ReportWire

Tag: Case

  • ‘I lost me’: How frontotemporal dementia changed a mind and a marriage

    I lost me.

    You lost yourself?

    Yeah.

    Where did you go?

    I don’t know. I don’t have a sense of who I am.

    Marc Pierrat’s mind once ran as smoothly as the gears on his endurance bike. He was a mechanical engineer by training and a marathoner for fun, a guy who maintained complicated systems at work and a meticulously organized garage at his Westlake Village home.

    Three years after his diagnosis of frontotemporal dementia, Marc’s thoughts are a jumble he can’t sort out alone. Once-routine tasks are now incomprehensible; memories swirl and slip away. His wife, Julia Pierrat, 58, shepherds Marc, 59, through meals and naptime, ensures he is clean and comfortable, gently offers names and words he can’t find himself.

    It is often impossible for a person to talk about the internal experience of living with FTD, either because they can’t accurately assess their internal state or don’t have the language to describe it. In many cases the disease attacks the brain’s language centers directly. In others, a common symptom is loss of insight, meaning the ability to recognize that anything is wrong.

    But minds can unwind in a million different ways. In Marc’s case, the disease has taken a path that for now has preserved his ability to talk about life with what one doctor called “the most difficult of all neurologic diseases.”

    • Share via

    Thousands of people in the U.S. live with FTD. Marc can speak for only one of them, and at times he does so with clarity that breaks his wife’s heart. Occasionally Julia records snippets of conversation with his permission, mementos from a stage of marriage they never saw coming.

    “It feels like walking into a closet you haven’t been in in a while, and you’re looking for something that you know is there, but you don’t know where,” Marc said recently, as Julia looked on.

    “And then, you know, you just — yeah. You just give up,” he concluded. “It’s the giving up part that’s hard.”

    Marc Pierrat takes a selfie with his wife, Julia before Marc was diagnosed with FTD.

    Marc takes a selfie with his wife, Julia before Marc was diagnosed with FTD.

    (Pierrat family)

    Do you know the name of the disease that you’re living with?

    Yes.

    What is it called?

    Frontotemporal dementia.

    Yep, that’s exactly right.

    FTD, for short.

    How does it affect you?

    Well, I guess, processing of inputs tend to, in a normal mind — they get processed efficiently to a decision. Like, if you’re going to catch a ball, you know, you have the ball in the air, [and] you have to raise your arm and your glove, and you catch the ball. And FTD interferes with all of that. So it makes it harder to catch the ball.

    More than 6 million people in the U.S. currently live with dementia, an umbrella term for conditions affecting memory, language and other cognitive functions.

    Up to 90% of dementia cases are caused by Alzheimer’s disease, the progressive memory disorder, or by strokes and other vascular problems that disrupt blood flow to the brain. The rest arise from a variety of lesser-known but equally devastating conditions. Frontotemporal dementia is one of them.

    Julia Pierrat spends a quiet moment in the kitchen of the family home in Westlake.

    After putting Marc in bed for an afternoon nap, Julia spends a quiet moment in the kitchen of their home in Westlake.

    In FTD, abnormal proteins accumulate in the brain’s frontal or temporal lobes, damaging and eventually destroying those neurons. It’s frequently misdiagnosed, and so the number of current U.S. cases is hard to pin down — estimates place it between 50,000 and 250,000 people.

    By far the best-known person living with FTD is the actor Bruce Willis, whose family disclosed his diagnosis in 2023.

    Willis has primary progressive aphasia, the second-most common form. In his case, the most damaged tissues are in his brain’s left frontal or left temporal lobes, which play crucial roles in processing and forming language. One of his first noticeable symptoms was a stutter, his wife Emma Heming Willis has said in interviews; he now has minimal language ability.

    But FTD is highly heterogeneous, meaning that symptoms vary widely, and it has affected Marc and Willis in very different ways.

    The disease has several subtypes based on where the degeneration begins its advance through the brain.

    Marc dances with activity counselor Rhoda Nino at Infinity Adult Day Health Care Center in Westlake Village.

    Marc Pierrat dances with activity counselor Rhoda Nino who leads a class at Infinity Adult Day Health Care Center in Westlake Village.

    Pierrat has the most common subtype, behavioral variant FTD. His disease has targeted his frontal lobes, which manage social behavior, emotional regulation, impulse control, planning and working memory — essentially, everything a person needs to relate to others.

    FTD typically presents between the ages of 45 and 60. Because it shows up so much earlier than other dementias, its initial symptoms are often mistaken for other conditions: depression, perimenopause, Parkinson’s disease, psychosis.

    Everything we think and do and say to one another depends on very specific physical locations in our brains functioning correctly. Behavioral variant FTD strikes right at the places that house our personalities.

    When an eloquent person suddenly can’t form sentences, it’s typically seen as a medical problem. But when an empathetic person suddenly withholds affection, it’s perceived as an act of unkindness. The truth is that both can be the product of physical deterioration in a previously healthy brain.

    If you were to describe to another person what it’s like to live with FTD, how would you describe it?

    Oh my God. . . . Well, you can’t assess situations accurately. You see a train coming, and it’s gonna smash into your car, and you’d be, like, ‘Oh. Huh. That train’s gonna hit my car.’ And there’s nothing you can do.

    The first sign came in late 2018. Marc, then 52, was in a fender-bender a few blocks from home and called Julia for a ride. When she arrived, he was not just surprised to see her, but angry. Why was she there? Who’d asked her to come?

    She was taken aback by his forgetfulness, and more so by his hostility. Marc could be stubborn and confrontational; over the decades, they’d argued as much as any couple. But this outburst was out of character. She chalked it up to nerves.

    Marc was a respected project manager in the pharmaceutical industry. He spent weekends on home improvement projects or immersed in his many hobbies: hiking, woodworking, 100-mile bike races.

    Marc, Julia (right), and their daughter take a selfie on the Golden Gate Bridge during a bike ride.

    Marc, Julia (right), and their daughter take a selfie on the Golden Gate Bridge during a bike ride.

    (Pierrat family)

    Julia was a business manager with Dole Packaged Foods. Their daughter was pursuing a doctorate at UCLA. The couple enjoyed life as empty nesters with shared passions for road trips and camping.

    For a year or two after the accident, nothing happened that couldn’t be dismissed as a normal midlife memory lapse or a cranky mood. But by late 2020, something had undeniably changed. The harsh parts of Marc’s personality ballooned to bizarre proportions, smothering his kindness, generosity and curiosity.

    He lost a phone charger and accused Julia’s mother of stealing it. He misplaced his binoculars and swore his sister took them. The neighbors asked the Pierrats to trim their gum trees and Marc flew into a rage, ranting about a supposed plot to spy on them.

    His work performance and exercise habits appeared unaffected, which only made his outbursts more confusing — and infuriating — to Julia.

    “At the beginning of the disease nobody knew he had any issue, other than he seemed like a total jerk,” she recalled.

    The Pierrats did not know they were at the start of a chaotic period distinct to sufferers of FTD’s behavioral variant.

    Julia Pierrat laughs as her husband as he squeezes by on a narrow bridge at the Foxfield Riding School in Lake Sherwood.

    Julia laughs as Marc he squeezes by on a narrow bridge at the Foxfield Riding School in Lake Sherwood.

    “Everything that can affect relationships is at the center of the presentation of the behavioral variant,” said Dr. Bruce Miller, director of the UC San Francisco Memory and Aging Center. “The first instinct of a spouse or a child or a human resource program or a psychiatrist [is to] assume a psychiatric problem.”

    People with the condition start to lash out at loved ones or lose interest in lifelong relationships. They may snarl at strangers or shoplift at the mall. They consume food or alcohol obsessively, touch people inappropriately or squander the family’s savings on weird purchases.

    And at first, just like in the Pierrats’ case, nobody understands why.

    “When someone is not who they were, think neurology before psychology,” said Sharon Hall, whose husband Rod — a devoted spouse who delighted in planning romantic surprises — was diagnosed in 2015 after he started drinking heavily and sending explicit texts to other women.

    At Julia’s insistence Marc visited his doctor in July 2021, who referred him to a neurologist. He would spend the next year making his way through a battery of appointments, scans and cognitive testing.

    In the meantime, his life disintegrated.

    Marc and Julia with their family dogs prior to his diagnosis with FTD.

    Marc and Julia with their family dogs prior to his diagnosis with FTD.

    (Pierrat family)

    Just a few years earlier, bosses and colleagues praised Marc as a superlative manager. In January 2022 he was put on notice for a host of causes: combative emails, obnoxious behavior, failures of organization.

    At home he botched routine fix-it jobs, missed crucial appointments and got lost on familiar routes. He stopped showering and called Julia appalling names. She went to therapy and contemplated divorce.

    Finally, on July 18, 2022, the couple sat across from a neurologist who delivered the diagnosis with all the delicacy of an uppercut.

    There was no cure, he told them, and few treatment options. He handed them a pamphlet. Marc showed no emotion.

    In the car Julia sobbed inconsolably as Marc sat silent in the passenger seat. Eventually she caught her breath and pulled out from the parking lot.

    Do you like being married?

    Yes, I do.

    Why?

    It makes me a better person.

    That’s so sweet. How do you think it makes you a better person?

    Being able to talk to you and, you know, resolve through different problems together. I mean, it’s good to have an extra mind.

    They left the neurologist with nothing: no instructions, no care plan, not even the stupid pamphlet, which was about memory problems in general. “It was diagnose and adios,” Julia said. “I hit the internet immediately.”

    Julia now had three different roles: her paid job, Marc’s 24-hour care, and a part-time occupation finding support, services and answers.

    Marc and Julia Pierrat order lunch at the Joi Cafe in Westlake.

    Marc tries to figure out what he would like for lunch as Julia offers suggestions at the Joi Cafe in Westlake.

    She insisted Marc fill the neurologist’s prescription for an anti-anxiety medication that diminished his irritability and agitation without zonking him out.

    She found an eldercare attorney, and together she and Marc organized their legal and financial affairs while he was still well enough to understand what he was signing. Through Facebook she found her most valuable lifeline, a twice-weekly Zoom support group for caregivers.

    She went on clinicaltrials.gov, a database of studies run by the U.S. National Institutes of Health, and FTDregistry.org, which lists trials specific to the disease, and signed the two of them up for every study they qualified for.

    Marc was accepted into AllFTD, a longitudinal study that is the largest ever conducted for this disease. The couple travels yearly to the University of Pennsylvania’s FTD Center for tests that track changes in his symptoms and biomarkers, with the goal of contributing to future therapies and preventive treatments.

    Marc Pierrat paints a bird house during an art class at Infinity Adult Day Health Care Center in Westlake Village.

    Marc paints a bird house during an art class at Infinity Adult Day Health Care Center in Westlake Village.

