard and another.

The death toll from Beryl in Texas is expected to continue to rise, and the increase in deaths from heatstroke has led to increased scrutiny of local power company CenterPoint Energy and the state government.

“She didn’t have to die like that,” Janet said of her sister. “I’m angry that I didn’t get a response. I couldn’t call anyone. I’m angry that CenterPoint didn’t do a better job. I’m just angry about the whole thing.”

More than 2 million homes and businesses were affected by power outages caused by Category 1 Hurricane Beryl. CenterPoint said in a statement to NBC News that it would be conducting a “thorough review” of its response to the storm.

“Our condolences go out to the families and friends of those who lost their lives as a result of Hurricane Beryl,” the power company said.

CenterPoint officials insist the company mobilized crews as quickly as possible and did everything in its power to resolve the outage.

Janet Jarrett was forced to go without electricity for a total of nine days, during which indoor temperatures soared to nearly 100 degrees Fahrenheit at night. She spent a week in that heat after her sister died.

Pamela Jarrett sits with her family.
Courtesy of Janet Jarrett

Janet said she did her best to keep Pamela cool, using cold rags and taking her outside in her wheelchair when it was windy, but as with most patients with heatstroke, by the time the symptoms became apparent it was too late.

“I didn’t know there was anything really wrong with her,” Jarrett said. “She was talking, she was reacting to everything, she was just normal, so I didn’t realize anything was wrong.”

Jesus Rodriguez, 52, of Houston, also had no idea that anything was wrong with his 78-year-old father, Oscar. On July 10, the third day of the blackout, Jesus went to check on Oscar in the morning, grabbing some water and a cold diet coke from the cooler.

When Jess got home that afternoon, her dad “was lying on his back, almost like he was asleep, but he was breathing heavily,” Jess said. “I didn’t think anything of it, but I tried to wake him up, but he wouldn’t wake up. That’s when I called 911.”

Oscar died that day at Memorial Hermann Greater Heights Hospital in Houston. Jess described her father as a healthy man for his age and a devoted family man.

There have been power outages during previous storms, but never for more than two days.

“This was definitely the worst,” Jesus said. “It took almost a week and a half to get the electricity restored.”

He blamed CentrePoint for being slow to respond and for not communicating well enough.

“If they had said, ‘We can’t get to your house in a week and a half,’ I might have been able to send my father somewhere else,” Jesus said.

Three Houston-area hospitals reported a significant increase in emergency room visits due to the post-storm heat.

Dr. Ben Saldana, associate medical director at Houston Methodist Hospital, said the hospital has seen its highest number of emergency room visits since the 2021 Texas cold snap.

“On the day of the storm, our emergency department saw almost double the normal volume of patients,” Saldana said, adding, “We’re not back to normal yet.”

Doctors at the hospital said they have linked health issues in 525 patients to the effects of heat since the Fourth of July.

Even those whose lives were not in danger from the heat described the harsh conditions caused by the power outages.

Deja McClendon of Humble, Texas, was without power for six days and had been shuttling between her apartment, her boyfriend’s mother’s apartment, and a hotel to escape the heat. She said the chaos had forced her to take time off work.

“Texas is something else when it comes to the heat,” McClendon said, adding, “It was very stressful having to move around so much.”

Talulah Christie, who is five months pregnant, was without power for five days in Conroe, Texas, which is served by Entergy Texas. She said the outages after Beryl were the worst she could remember.

“I tried to endure [the heat] “After the first two days, and then the second night, I knew this was becoming a medical issue. I couldn’t stay here,” she said. But she and her husband couldn’t find an affordable hotel room nearby, so they stayed.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott has called for an investigation into CenterPoint’s response after the hurricane, but he has himself faced criticism for being on an economic development trip to Asia when the storm made landfall.

The utility has also been blamed by Democratic Rep. Sylvia Garcia of Texas, whose district saw several heatstroke deaths after Hurricane Beryl.

“The extreme heat exacerbated the public health crisis because CenterPoint failed to quickly restore power,” she said in a statement to NBC News.

Janet Jarrett said she hopes preventative measures are taken to prevent others from suffering preventable losses.

“This should never have happened. We had so many plans and they took it all away from her,” Jarrett said. “And now I’m burying her.”

Source: www.nbcnews.com