    She found the website of the nonprofit Assn. for Frontotemporal Degeneration. Eventually she became a volunteer AFTD ambassador, speaking and advocating for families affected by the disease. In August, she posed for a group photograph at the state capitol with Emma Heming Willis and other FTD advocates who traveled to Sacramento to meet with state lawmakers.

    All of it is a way of finding purpose in pain. FTD has dulled Marc’s emotional reactions, leaving Julia to carry the full weight of their grief.

    “He grasps the impact, but somehow the emotion is buffered,” she said. “I lose it sometimes. I cry my eyes out, for sure. I feel the full emotional impact of it, in slow motion. . . . There’s no blunting it for me.”

    Julia helps Marc up from a couch on the back patio of their home in Westlake.

    Julia helps Marc up from a couch on the back patio of their home in Westlake.

    These days the Pierrats rise around 6 a.m., eat the breakfast Julia prepares, and then Marc takes his first nap of the day (fatigue is a common FTD symptom). When he wakes around 9 a.m. Julia makes sure he uses the bathroom, and then drives him to a nearby adult daycare program where he does crafts and games until lunch. He sleeps for another few hours at home, spends two hours in the afternoon with a paid caregiver so that Julia can do errands or exercise, and then the couple eats dinner together before Marc beds down by 8 p.m.

    When they are awake together, they go for walks around the neighborhood or to familiar cafes or parks. The hostility of the early disease has passed. They speak tenderly to one another.

    At each sleep, Julia walks him upstairs to the bedroom they used to share. She tucks him in and gives him a kiss. At night she retires to a downstairs guestroom, because if they share a bed Marc will pat her constantly throughout the night to make sure she’s still there.

    My clock’s ticking. I could die any day.

    Do you feel like you’re going to die any day? Or do you feel healthy?

    I feel kind of healthy, but I’m still worried. Because I have something that I can’t control inside of me.

    About two years ago, Julia and Marc were on one of their daily walks when she realized they had already had their last conversation as the couple they once were, with both of them in full possession of their faculties. In one crucial sense, Marc was already gone.

    Julia Pierrat makes sure her husband Marc is comfortable for his afternoon nap at their home in Westlake.

    Julia makes sure Marc is comfortable for his afternoon nap at their home in Westlake.

    But in other ways, their connection remains.

    “The love that we have is still completely there,” she said recently in the couple’s backyard, while Marc napped upstairs.

    “When you’re married to someone and you’ve been with someone for so long, you almost have your own language between you. He and I still have that.”

    She looked out over the potted succulents and winding stone pathways they had spent so many weekends tending together.

    “A lot of our relationship is preserved in spite of it, which is just so interesting, [and] also makes it more heartbreaking,” she continued. “Because you know that if the disease plays out like it is expected to, you will just continue to slowly lose pieces.”

    The average life expectancy for people with Marc’s type of FTD is five to seven years after diagnosis. Some go much sooner, and others live several years longer.

    At the moment, all FTD variants lead to a similar end. Cognition and memory decline until language and self-care are no longer possible. The brain’s ability to regulate bodily functions, like swallowing and continence, erodes. Immobility sets in, and eventually, the heart beats for the last time.

    But until then, people keep living. They find reasons to keep going and ways to love one another. The Pierrats do, anyway.

    Marc and Julia Pierrat visit horses at the Foxfield Riding School in Lake Sherwood.

    Marc and Julia visit horses at the Foxfield Riding School in Lake Sherwood.

    On a recent morning, the couple strolled through a nearby equestrian school where their daughter once took lessons. Julia brought a baggie of rainbow carrot coins she’d sliced at home. She showed Marc how to feed the horses, as she does at every visit.

    “Hold your hand completely flat, like I’m doing,” she said gently.

    “I don’t want to lose a finger,” Marc said as a chestnut horse nuzzled his palm.

    “You’re not going to lose a finger,” Julia assured him. “I won’t let that happen to you.”

    Marc and Julia Pierrat walk hand-in-hand at the Foxfield Riding School in Lake Sherwood.

    Marc and Julia walk hand-in-hand after visiting horses at the Foxfield Riding School in Lake Sherwood.

    If you are concerned about a loved one with dementia or need support after a diagnosis, contact the Assn. for Frontotemporal Dementia helpline at theaftd.org/aftd-helpline or (866) 507-7222 Monday through Friday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. EST.

    Corinne Purtill

    Source link

  • AI company Anthropic to pay authors $1.5 billion over pirated books used to train chatbots

    Artificial intelligence company Anthropic has agreed to pay $1.5 billion to settle a class-action lawsuit by book authors who say the company took pirated copies of their works to train its chatbot.Related video above: The risks to children under President Trump’s new AI policyThe landmark settlement, if approved by a judge as soon as Monday, could mark a turning point in legal battles between AI companies and the writers, visual artists and other creative professionals who accuse them of copyright infringement.The company has agreed to pay authors or publishers about $3,000 for each of an estimated 500,000 books covered by the settlement.”As best as we can tell, it’s the largest copyright recovery ever,” said Justin Nelson, a lawyer for the authors. “It is the first of its kind in the AI era.”A trio of authors — thriller novelist Andrea Bartz and nonfiction writers Charles Graeber and Kirk Wallace Johnson — sued last year and now represent a broader group of writers and publishers whose books Anthropic downloaded to train its chatbot Claude.A federal judge dealt the case a mixed ruling in June, finding that training AI chatbots on copyrighted books wasn’t illegal but that Anthropic wrongfully acquired millions of books through pirate websites. If Anthropic had not settled, experts say losing the case after a scheduled December trial could have cost the San Francisco-based company even more money.”We were looking at a strong possibility of multiple billions of dollars, enough to potentially cripple or even put Anthropic out of business,” said William Long, a legal analyst for Wolters Kluwer.U.S. District Judge William Alsup of San Francisco has scheduled a Monday hearing to review the settlement terms.Anthropic said in a statement Friday that the settlement, if approved, “will resolve the plaintiffs’ remaining legacy claims.””We remain committed to developing safe AI systems that help people and organizations extend their capabilities, advance scientific discovery, and solve complex problems,” said Aparna Sridhar, the company’s deputy general counsel.As part of the settlement, the company has also agreed to destroy the original book files it downloaded.Books are known to be important sources of data — in essence, billions of words carefully strung together — that are needed to build the AI large language models behind chatbots like Anthropic’s Claude and its chief rival, OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Alsup’s June ruling found that Anthropic had downloaded more than 7 million digitized books that it “knew had been pirated.” It started with nearly 200,000 from an online library called Books3, assembled by AI researchers outside of OpenAI to match the vast collections on which ChatGPT was trained.Debut thriller novel “The Lost Night” by Bartz, a lead plaintiff in the case, was among those found in the dataset.Anthropic later took at least 5 million copies from the pirate website Library Genesis, or LibGen, and at least 2 million copies from the Pirate Library Mirror, Alsup wrote.The Authors Guild told its thousands of members last month that it expected “damages will be minimally $750 per work and could be much higher” if Anthropic was found at trial to have willfully infringed their copyrights. The settlement’s higher award — approximately $3,000 per work — likely reflects a smaller pool of affected books, after taking out duplicates and those without copyright. On Friday, Mary Rasenberger, CEO of the Authors Guild, called the settlement “an excellent result for authors, publishers, and rightsholders generally, sending a strong message to the AI industry that there are serious consequences when they pirate authors’ works to train their AI, robbing those least able to afford it.” The Danish Rights Alliance, which successfully fought to take down one of those shadow libraries, said Friday that the settlement would be of little help to European writers and publishers whose works aren’t registered with the U.S. Copyright Office.”On the one hand, it’s comforting to see that compiling AI training datasets by downloading millions of books from known illegal file-sharing sites comes at a price,” said Thomas Heldrup, the group’s head of content protection and enforcement.On the other hand, Heldrup said it fits a tech industry playbook to grow a business first and later pay a relatively small fine, compared to the size of the business, for breaking the rules.”It is my understanding that these companies see a settlement like the Anthropic one as a price of conducting business in a fiercely competitive space,” Heldrup said.The privately held Anthropic, founded by ex-OpenAI leaders in 2021, earlier this week put its value at $183 billion after raising another $13 billion in investments.Anthropic also said it expects to make $5 billion in sales this year, but, like OpenAI and many other AI startups, it has never reported making a profit, relying instead on investors to back the high costs of developing AI technology for the expectation of future payoffs.The settlement could influence other disputes, including an ongoing lawsuit by authors and newspapers against OpenAI and its business partner Microsoft, and cases against Meta and Midjourney. And just as the Anthropic settlement terms were filed, another group of authors sued Apple on Friday in the same San Francisco federal court.”This indicates that maybe for other cases, it’s possible for creators and AI companies to reach settlements without having to essentially go for broke in court,” said Long, the legal analyst.The industry, including Anthropic, had largely praised Alsup’s June ruling because he found that training AI systems on copyrighted works so chatbots can produce their own passages of text qualified as “fair use” under U.S. copyright law because it was “quintessentially transformative.”Comparing the AI model to “any reader aspiring to be a writer,” Alsup wrote that Anthropic “trained upon works not to race ahead and replicate or supplant them — but to turn a hard corner and create something different.”But documents disclosed in court showed Anthropic employees’ internal concerns about the legality of their use of pirate sites. The company later shifted its approach and hired Tom Turvey, the former Google executive in charge of Google Books, a searchable library of digitized books that successfully weathered years of copyright battles.With his help, Anthropic began buying books in bulk, tearing off the bindings and scanning each page before feeding the digitized versions into its AI model, according to court documents. That was legal but didn’t undo the earlier piracy, according to the judge.

    Artificial intelligence company Anthropic has agreed to pay $1.5 billion to settle a class-action lawsuit by book authors who say the company took pirated copies of their works to train its chatbot.

    Related video above: The risks to children under President Trump’s new AI policy

    The landmark settlement, if approved by a judge as soon as Monday, could mark a turning point in legal battles between AI companies and the writers, visual artists and other creative professionals who accuse them of copyright infringement.

    The company has agreed to pay authors or publishers about $3,000 for each of an estimated 500,000 books covered by the settlement.

    “As best as we can tell, it’s the largest copyright recovery ever,” said Justin Nelson, a lawyer for the authors. “It is the first of its kind in the AI era.”

    A trio of authors — thriller novelist Andrea Bartz and nonfiction writers Charles Graeber and Kirk Wallace Johnson — sued last year and now represent a broader group of writers and publishers whose books Anthropic downloaded to train its chatbot Claude.

    A federal judge dealt the case a mixed ruling in June, finding that training AI chatbots on copyrighted books wasn’t illegal but that Anthropic wrongfully acquired millions of books through pirate websites.

    If Anthropic had not settled, experts say losing the case after a scheduled December trial could have cost the San Francisco-based company even more money.

    “We were looking at a strong possibility of multiple billions of dollars, enough to potentially cripple or even put Anthropic out of business,” said William Long, a legal analyst for Wolters Kluwer.

    U.S. District Judge William Alsup of San Francisco has scheduled a Monday hearing to review the settlement terms.

    Anthropic said in a statement Friday that the settlement, if approved, “will resolve the plaintiffs’ remaining legacy claims.”

    “We remain committed to developing safe AI systems that help people and organizations extend their capabilities, advance scientific discovery, and solve complex problems,” said Aparna Sridhar, the company’s deputy general counsel.

    As part of the settlement, the company has also agreed to destroy the original book files it downloaded.

    Books are known to be important sources of data — in essence, billions of words carefully strung together — that are needed to build the AI large language models behind chatbots like Anthropic’s Claude and its chief rival, OpenAI’s ChatGPT.

    Alsup’s June ruling found that Anthropic had downloaded more than 7 million digitized books that it “knew had been pirated.” It started with nearly 200,000 from an online library called Books3, assembled by AI researchers outside of OpenAI to match the vast collections on which ChatGPT was trained.

    Debut thriller novel “The Lost Night” by Bartz, a lead plaintiff in the case, was among those found in the dataset.

    Anthropic later took at least 5 million copies from the pirate website Library Genesis, or LibGen, and at least 2 million copies from the Pirate Library Mirror, Alsup wrote.

    The Authors Guild told its thousands of members last month that it expected “damages will be minimally $750 per work and could be much higher” if Anthropic was found at trial to have willfully infringed their copyrights. The settlement’s higher award — approximately $3,000 per work — likely reflects a smaller pool of affected books, after taking out duplicates and those without copyright.

    On Friday, Mary Rasenberger, CEO of the Authors Guild, called the settlement “an excellent result for authors, publishers, and rightsholders generally, sending a strong message to the AI industry that there are serious consequences when they pirate authors’ works to train their AI, robbing those least able to afford it.”

    The Danish Rights Alliance, which successfully fought to take down one of those shadow libraries, said Friday that the settlement would be of little help to European writers and publishers whose works aren’t registered with the U.S. Copyright Office.

    “On the one hand, it’s comforting to see that compiling AI training datasets by downloading millions of books from known illegal file-sharing sites comes at a price,” said Thomas Heldrup, the group’s head of content protection and enforcement.

    On the other hand, Heldrup said it fits a tech industry playbook to grow a business first and later pay a relatively small fine, compared to the size of the business, for breaking the rules.

    “It is my understanding that these companies see a settlement like the Anthropic one as a price of conducting business in a fiercely competitive space,” Heldrup said.

    The privately held Anthropic, founded by ex-OpenAI leaders in 2021, earlier this week put its value at $183 billion after raising another $13 billion in investments.

    Anthropic also said it expects to make $5 billion in sales this year, but, like OpenAI and many other AI startups, it has never reported making a profit, relying instead on investors to back the high costs of developing AI technology for the expectation of future payoffs.

    The settlement could influence other disputes, including an ongoing lawsuit by authors and newspapers against OpenAI and its business partner Microsoft, and cases against Meta and Midjourney. And just as the Anthropic settlement terms were filed, another group of authors sued Apple on Friday in the same San Francisco federal court.

    “This indicates that maybe for other cases, it’s possible for creators and AI companies to reach settlements without having to essentially go for broke in court,” said Long, the legal analyst.

    The industry, including Anthropic, had largely praised Alsup’s June ruling because he found that training AI systems on copyrighted works so chatbots can produce their own passages of text qualified as “fair use” under U.S. copyright law because it was “quintessentially transformative.”

    Comparing the AI model to “any reader aspiring to be a writer,” Alsup wrote that Anthropic “trained upon works not to race ahead and replicate or supplant them — but to turn a hard corner and create something different.”

    But documents disclosed in court showed Anthropic employees’ internal concerns about the legality of their use of pirate sites. The company later shifted its approach and hired Tom Turvey, the former Google executive in charge of Google Books, a searchable library of digitized books that successfully weathered years of copyright battles.

    With his help, Anthropic began buying books in bulk, tearing off the bindings and scanning each page before feeding the digitized versions into its AI model, according to court documents. That was legal but didn’t undo the earlier piracy, according to the judge.

    Source link

  • Top immigration court rules judges can deny bond to millions of migrants

    A Trump administration policy to deny bond hearings to immigrants who entered the country without authorization was upheld by an immigration appellate board Friday, expanding mandatory detention to thousands of people already behind bars and potentially millions more nationwide.

    Although the policy is being challenged in federal court, the ruling by the Board of Immigration Appeals is likely to send an immediate chill through immigration courts where judges for decades have released individuals on bond whom they did not deem a flight risk or danger.

    Those judges are now bound by the board’s decision. Immigration courts are not part of the judicial branch but fall under the Department of Justice.

    Immigrant rights attorneys say holding immigrants throughout their cases — a process that can sometimes take years — is intended to break the spirit of many and force them to sign their own deportation orders.

    “This is an effort to increase the number of people in detention significantly,” said Niels W. Frenzen, director of the USC Gould School of Law Immigration Clinic, who is part of a team of attorneys who have filed habeas petitions for dozens of immigrants picked up during the summer raids in Los Angeles.

    “Literally millions of people are now subject to being held without bond,” he said.

    One of those is Ana Franco Galdamez, a mother of two U.S. citizens who has been in the country for two decades. She was getting treatment for breast cancer when she was arrested in a June 19 raid in Los Angeles County, where nearly 1 million undocumented immigrants reside, according to estimates.

    She was denied bond and missed treatment, but she was eventually released after a lawyer filed a habeas case.

    “Detention conditions are horrific, and they’ve gotten even worse,” Frenzen said. “The goal of the administration is to make it difficult for people to fight their cases and to give up.”

    Federal judges have ruled in several cases that denying bond violated federal statues and constitutionally protected due process. The group is now seeking to block the no-bond policy in a class-action lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Other lawsuits are also pending.

    The Trump administration introduced the no-bond policy nationally in a memo in July — paving the way for the mandatory detention of immigrants.

    The move came after Congress authorized expanding immigration detention and enforcement amid a crackdown inside courtrooms and at immigration check-ins.

    Immigrants, most of whom had been following the rules to adjust, maintain or gain legal status, were arrested and detained.

    For months now, those inside the immigration courts system have been pressed to implement Trump Administration policies. Judges have been fired, and the Pentagon has said it is identifying military lawyers and judges to temporarily sit on the bench.

    The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to a request for comment. The Executive Office for Immigration Review, which oversees the immigration courts, did not answer specific questions from The Times — but pointed out that the ruling was a precedent.

    “It strips judicial discretion in many cases,” said Claire Trickler-McNulty, a former senior official with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “It basically says, if you entered illegally, only ICE can decide if you get out of detention.”

    The Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision stems from the case of a Venezuelan immigrant who crossed the border in November 2022 near El Paso, Texas, and was later granted temporary protected status. That status expired on April 2 after the Trump administration terminated the program, a decision that is also tied up in litigation.

    The board determined that immigration judges had no authority to issue bonds because immigrants “who are present in the United States without admission … must be detained for the duration of their removal proceedings.”

    In other words, the board’s decision treats people who have been in the U.S. for years the same as newly arriving immigrants at the border, who can be quickly deported without bond.

    “We’ve had clients that are pregnant, we’ve had clients that are breastfeeding. We’ve had clients who have never been arrested, let alone commit, convicted of any crime ever, who’ve never missed an ICE check in — they’re all being told, ‘You’re subject to mandatory detention because of this new interpretation by the Trump administration,’” said Jordan Wells, an attorney with the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area. “This now solidifies that as the law of the land, unless and until [the] federal circuit court rules otherwise.”

    Rachel Uranga

    Source link

  • In a week of stumbles, Trump faces setbacks in court and abroad

    Facing viral rumors of his imminent death, President Trump emerged in the Oval Office on Tuesday alive and scowling. Core tenets of his economic policies were under strain. Flashy diplomatic overtures to Moscow appeared to be backfiring. And a scandal over a notorious sexual abuser that has fixated his base was roaring back to life in Washington.

    It was a challenging week for the president, whose aggressive approach to his second term has begun to hit significant roadblocks with the public and the courts, and overseas, with longstanding U.S. adversaries Trump once hoped to coax to his will.

    The president called for an expedited Supreme Court review of an appellate court ruling that he had exceeded his authority by issuing sweeping global tariffs last spring — a decision that, if left standing, could upend the foundation of his economic agenda. On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics issued jobs numbers showing a contraction of the labor market in July, a first since the depths of the pandemic in 2020.

    New art lining a hallway in the West Wing features photographs of Trump’s summit with Vladimir Putin in Alaska, where Trump said the Russian president had agreed to meet with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to discuss an end to the war. Yet, three weeks on, Russia had launched its most intense bombardment of Kyiv in years, and Putin traveled to Beijing for a military parade hosted by Xi Jinping, which Russian state media used to mock the U.S. president.

    During an appearance in the Oval Office on Friday afternoon, Trump said reaching a deal to end the war between Russia and Ukraine has turned out to be “a little bit more difficult” than he initially thought.

    And a rare spree of bipartisanship broke out on Capitol Hill — in opposition to Trump’s causes.

    A tense hearing at the Senate Finance Committee with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. laid bare concern over the direction of federal vaccination policy and public health recommendations under his leadership across party lines.

    Trump declined to stand behind him wholeheartedly after the hearing. “He’s got some little different ideas,” Trump told reporters, adding: “It’s not your standard talk.”

    On Wednesday, moments after a group of more than 100 women pleaded for Trump’s help from the steps of the Capitol seeking transparency over the investigation of their alleged abuser, Jeffrey Epstein, Trump dismissed the matter as a “hoax” perpetrated by Democrats.

    “The Department of Justice has done its job, they have given everything requested of them,” Trump repeated on Truth Social on Friday. “It’s time to end the Democrat Epstein Hoax.”

    Trump was close friends with Epstein for more than a decade. But his base has repeatedly called for the release of thousands of files in his case — and some of Trump’s staunchest allies in Congress are set to vote against his wishes for a discharge petition directing the Justice Department to do so in the coming days.

    A far-right political activist released hidden camera footage this week of a Justice Department official claiming the agency would redact the names of Republicans, but not Democrats, identified in the files. In the video, the DOJ official also suggested that Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell was recently moved to a lower-security prison as part of a deal to keep her quiet.

    Public support for Trump has appeared stable since July, with roughly 42% of Americans approving of his job performance across a series of high quality polls. But the end of the August recess in Washington — and the oncoming flu and COVID-19 season — could return public attention to subjects that have proved politically perilous for the president this week.

    Polls show that a majority of the president’s Republican voters support vaccines. They oppose Putin and increasingly support Ukraine. And across the political spectrum, Americans want the Epstein files released, unredacted and in full.

    A string of court losses

    The president’s agenda suffered several setbacks this week, as federal judges across the country ruled his administration had broken the law in various instances.

    In San Francisco, a federal judge ruled that Trump’s deployment of military troops in Los Angeles was illegal and barred soldiers from aiding immigration arrests in California in an order set to take effect next week.

    In Boston, a federal judge said the Trump administration broke the law when it froze billions of dollars in research funds awarded to Harvard University. In another court ruling, a judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from deporting dozens of unaccompanied migrant children to Guatemala.

    And on Friday afternoon, a federal judge stopped the Trump administration from taking away the deportation protections under Temporary Protected Status for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans and Haitians living in the United States.

    While the court decisions represent a snag for key portions of the administration’s agenda, the cases continue to play out in court — and could ultimately turn in favor of Trump.

    Legal experts are closely watching those decisions. In the case of the military troop deployments, for instance, some fear a reversal on appeal could ultimately hand the president broader power to send troops to American cities.

    Trump has floated additional federal deployments — to Chicago, Baltimore and New Orleans — in recent days.

    Trump reacts to a bad week

    Trump greeted the waves of bad news with a characteristic mix of deflection, finger-pointing and anger.

    He warned that losing his appeal on tariff policy at the Supreme Court would render the United States a “third world country,” telling reporters, “if we don’t win that case, our country is going to suffer so greatly.” And he said he was “very disappointed” in Putin.

    After the parade in Beijing — which was also attended by Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India, a longstanding U.S. ally now ostracized by Trump’s tariffs — drew widespread media attention, Trump wrote on social media that the countries were conspiring together against the United States.

    “We’ve lost India and Russia to deepest, darkest, China,” he wrote.

    In another lengthy social media post on Friday, Trump accused Democrats of fueling the Epstein “hoax” as a means to “distract from the great success of a Republican President.”

    Days earlier, survivors of Epstein’s sexual abuse publicly pressured lawmakers to back a legislative measure to force the release of the sex trafficking investigation into the late financier.

    “This is about ending secrecy wherever abuse of power takes root,” said Anouska De Georgiou, who was among the Epstein victims who held a news conference on Capitol Hill.

    A few high-profile Republicans also broke with Trump on the Epstein issue, calling for more transparency on the investigation. Trump ally Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia said she is willing to expose those who are tied to Epstein’s sex trafficking case.

    On a phone call with Trump on Wednesday morning, Greene suggested he meet with Epstein’s victims at the White House while they were gathered in town. He was noncommittal, the congresswoman told reporters.

    The survivors left town without a meeting. At the direction of the White House, Republican leadership continues to press Republican members to oppose efforts to release the files.

    Michael Wilner, Ana Ceballos

    Source link

  • Judge rules Utah’s congressional map must be redrawn for the 2026 elections

    The Utah Legislature will need to rapidly redraw the state’s congressional boundaries after a judge ruled Monday that the Republican-controlled body circumvented safeguards put in place by voters to ensure districts aren’t drawn to favor any party.Related video above — Get the Facts: Redistricting or Gerrymandering? The current map, drawn in 2021, divides Salt Lake County — the state’s population center and a Democratic stronghold — among the state’s four congressional districts, all of which have since elected Republicans by wide margins.District Court Judge Dianna Gibson made few judgments on the content of the map but declared it unlawful because lawmakers had weakened and ignored an independent commission established by voters to prevent partisan gerrymandering. The nature of the violation lies in “the Legislature’s refusal to respect the people’s exercise of their constitutional lawmaking power and to honor the people’s right to reform their government,” Gibson said in her ruling.New maps will need to be drawn quickly for the 2026 midterm elections. Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson, the state’s top elections official, asked the courts for the case to be finalized by November to leave time for the process before candidates start filing in early January. But appeals promised by Republican lawmakers could help them run out the clock to possibly delay adopting new maps until 2028.The ruling creates uncertainty in a state that was thought to be a clean sweep for the GOP as the party is preparing to defend its slim majority in the U.S. House. Nationally, Democrats need to net three seats next year to take control of the chamber. The sitting president’s party tends to lose seats in the midterms, as was the case for President Donald Trump in 2018.Trump has urged several Republican-led states to add winnable seats for the GOP. In Texas, a plan awaiting Gov. Greg Abbott’s approval includes five new districts that would favor Republicans. Ohio Republicans already were scheduled to revise their maps to make them more partisan, and Indiana, Florida and Missouri may choose to make changes. Some Democrat-led states say they may enter the redistricting battle, but so far only California has taken action to offset GOP gains in Texas.

    The Utah Legislature will need to rapidly redraw the state’s congressional boundaries after a judge ruled Monday that the Republican-controlled body circumvented safeguards put in place by voters to ensure districts aren’t drawn to favor any party.

    Related video above — Get the Facts: Redistricting or Gerrymandering?

    The current map, drawn in 2021, divides Salt Lake County — the state’s population center and a Democratic stronghold — among the state’s four congressional districts, all of which have since elected Republicans by wide margins.

    District Court Judge Dianna Gibson made few judgments on the content of the map but declared it unlawful because lawmakers had weakened and ignored an independent commission established by voters to prevent partisan gerrymandering. The nature of the violation lies in “the Legislature’s refusal to respect the people’s exercise of their constitutional lawmaking power and to honor the people’s right to reform their government,” Gibson said in her ruling.

    New maps will need to be drawn quickly for the 2026 midterm elections. Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson, the state’s top elections official, asked the courts for the case to be finalized by November to leave time for the process before candidates start filing in early January. But appeals promised by Republican lawmakers could help them run out the clock to possibly delay adopting new maps until 2028.

    The ruling creates uncertainty in a state that was thought to be a clean sweep for the GOP as the party is preparing to defend its slim majority in the U.S. House. Nationally, Democrats need to net three seats next year to take control of the chamber. The sitting president’s party tends to lose seats in the midterms, as was the case for President Donald Trump in 2018.

    Trump has urged several Republican-led states to add winnable seats for the GOP. In Texas, a plan awaiting Gov. Greg Abbott’s approval includes five new districts that would favor Republicans. Ohio Republicans already were scheduled to revise their maps to make them more partisan, and Indiana, Florida and Missouri may choose to make changes. Some Democrat-led states say they may enter the redistricting battle, but so far only California has taken action to offset GOP gains in Texas.

    Source link

  • Florida man’s arrest wiped from record after AI software leads police to wrong suspect

    A wrongful arrest has now been wiped from a Lee County man’s record. Gulf Coast News first exposed the injustice months ago. The arrest happened after artificial intelligence facial recognition led police to the wrong suspect. “They say in life, everything happens for a reason. I can’t for the life of me figure out this one,” Robert Dillon, the man wrongfully arrested, told Gulf Coast News earlier this year. ‘How did this happen?’ One year ago, right outside his home in San Carlos Park, Dillon was arrested for a crime he never committed. His stunned reaction was captured on the body camera of the deputy who’d knocked on his door. “I’m thinking, ‘How in the hell did this happen. How did this happen?’” Dillon recalled. Dillon was accused of trying to lure a child at a fast-food restaurant more than 300 miles away in Jacksonville Beach. Investigators there submitted restaurant surveillance photos of the suspect to an AI-assisted facial recognition program, which identified Dillon as a 93% match. Beyond that, and a witness who picked his photo out of a lineup, there was no evidence tying him to it.As Dillon first explained months ago, he’s never been to Jacksonville Beach. “Out of the blue. They pick some guy that lives six and a half hours away and says, ‘This is you.’ It blew my mind,” Dillon said earlier this year. Case dropped, arrest wiped from recordOnce Dillon and his attorney provided evidence to show that he did not commit the crime, the state attorney’s office in Jacksonville dropped the case.When Gulf Coast News first reported on it, a spokesman for the state attorney’s office said they were submitting paperwork to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement for the case to be stricken from Dillon’s record. Now, the spokesman confirmed Dillon is no longer in their system. His arrest mugshot — and his case file — are nowhere to be found online. Not the first time…”This is a technology that’s really dangerous, because it often gets it wrong. But police often treat it like it has to be right,” Nate Wessler said of facial recognition programs. Wessler is an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union. He focuses on government and police use of new technology, like the facial recognition in Dillon’s case. “Now that we know about it, we want to dig deeper,” Wessler said of the case. “This is a real miscarriage of justice. And it’s the latest in a series of wrongful arrests we know of around the country after police relied on incorrect results from face recognition technology.” In 2020, Robert Williams was wrongfully arrested in front of his home by Detroit police. His wife and two daughters watched it happen. “I can’t really put it into words. It was one of the most shocking things I’ve ever had happen to me,” Williams said in an interview with the ACLU after his arrest. A surveillance photo of a man stealing from a watch store was run through face recognition technology by investigators and identified Williams — who was nowhere near the store at time — as a possible match. Wessler was part of the legal team that sued the city of Detroit on Williams’ behalf. “The way to avoid this kind of travesty of justice is to either take this technology out of the hands of police, or lock it down really seriously with a set of policies and restrictions,” Wessler said. Detroit PD changes policy after wrongful arrestWilliams’ lawsuit led to a settlement, which included not only a payout for him but also sparked a policy change within the Detroit PD. In Williams’ case, much like Robert Dillon’s, police relied on two pieces of evidence: the face recognition match and someone picking his photo out of a lineup. Now, in Detroit, more evidence is required to make an arrest. “When you go straight from a face recognition result right to a photo lineup, there’s a high, high likelihood of tainting the reliability of that lineup,” Wessler explained. “You’re going to populate it with an innocent lookalike, plus five people who don’t look much like the suspect. And now you’ve just created this totally suggestible situation, where even a well-meaning witness is going to be tricked.”Months later, Dillon still hopes to get justiceRobert Dillon is relieved the arrest is off his record, but he wants to file a lawsuit to fight back against the injustice. After all, he said he can never get back the sleepless nights wondering if he’d serve time for a crime he never committed. “You cannot wrongfully imprison somebody. No matter who you are. Everybody’s got rights,” Dillon said. Gulf Coast News reached out to the Jacksonville Beach Police Department again, but they still refuse to answer any questions about their investigation.

    A wrongful arrest has now been wiped from a Lee County man’s record.

    Gulf Coast News first exposed the injustice months ago.

    The arrest happened after artificial intelligence facial recognition led police to the wrong suspect.

    “They say in life, everything happens for a reason. I can’t for the life of me figure out this one,” Robert Dillon, the man wrongfully arrested, told Gulf Coast News earlier this year.

    ‘How did this happen?’

    One year ago, right outside his home in San Carlos Park, Dillon was arrested for a crime he never committed. His stunned reaction was captured on the body camera of the deputy who’d knocked on his door.

    “I’m thinking, ‘How in the hell did this happen. How did this happen?’” Dillon recalled.

    Dillon was accused of trying to lure a child at a fast-food restaurant more than 300 miles away in Jacksonville Beach.

    Investigators there submitted restaurant surveillance photos of the suspect to an AI-assisted facial recognition program, which identified Dillon as a 93% match.

    Beyond that, and a witness who picked his photo out of a lineup, there was no evidence tying him to it.

    As Dillon first explained months ago, he’s never been to Jacksonville Beach.

    “Out of the blue. They pick some guy that lives six and a half hours away and says, ‘This is you.’ It blew my mind,” Dillon said earlier this year.

    Case dropped, arrest wiped from record

    Once Dillon and his attorney provided evidence to show that he did not commit the crime, the state attorney’s office in Jacksonville dropped the case.

    When Gulf Coast News first reported on it, a spokesman for the state attorney’s office said they were submitting paperwork to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement for the case to be stricken from Dillon’s record.

    Now, the spokesman confirmed Dillon is no longer in their system. His arrest mugshot — and his case file — are nowhere to be found online.

    Not the first time…

    “This is a technology that’s really dangerous, because it often gets it wrong. But police often treat it like it has to be right,” Nate Wessler said of facial recognition programs.

    Wessler is an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union. He focuses on government and police use of new technology, like the facial recognition in Dillon’s case.

    “Now that we know about it, we want to dig deeper,” Wessler said of the case. “This is a real miscarriage of justice. And it’s the latest in a series of wrongful arrests we know of around the country after police relied on incorrect results from face recognition technology.”

    In 2020, Robert Williams was wrongfully arrested in front of his home by Detroit police. His wife and two daughters watched it happen.

    “I can’t really put it into words. It was one of the most shocking things I’ve ever had happen to me,” Williams said in an interview with the ACLU after his arrest.

    A surveillance photo of a man stealing from a watch store was run through face recognition technology by investigators and identified Williams — who was nowhere near the store at time — as a possible match.

    Wessler was part of the legal team that sued the city of Detroit on Williams’ behalf.

    “The way to avoid this kind of travesty of justice is to either take this technology out of the hands of police, or lock it down really seriously with a set of policies and restrictions,” Wessler said.

    Detroit PD changes policy after wrongful arrest

    Williams’ lawsuit led to a settlement, which included not only a payout for him but also sparked a policy change within the Detroit PD.

    In Williams’ case, much like Robert Dillon’s, police relied on two pieces of evidence: the face recognition match and someone picking his photo out of a lineup.

    Now, in Detroit, more evidence is required to make an arrest.

    “When you go straight from a face recognition result right to a photo lineup, there’s a high, high likelihood of tainting the reliability of that lineup,” Wessler explained. “You’re going to populate it with an innocent lookalike, plus five people who don’t look much like the suspect. And now you’ve just created this totally suggestible situation, where even a well-meaning witness is going to be tricked.”

    Months later, Dillon still hopes to get justice

    Robert Dillon is relieved the arrest is off his record, but he wants to file a lawsuit to fight back against the injustice.

    After all, he said he can never get back the sleepless nights wondering if he’d serve time for a crime he never committed.

    “You cannot wrongfully imprison somebody. No matter who you are. Everybody’s got rights,” Dillon said.

    Gulf Coast News reached out to the Jacksonville Beach Police Department again, but they still refuse to answer any questions about their investigation.

    Source link

  • US seeks to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Uganda after he refuses plea offer

    Immigration officials said they intend to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Uganda, after he declined an offer to be deported to Costa Rica in exchange for remaining in jail and pleading guilty to human smuggling charges, according to a Saturday court filing.The Costa Rica offer came late Thursday, after it was clear that the Salvadoran national would likely be released from a Tennessee jail the following day. Abrego Garcia declined to extend his stay in jail and was released on Friday to await trial in Maryland with his family. Later that day, the Department of Homeland Security notified his attorneys that he would be deported to Uganda and should report to immigration authorities on Monday.His attorneys declined to comment on whether the plea offer had been formally rescinded. The brief they filed only said that Abrego Garcia had declined one part of the offer — to remain in jail — and that his attorneys would “communicate the government’s proposal to Mr. Abrego.”Abrego Garcia’s case became a flashpoint in President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda after he was mistakenly deported in March. Facing a court order, the Trump administration brought him back to the U.S. in June, only to detain him on human smuggling charges.He has pleaded not guilty and has asked the judge to dismiss the case, claiming that it is an attempt to punish him for challenging his deportation to El Salvador. The Saturday filing came as a supplement to that motion to dismiss, stating that the threat to deport him to Uganda is more proof that the prosecution is vindictive.“The government immediately responded to Mr. Abrego’s release with outrage,” the filing reads. “Despite having requested and received assurances from the government of Costa Rica that Mr. Abrego would be accepted there, within minutes of his release from pretrial custody, an ICE representative informed Mr. Abrego’s counsel that the government intended to deport Mr. Abrego to Uganda and ordered him to report to ICE’s Baltimore Field Office Monday morning.”Although Abrego Garcia was deemed eligible for pretrial release, he had remained in jail at the request of his attorneys, who feared the Republican administration could try to immediately deport him again if he were freed. Those fears were somewhat allayed by a recent ruling in a separate case in Maryland, which requires immigration officials to allow Abrego Garcia time to mount a defense.

    Immigration officials said they intend to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Uganda, after he declined an offer to be deported to Costa Rica in exchange for remaining in jail and pleading guilty to human smuggling charges, according to a Saturday court filing.

    The Costa Rica offer came late Thursday, after it was clear that the Salvadoran national would likely be released from a Tennessee jail the following day. Abrego Garcia declined to extend his stay in jail and was released on Friday to await trial in Maryland with his family. Later that day, the Department of Homeland Security notified his attorneys that he would be deported to Uganda and should report to immigration authorities on Monday.

    His attorneys declined to comment on whether the plea offer had been formally rescinded. The brief they filed only said that Abrego Garcia had declined one part of the offer — to remain in jail — and that his attorneys would “communicate the government’s proposal to Mr. Abrego.”

    Abrego Garcia’s case became a flashpoint in President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda after he was mistakenly deported in March. Facing a court order, the Trump administration brought him back to the U.S. in June, only to detain him on human smuggling charges.

    He has pleaded not guilty and has asked the judge to dismiss the case, claiming that it is an attempt to punish him for challenging his deportation to El Salvador. The Saturday filing came as a supplement to that motion to dismiss, stating that the threat to deport him to Uganda is more proof that the prosecution is vindictive.

    “The government immediately responded to Mr. Abrego’s release with outrage,” the filing reads. “Despite having requested and received assurances from the government of Costa Rica that Mr. Abrego would be accepted there, within minutes of his release from pretrial custody, an ICE representative informed Mr. Abrego’s counsel that the government intended to deport Mr. Abrego to Uganda and ordered him to report to ICE’s Baltimore Field Office Monday morning.”

    Although Abrego Garcia was deemed eligible for pretrial release, he had remained in jail at the request of his attorneys, who feared the Republican administration could try to immediately deport him again if he were freed. Those fears were somewhat allayed by a recent ruling in a separate case in Maryland, which requires immigration officials to allow Abrego Garcia time to mount a defense.

    Source link

  • Board denies parole for Erik Menendez despite reduced sentence for his parents’ 1989 murders

    Erik Menendez was denied parole Thursday after serving decades in prison for murdering his parents with his older brother in 1989.A panel of California commissioners denied Menendez parole for three years, after which he will be eligible again, in a case that continues to fascinate the public. A parole hearing for his brother Lyle Menendez, who is being held at the same prison in San Diego, is scheduled for Friday morning.The two commissioners determined that Menendez should not be freed after an all-day hearing during which they questioned him about why he committed the crime and violated prison rules.The brothers became eligible for parole after a judge reduced their sentences in May from life without parole to 50 years to life.The parole hearings marked the closest they’ve been to winning freedom from prison since their convictions almost 30 years ago for murdering their parents.The brothers were sentenced to life in prison in 1996 for fatally shooting their father, Jose Menendez, and mother, Kitty Menendez, in their Beverly Hills mansion in 1989. While defense attorneys argued that the brothers acted out of self-defense after years of sexual abuse by their father, prosecutors said the brothers sought a multimillion-dollar inheritance.A judge reduced their sentences in May, and they became immediately eligible for parole.Erik Menendez made his case to two parole commissioners, offering his most detailed account in years of how he was raised, why he made the choices he did, and how he transformed in prison. He noted the hearing fell almost exactly 36 years after he killed his parents — on Aug. 20, 1989.”Today is August 21st. Today is the day that all of my victims learned my parents were dead. So today is the anniversary of their trauma journey,” he said, referring to his family members.The state corrections department chose a single reporter to watch the videoconference and share details with the rest of the press.Erik Menendez’s prison recordMenendez, gray-haired and spectacled, sat in front of a computer screen wearing a blue T-shirt over a white long-sleeve shirt in a photo shared by officials.The panel of commissioners scrutinized every rules violation and fight on his lengthy prison record, including allegations that he worked with a prison gang, bought drugs, used cellphones and helped with a tax scam.He told commissioners that since he had no hope of ever getting out then, he prioritized protecting himself over following the rules. Then last fall, LA prosecutors asked a judge to resentence him and his brother — opening the door to parole.”In November of 2024, now the consequences mattered,” Menendez said. “Now the consequences meant I was destroying my life.”A particular sticking point for the commissioners was his use of cellphones.”What I got in terms of the phone and my connection with the outside world was far greater than the consequences of me getting caught with the phone,” Menendez said.The board also brought up his earliest encounters with the law, when he committed two burglaries in high school.”I was not raised with a moral foundation,” he said. “I was raised to lie, to cheat, to steal in the sense, an abstract way.”The panel asked about details like why he used a fake ID to purchase the guns he and Lyle Menendez used to kill their parents, who acted first and why they killed their mother if their father was the main abuser.Commissioner Robert Barton asked: “You do see that there were other choices at that point?””When I look back at the person I was then and what I believed about the world and my parents, running away was inconceivable,” Menendez said. “Running away meant death.”His transformation behind barsErik Menendez’s parole attorney, Heidi Rummel, emphasized 2013 as the turning point for her client.”He found his faith. He became accountable to his higher power. He found sobriety and made a promise to his mother on her birthday,” Rummel said. “Has he been perfect since 2013? No. But he has been remarkable.”Commissioner Rachel Stern also applauded him for starting a group to take care of older and disabled inmates.Since the brothers reunited, they have been “serious accountability partners” for each other. At the same time, he said he’s become better at setting boundaries with Lyle Menendez, and they tend to do different programming.More than a dozen of their relatives, who have advocated for the brothers’ release for months, delivered emotional statements at Thursday’s hearing via videoconference.”Seeing my crimes through my family’s eyes has been a huge part of my evolution and my growth,” Menendez said. “Just seeing the pain and the suffering. Understanding the magnitude of what I’ve done, the generational impact.”His aunt Teresita Menendez-Baralt, who is Jose Menendez’s sister, said she has fully forgiven him. She noted that she is dying from Stage 4 cancer and wishes to welcome him into her home.”Erik carries himself with kindness, integrity and strength that comes from patience and grace,” she said.One relative promised to the parole board that she would house him in Colorado, where he can spend time with his family and enjoying nature.The board brushed off prosecutor’s questionsLA County District Attorney Nathan Hochman said ahead of the parole hearings that he opposes parole for the brothers because of their lack of insight, comparing them to Sirhan Sirhan, who assassinated presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom denied him parole in January 2022 because of his “deficient insight.”During the hearing, LA prosecutor Habib Balian asked Menendez about his and his brothers’ attempts to ask witnesses to lie in court on their behalf, and if the brothers staged the killings as a mafia hit. Commissioners largely dismissed the questions, saying they were not retrying the case.In closing statements, Balian questioned whether Menendez was “truly reformed” or saying what commissioners wanted to hear.”When one continues to diminish their responsibility for a crime and continues to make the same false excuses that they’ve made for 30-plus years, one is still that same dangerous person that they were when they shotgunned their parents,” Balian said.What happens nextLyle Menendez is set to appear over videoconference Friday for his parole hearing from the same prison in San Diego.The case has captured the attention of true crime enthusiasts for decades and spawned documentaries, television specials and dramatizations. The Netflix drama ” Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story ” and a documentary released in 2024 have been credited for bringing new attention to the brothers.Greater recognition of the brothers as victims of sexual abuse has also helped mobilize support for their release. Some supporters have flown to Los Angeles to hold rallies and attend court hearings.

    Erik Menendez was denied parole Thursday after serving decades in prison for murdering his parents with his older brother in 1989.

    A panel of California commissioners denied Menendez parole for three years, after which he will be eligible again, in a case that continues to fascinate the public. A parole hearing for his brother Lyle Menendez, who is being held at the same prison in San Diego, is scheduled for Friday morning.

    The two commissioners determined that Menendez should not be freed after an all-day hearing during which they questioned him about why he committed the crime and violated prison rules.

    The brothers became eligible for parole after a judge reduced their sentences in May from life without parole to 50 years to life.

    The parole hearings marked the closest they’ve been to winning freedom from prison since their convictions almost 30 years ago for murdering their parents.

    The brothers were sentenced to life in prison in 1996 for fatally shooting their father, Jose Menendez, and mother, Kitty Menendez, in their Beverly Hills mansion in 1989. While defense attorneys argued that the brothers acted out of self-defense after years of sexual abuse by their father, prosecutors said the brothers sought a multimillion-dollar inheritance.

    A judge reduced their sentences in May, and they became immediately eligible for parole.

    Erik Menendez made his case to two parole commissioners, offering his most detailed account in years of how he was raised, why he made the choices he did, and how he transformed in prison. He noted the hearing fell almost exactly 36 years after he killed his parents — on Aug. 20, 1989.

    “Today is August 21st. Today is the day that all of my victims learned my parents were dead. So today is the anniversary of their trauma journey,” he said, referring to his family members.

    The state corrections department chose a single reporter to watch the videoconference and share details with the rest of the press.

    Erik Menendez’s prison record

    Menendez, gray-haired and spectacled, sat in front of a computer screen wearing a blue T-shirt over a white long-sleeve shirt in a photo shared by officials.

    The panel of commissioners scrutinized every rules violation and fight on his lengthy prison record, including allegations that he worked with a prison gang, bought drugs, used cellphones and helped with a tax scam.

    He told commissioners that since he had no hope of ever getting out then, he prioritized protecting himself over following the rules. Then last fall, LA prosecutors asked a judge to resentence him and his brother — opening the door to parole.

    “In November of 2024, now the consequences mattered,” Menendez said. “Now the consequences meant I was destroying my life.”

    A particular sticking point for the commissioners was his use of cellphones.

    “What I got in terms of the phone and my connection with the outside world was far greater than the consequences of me getting caught with the phone,” Menendez said.

    The board also brought up his earliest encounters with the law, when he committed two burglaries in high school.

    “I was not raised with a moral foundation,” he said. “I was raised to lie, to cheat, to steal in the sense, an abstract way.”

    The panel asked about details like why he used a fake ID to purchase the guns he and Lyle Menendez used to kill their parents, who acted first and why they killed their mother if their father was the main abuser.

    Commissioner Robert Barton asked: “You do see that there were other choices at that point?”

    “When I look back at the person I was then and what I believed about the world and my parents, running away was inconceivable,” Menendez said. “Running away meant death.”

    His transformation behind bars

    Erik Menendez’s parole attorney, Heidi Rummel, emphasized 2013 as the turning point for her client.

    “He found his faith. He became accountable to his higher power. He found sobriety and made a promise to his mother on her birthday,” Rummel said. “Has he been perfect since 2013? No. But he has been remarkable.”

    Commissioner Rachel Stern also applauded him for starting a group to take care of older and disabled inmates.

    Since the brothers reunited, they have been “serious accountability partners” for each other. At the same time, he said he’s become better at setting boundaries with Lyle Menendez, and they tend to do different programming.

    More than a dozen of their relatives, who have advocated for the brothers’ release for months, delivered emotional statements at Thursday’s hearing via videoconference.

    “Seeing my crimes through my family’s eyes has been a huge part of my evolution and my growth,” Menendez said. “Just seeing the pain and the suffering. Understanding the magnitude of what I’ve done, the generational impact.”

    His aunt Teresita Menendez-Baralt, who is Jose Menendez’s sister, said she has fully forgiven him. She noted that she is dying from Stage 4 cancer and wishes to welcome him into her home.

    “Erik carries himself with kindness, integrity and strength that comes from patience and grace,” she said.

    One relative promised to the parole board that she would house him in Colorado, where he can spend time with his family and enjoying nature.

    The board brushed off prosecutor’s questions

    LA County District Attorney Nathan Hochman said ahead of the parole hearings that he opposes parole for the brothers because of their lack of insight, comparing them to Sirhan Sirhan, who assassinated presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom denied him parole in January 2022 because of his “deficient insight.”

    During the hearing, LA prosecutor Habib Balian asked Menendez about his and his brothers’ attempts to ask witnesses to lie in court on their behalf, and if the brothers staged the killings as a mafia hit. Commissioners largely dismissed the questions, saying they were not retrying the case.

    In closing statements, Balian questioned whether Menendez was “truly reformed” or saying what commissioners wanted to hear.

    “When one continues to diminish their responsibility for a crime and continues to make the same false excuses that they’ve made for 30-plus years, one is still that same dangerous person that they were when they shotgunned their parents,” Balian said.

    What happens next

    Lyle Menendez is set to appear over videoconference Friday for his parole hearing from the same prison in San Diego.

    The case has captured the attention of true crime enthusiasts for decades and spawned documentaries, television specials and dramatizations. The Netflix drama ” Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story ” and a documentary released in 2024 have been credited for bringing new attention to the brothers.

    Greater recognition of the brothers as victims of sexual abuse has also helped mobilize support for their release. Some supporters have flown to Los Angeles to hold rallies and attend court hearings.

    Source link

  • Toddler found in filth near woods; neighbors say it’s happened before

    A woman has been arrested and charged with felony child neglect after Cocoa police said a child in her care was found wandering the streets in a soiled diaper.Trimeka Dixon, 45, was taken into custody Tuesday.Police responded to the neighborhood near London Boulevard and Robin Hood Drive after a witness called 911 to report a 3-year-old child walking alone in the roadway wearing only a diaper, according to an arrest affidavit. Another neighbor told police he had seen the same child walking in the road unsupervised on three previous occasions.”But they only contacted us the week prior,” Cocoa police spokesperson Yvonne Martinez said. “We got DCF involved in it. It happened again, and we responded on Tuesday. That’s when they decided to arrest the guardian.”Once officers contacted Dixon, they determined the child had been left unsupervised for more than an hour and a half. Dixon told police someone else was supposed to be watching the child.”Nobody was there. Nobody was home,” Martinez said. “When we responded, the neighbors were out there with the child. Our officers went in and searched the home for a family member or someone who was watching the child, and there was nobody around.”Martinez said the case appeared to show a pattern of neglect.The child is now staying with other family members. Police are urging residents to report suspected neglect or abuse.”You don’t know what could have happened to that child,” Martinez said. “That’s a very dangerous situation — happening once is bad enough, but for it to happen as many times as they say it did? That child is lucky not to have been seriously injured, kidnapped or worse.”The Florida Department of Children and Families confirmed it has an open case and said a representative is working to provide a report.We attempted to reach Dixon at her home for comment. A family member said she had nothing to say.

    A woman has been arrested and charged with felony child neglect after Cocoa police said a child in her care was found wandering the streets in a soiled diaper.

    Trimeka Dixon, 45, was taken into custody Tuesday.

    Police responded to the neighborhood near London Boulevard and Robin Hood Drive after a witness called 911 to report a 3-year-old child walking alone in the roadway wearing only a diaper, according to an arrest affidavit. Another neighbor told police he had seen the same child walking in the road unsupervised on three previous occasions.

    “But they only contacted us the week prior,” Cocoa police spokesperson Yvonne Martinez said. “We got DCF involved in it. It happened again, and we responded on Tuesday. That’s when they decided to arrest the guardian.”

    Once officers contacted Dixon, they determined the child had been left unsupervised for more than an hour and a half. Dixon told police someone else was supposed to be watching the child.

    “Nobody was there. Nobody was home,” Martinez said. “When we responded, the neighbors were out there with the child. Our officers went in and searched the home for a family member or someone who was watching the child, and there was nobody around.”

    Martinez said the case appeared to show a pattern of neglect.

    The child is now staying with other family members. Police are urging residents to report suspected neglect or abuse.

    “You don’t know what could have happened to that child,” Martinez said. “That’s a very dangerous situation — happening once is bad enough, but for it to happen as many times as they say it did? That child is lucky not to have been seriously injured, kidnapped or worse.”

    The Florida Department of Children and Families confirmed it has an open case and said a representative is working to provide a report.

    We attempted to reach Dixon at her home for comment. A family member said she had nothing to say.

    Source link

  • Trump officials are reopening old immigration cases, even for dead people. ‘They don’t do their homework,’ lawyers say

    A decade ago, Jesus Adan Rico breathed a big sigh of relief. That was when the Chino High School student, a Dreamer, learned an immigration judge had effectively shelved his deportation proceedings. Maria Torres, who came to the U.S. at 2 years old, also had her deportation proceedings paused by an immigration judge because she recently married a U.S. citizen.

    Yet just eight weeks ago, Adan Rico — now 29, married with a new child — discovered that the Trump administration had revived his deportation case, even though he has renewed his DACA status at least four times. Torres learned the government wants to bring back her case just as she was preparing for her green card interview.

    “No matter what we do, no matter how far we go in school, in our jobs and with our families, it doesn’t matter. It is all hanging by a thread,” he said.

    Adan Rico and Torres are among thousands of immigrants who have built lives around the assumption they are safe from being detained and deported. Now they face that threat at the hands of the Department of Homeland Security, which is giving new life to administratively closed cases in a bid to step up immigration enforcement.

    Some lawyers have received dozens of motions to recalendar — the first step to reopen old cases. If lawyers don’t succeed in opposing those motions, the immigrants could wind up back in courthouses that in recent months have become a hub for arrests.

    “It has been 10 years,” Adan Rico said. “And all of a sudden our lives are on hold again, at the mercy of these people that think I have no right to be here.”

    DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin, flanked by Madison Sheahan, left, and Todd Lyons, speaks during a news conference at ICE headquarters in May.

    (Jose Luis Magana / Associated Press)

    When asked about the government’s push to restart old proceedings, Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin declined to address questions about the administration’s change in policy or respond to attorneys’ complaints about the process. She released a statement similar to others she has offered to the media on immigration inquiries.

    “Biden chose to release millions of illegal aliens, including criminals, into the country and used prosecutorial discretion to indefinitely delay their cases and allow them to illegally remain in the United States,” she said. “Now, President Trump and Secretary Noem are following the law and resuming these illegal aliens’ removal proceedings and ensuring their cases are heard by a judge.”

    Attorneys handling these proceedings say the government is overwhelming the courts and immigration lawyers by dredging up cases, many of which are a decade or more old. In several of these, clients or their original lawyers have died. In other cases, immigrants have received legal status and were surprised to learn the government was attempting to revive deportation proceedings against them.

    Since the 1970s, immigration judges have administratively closed deportation proceedings in order to ease the massive backlog on their dockets and prioritize more urgent cases. The maneuver essentially deferred a case, but didn’t completely dismiss it, giving both the court and the immigrant wiggle room. The idea was that immigrants could pursue other forms of relief such as a hardship waiver or deferred status. The government could reopen the case if needed.

    Across the country, immigration attorneys have received a flurry of requests by Homeland Security’s Office of Principal Legal Advisor to revive cases. The motions, attorneys say, appear similar in language, and lack analysis or reference to a change that prompted the decision. In their motions, Trump administration lawyers argue that the targeted immigrants have not been granted green cards and therefore do not have legal status to be here.

    The motions urge immigration judges to use their discretion to revive cases and consider whether a person has been detained or the pending application’s “ultimate outcome or likelihood of success.”

    What distinguishes immigration proceedings from cases in federal or state courts is that both the lawyers and the judges are part of the executive branch, not the judiciary branch. They answer to Secretary Kristi Noem and Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi, respectively.

    Attorneys and clients are racing against the clock to submit opposition to these motions. Many have become in essence private investigators, tracking down clients they haven’t seen in years. Other attorneys, who have retired, are looking to other immigration attorneys to pick up their client’s case.

    “The court is drowning in these motions because we’re trying to resist these,” said David L. Wilson, an immigration attorney at Wilson Law Group in Minneapolis. He first received a batch of 25 government motions at the end of May — and then they kept coming every few weeks. One case involved a client from El Salvador who had been granted Temporary Protected Status, and whose case was administratively closed in 2006.

    Adan Rico, a new father who is studying to be an HVAC technician in the Inland Empire, was stunned that the government was seeking to revive deportation proceedings.

    The attorney who originally represented him has since died. “If it wasn’t for his daughter calling, I would have never found out my case was reopened,” he said. “The Department of Homeland Security never sent me anything.”

    Patricia Corrales

    Attorney Patricia M. Corrales speaks at the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights Los Angeles office in April.

    (Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

    His new attorney, Patricia Corrales, said Adan Rico’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals status doesn’t come up for renewal until 2027 and it defers deportation proceedings. But Corrales, who has received about a dozen motions, said it appears the government isn’t even checking whether the individuals are alive, much less their immigration status.

    One of her cases is that of construction worker Helario Romero Arciniega. Seven years ago, a judge administratively closed deportation proceedings for Romero Arciniega, after he was severely beaten with a metal sprinkler head and had qualified for a visa for crime victims.

    This year, government officials filed a motion to bring back the deportation proceedings against the construction worker, even though he had died six months ago.

    “They don’t do their homework,” Corrales said of the government lawyers. “They’re very negligent in the manner in which they’re handling these motions to re-calendar.”

    Some attorneys have reported delays in their ability to file their opposition motions because the court is so overwhelmed.

    When asked about the backlog, Kathryn Mattingly, a spokesperson for the federal immigration court known as the Executive Office for Immigration Review, confirmed that the court “must receive the underlying initial motion before it can accept a response to that motion.”

    Some immigrants now in legal limbo were just steps away from finalizing their green card applications.

    Maria Torres, an L.A. County resident and mother of two, said she was only 2 years old when she was brought to the U.S. by her family. She grew up undocumented, and when the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program became available, applied to gain work authorization.

    But in 2019, at 21, she was arrested on suspicion of a misdemeanor DUI, which put her into deportation proceedings. She took the classes and paid her ticket. With deportation proceedings open against her, she was able to get her case closed in 2022 while she sought a visa through her husband, a U.S. citizen.

    Her visa was approved, and with just one interview appointment left, Torres felt blindsided when she received a call from her attorney’s office, saying the government wanted to restart deportation proceedings against her.

    “I just felt my heart sink and I started crying,” she said. Her attorney submitted a motion opposing the recalendaring of the case, and they are waiting to hear how a judge will rule. In the meantime, she said, she’s hopeful she’ll have her final interview for her approved visa before then.

    Mariela Caravetta, an immigration attorney.

    “People aren’t getting due process,” said attorney Mariela Caravetta. “It’s very unfair to the client because these cases have been sleeping for 10 years.”

    (Carlin Stiehl / Los Angeles Times)

    Mariela Caravetta, an immigration attorney in Van Nuys, said that, since early June, about 30 of her clients have been targeted with government motions to reopen their cases.

    By law, she has to reply in 10 days. That means she has to track down the client, who may have moved out of state.

    “It’s bad faith doing it like that,” said Caravetta, who accused the federal government of flooding the immigration courts in an effort to meet its deportation quotas.

    “People aren’t getting due process,” she said. “It’s very unfair to the client because these cases have been sleeping for 10 years.”

    Caravetta has convinced some judges to deny the government motions because the clients are seeking ways to legally stay in the country. In a handful of cases, she hasn’t been able to reach her clients.

    The government isn’t making an effort to reach out to attorneys to discuss the cases, as is required, she added. “That would save a lot of time for everybody,” she said. Her clients may have U-visas, which give relief to migrants who have been victims of crime and who help investigators or prosecutors. But the government’s motions say, “These people have not done anything to legalize their status, we need a final resolution.”

    Matt O’Brien, a former federal immigration judge and deputy executive director of FAIR, which advocates for stricter immigration laws, said the Trump administration is “enforcing the Immigration and Nationality Act the way that Congress wrote it.”

    He questioned why attorneys are complaining about cases being recalendared, saying “it’s akin to a motion of reopening a case in any other court.”

    Yet for many immigrants whose cases are being revived, the risks are high. Judges have discretion to deny motions to reopen cases, and have done so in some situations, attorneys say. But judges have also approved the government’s request if there is no opposition from the immigrant or their attorney.

    At that point, cases are put on the calendar. If it gets scheduled, and the immigrants do not show up to court, they could eventually be ruled “in absentia,” which would make them vulnerable to immediate deportation and bar them from entering the country legally for years.

    It all fits with the Trump administration’s goal of increasing deportation numbers, say many immigration lawyers and former officials.

    “They are getting the largest pool possible of people that they can remove, and removing them from the country,” said Jason Hauser, the former chief of staff of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “And what stands in the way from that is a working due process of an immigration system.”

    In April, Sirce E. Owen, acting director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, issued a memo criticizing the use of administrative closure, referring to it as “a de facto amnesty program with benefits” because it offers work authorization and deportation protections. Owen, a former immigration judge, rescinded previous Biden administration guidance that offered a more proactive approach to administrative closures.

    Owen stated that, as of April, about 379,000 cases were still administratively closed in immigration court and cited them as a contributing factor to the court system’s backlog of 4 million cases.

    In immigration courts in Los Angeles and San Diego, attorneys are already seeing these cases come before immigration judges. Many clients have expressed shock and despair at being dragged back into court.

    Sherman Oaks attorney Edgardo Quintanilla has seen about 40 cases recently, including some dating back to the 2010s. Clients, he said, are alarmed not only by the government’s legal maneuvers but by the prospect of entering a federal building these days.

    “There is always the fear that they may be arrested when they go to the court,” he said. “With everything going on, it is a reasonable fear.”

    This article is part of The Times’ equity reporting initiative, funded by the James Irvine Foundation, exploring the challenges facing low-income workers and the efforts being made to address California’s economic divide.

    Melissa Gomez, Dakota Smith, Rachel Uranga

    Source link

  • U.S. declines to pursue death penalty against trio of accused Mexican cartel kingpins

    Federal authorities in the United States revealed Tuesday that they will not seek the death penalty against three reputed Mexican drug cartel leaders, including an alleged former partner of the infamous “El Chapo” and the man accused of orchestrating the killing of a Drug Enforcement Administration agent.

    Court filings showed decisions handed down in the trio of prosecutions, all being held in Brooklyn, N.Y.

    The cases involve drug and conspiracy charges against Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada, 75, charged with running a powerful faction of Mexico’s Sinaloa cartel; Rafael Caro Quintero, 72, who allegedly masterminded the DEA agent’s torture and murder in 1985; and Vicente Carrillo Fuentes, 62, also known as El Viceroy, who is under indictment as the ex-boss of the Juárez cartel.

    Prosecutors from the Eastern District of New York filed a letter in each case “to inform the Court and the defense that the Attorney General has authorized and directed this Office not to seek the death penalty.”

    The decision comes despite calls by President Trump use capital punishment against drug traffickers and the U.S. government ratcheting up pressure against Mexico to dismantle organized crime groups and to stanch the flow of fentanyl and other illicit drugs across the border.

    A White House spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    It’s rare for the death penalty to be in play against high-level Mexican cartel figures. Mexico long ago abolished capital punishment and typically extradites its citizens on the condition that they are spared death.

    In Zambada’s case, the standard restrictions did not apply because he was not extradited. Zambada was brought to the U.S. in July 2024 by a son of his longtime associate, Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán. Zambada alleges he was ambushed and kidnapped in Sinaloa by Joaquín Guzmán López, who forced him onto an airplane bound for a small airport outside El Paso.

    Zambada has pleaded not guilty to the charges against him and remains jailed in Brooklyn while his case proceeds. A court filing in June said prosecutors and the defense had “discussed the potential for a resolution short of trial,” suggesting plea negotiations are underway.

    We’re going to be asking [that] everyone who sells drugs, gets caught selling drugs, to receive the death penalty for their heinous acts

    — President Trump in 2022

    Frank Perez, the lawyer representing Zambada, issued a statement Tuesday to The Times that said: “We welcome the government’s decision not to pursue the death penalty against our client. This marks an important step toward achieving a fair and just resolution.”

    Federal authorities announced in May that Guzmán López, 39, an accused leader of the Sinaloa cartel faction known as “Los Chapitos,” would also not face the death penalty. He faces an array of drug smuggling and conspiracy charges in a case pending before the federal court in Chicago.

    Another son of El Chapo, Ovidio Guzmán López, 35, pleaded guilty to drug trafficking, money laundering and firearms charges last month in Chicago. Court filings show he has agreed to cooperate with U.S. authorities in other investigations.

    Caro Quintero and Carrillo Fuentes were two of the biggest names among a group of 29 men handed over by Mexico to the U.S. in February. The unusual mass transfer was conducted outside the typical extradition process, which left open the possibility of the death penalty.

    Reputed to be a founding member of Mexico’s powerful Guadalajara cartel in the 1980s, Caro Quintero is allegedly responsible for the brutal slaying of DEA agent Enrique “Kiki” Camarena 40 years ago.

    The killing, portrayed on the Netflix show “Narcos: Mexico” and recounted in many books and documentaries, led to a fierce response by U.S. authorities, but Caro Quintero managed to elude justice for decades. Getting him on U.S. soil was portrayed as a major victory by Trump administration officials.

    Derek Maltz, the DEA chief in February, said in a statement that Caro Quintero had “unleashed violence, destruction, and death across the United States and Mexico, has spent four decades atop DEA’s most wanted fugitives list.”

    Carrillo Fuentes is perhaps best known as the younger brother of another Mexican drug trafficker, Amado Carrillo Fuentes, the legendary “Lord of the Skies,” who died in 1997. Once close to El Chapo, El Mayo and other Sinaloa cartel leaders, the younger Carrillo Funtes split off to form his own cartel in the city of Juárez, triggering years of bloody cartel warfare.

    Kenneth J. Montgomery, the lawyer for Carrillo Fuentes, said Tuesday that his client was “extremely grateful” for the government’s decision to not seek the death penalty. “I thought it was the right decision,” he said. “In a civilized society, I don’t think the death penalty should ever be an option.”

    Trump has been an ardent supporter of capital punishment. In January, he signed an order that directs the attorney general to “take all necessary and lawful action” to ensure that states have enough lethal injection drugs to carry out executions.

    The executive order directed the attorney general to pursue the death penalty in cases that involve the killing of law enforcement officers, among other factors. For years, Trump has loudly called for executing convicted drug traffickers. He reiterated the call for executions again in 2022 when announcing his intent to run again for president.

    “We’re going to be asking [for] everyone who sells drugs, gets caught selling drugs, to receive the death penalty for their heinous acts,” Trump said.

    Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi lifted a moratorium on federal executions in February, reversing a policy that began under the Biden administration. In April, Bondi announced intentions to seek the death penalty against Luigi Mangione, the man charged with assassinating a UnitedHealthcare executive in New York City.

    Bonnie Klapper, a former federal narcotics prosecutor in the Eastern District of New York, reacted with surprise upon learning that the Trump administration had decided to not pursue capital cases against the accused kingpins, particularly Caro Quintero.

    Klapper, who is now a defense attorney, speculated that Mexico is strongly opposed to executions of its citizens and officials may have exerted diplomatic pressure to spare the lives of the three men, perhaps offering to send more kingpins in the future.

    “While my initial reaction is one of shock given this administration’s embrace of the death penalty, perhaps there’s conversations taking place behind the scenes in which Mexico has said, ‘If you want more of these, you can’t ask to kill any of our citizens.’”

    Keegan Hamilton

    Source link

  • Commentary: California has sued Trump 37 times. Here’s what’s at stake.

    Seven months into President Trump’s second term, California has filed 37 lawsuits against his administration and spent about $5 million doing it.

    Before you go off on a government-spending rant, let me drop this figure on you: For each dollar the state has spent in litigation with Trump, it has recouped $33,600 in funds that the federal government has tried to take away from the Golden State, according to Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta.

    That, as he put it during a Monday news conference, is “bringing the receipts.”

    These aren’t dollars Californians were wishing for or begging for from the federal government — these are funds that have already been legally allotted to the state but which the Trump administration is attempting to stop for reasons petty, ideological or both. They pay for teacher training, immunizations, tracking infectious diseases, keeping roads safe, disaster recovery and on and on. And they are predominantly your tax dollars, being withheld from your state.

    “What we’re demanding is that we get the funding that’s already been legally approved and appropriated,” Bonta said.

    But as much as it’s about paying for the basics that keep California going, it’s also about protecting an inclusive and equitable way of living that defines the ethos of our state. Don’t tread on us! Californians get to spend our money how we see fit.

    “When you add it all up, you see the totality of what’s at stake: the California dream,” Bonta said. “The idea that every Californian, no matter how they look, where they live or how much money they have, can send their kid to school, go to the doctor when they’re sick and put food on the table and a roof over their heads.”

    Or as Gov. Gavin Newsom put it, it’s litigation not for the sake of suing, but to “defend, to stand tall, to hold the line in terms of our values, the things we hold dear.”

    It’s serious times, folks. Trump has made it clear that he doesn’t stand for LGBTQ+ rights, for immigrants’ rights, for women’s rights, for due process or even public schools. But so far, the courts have held, for the most part, to their responsibility to be a check on this unbalanced administration.

    Of course, lawyers win cases, sometimes regardless of facts. I want to give a shout out to our state Department of Justice. Bonta may be the state’s top lawyer, but there is a whole army of legal folks behind these lawsuits.

    The $5 million spent so far has been entirely in-house, Bonta said. This cash isn’t going to expensive outside counsel, but, as my colleague Kevin Rector points out, money that is funding the smart, talented attorneys and staff who work for taxpayers.

    More than a few of them were around during Trump’s first term, when the state was involved in more than 120 lawsuits against his administration. Many of those suits were about process — the haphazard, rules-be-damned way Trump seeks to implement his policies.

    Our California lawyers learned then that courts do in fact uphold law, and simply pointing out that rules have to be followed was often enough to stop Trump. While we now have a seasoned legal team that understands the weaknesses in what Trump is doing, the sort-of-funny part is that he’s still doing it. Few lessons learned, which is good for California.

    So far, these lawsuits by California have ensured that about $168 billion that Trump would have cut off instead continued to flow to California. Bonta said that in the 19 cases that have made it in front of a judge so far, he’s succeeded in 17, including winning 13 court orders directly blocking Trump’s “illegal actions.”

    He’s also secured wins outside of court, including when the U.S. Department of Education recently backed down after freezing school funding weeks before school is set to start. That funding, under threat of a lawsuit, has been restored.

    Bonta said that while the state is fighting every lawsuit with rigor, two are personal to him and “remain sort of the most important in terms of what they represent.”

    They happen to be the first two suits the state filed, shortly after Trump took office. The first was about birthright citizenship, and Trump’s bid to end it. It’s a case Bonta says is “very meaningful” to him.

    Bonta was born in the Philippines and immigrated to the United States when he was 2 months old, living in a trailer in the Central Valley town of La Paz, the home of the United Farm Workers. His parents left their country to avoid martial law as the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos gained power, and worked with civil rights leaders including Cesar Chavez once they settled here.

    So it makes sense that an executive order that would leave about 24,500 babies born each year in California without U.S. citizenship hits hard with Bonta.

    Bonta, along with attorneys general of several other states, filed that lawsuit the day after Trump took office, in response to an executive order he signed on Inauguration Day. So far, multiple courts have expressed deep skepticism of that order, and the idea that the Constitution and prior Supreme Court rulings should be ignored in favor of Trump’s position.

    The second case that Bonta takes personally is a multistate pushback on Trump’s sweeping halt of federal funding. That case put at risk about $3 trillion nationwide, including that $168 billion in California, about a third of the state budget.

    Coming up next is a challenge to the deployment of Marines and National Guard troops in Los Angeles. The Trump administration has been quietly removing those soldiers in recent days, perhaps in preparation for asking the court to drop that case, which seems like a loser for them. No troops, no case. We’ll see how it goes in a few days.

    “The Marines and the National Guardspeople arrived to quiet streets in L.A.,” Bonta said. “The president has been incredibly, in my view, disrespectful to these patriots. He’s treated them as political pawns.”

    The $5 million the state has spent so far on legal fights with Trump is part of $25 million the Legislature set aside earlier this year during a special session. Bonta said that even that will likely not be enough to keep the challenges flowing for the next three and a half years.

    Newsom, for his part, is all in and promised that Bonta “will not be in need of resources to do his job.” (And yes, I know it raises his profile for a 2028 presidential run.)

    As much as it seems ridiculous that we are setting aside this huge chunk of change for legal fees at a moment when we are facing a budget crisis, the cost of letting Trump run roughshod over our state is much higher. This is money well spent.

    Because it’s not just our federal funding at stake, it’s the California dream.

    Anita Chabria

    Source link

  • Wildfire victims in limbo as fight with insurers hits another snag

    After receiving more than 1,000 complaints from Jan. 7 fire victims about how insurers are handling their claims, state regulators are considering referring hundreds of the cases to mediation — a little used practice that some consumer advocates fear could hurt policyholders.

    The Department of Insurance has been bombarded with complaints from property owners since the Palisades and Eaton fires destroyed more than 16,000 structures and damaged more than 2,000 others, causing up to $45 billion in insured damages by one estimate.

    Fire victims say they have experienced slow responses from insurance company claims handlers, been rotated to multiple adjusters, denied hygienic testing for toxic chemicals and given lowball offers.

    The department has encouraged fire victims unhappy with how their claims are being managed to file complaints. They are then assigned a compliance officer who attempts to resolve the issues with their insurer.

    Joy Chen, chief executive and co-founder of the Eaton Fire Survivors Network, which, according to its website, has
    some 5,000 members, said that the compliance officers have not been successful in sorting out the disputes.

    “Across thousands of complaints I’ve seen discussed, I have barely heard of a single survivor who said DOI actually helped them resolve their claim,” she said. “At best, people say things like, ‘I finally got a return call from my adjuster — right before they left for vacation again.’”

    The department says the complaint process has helped policyholders whose homes were destroyed or damaged by the fires recover $67 million in insurance payments.

    Still, the department is considering referring some 400 unresolved complaints to its residential mediation program, two department sources with knowledge of the complaint process told the Los Angeles Times.

    That would far exceed the typical number of referrals in a year.

    Michael Soller, a spokesman for Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, said it was likely that some unresolved complaints would be referred to mediators but couldn’t say how many.

    In 2023, the latest year for which department statistics are available, just five residential insurance disputes were sent to mediation, resulting in settlements. The policyholders filed claims totaling $3.05 million and settled for $1.55 million.

    Over the last 10 years, there were years when no disputes went through mediation, despite a growing number of catastrophic fires statewide. Although 2019 was the busiest year for mediations in the last decade, only 72 cases were referred that year, according to the department’s annual reports.

    Tony Cignarale, the department’s deputy commissioner of consumer services and market conduct, said complaints are referred to mediation when policyholders and insurers reach an impasse despite the assistance of the department’s compliance officers, who number about 100 and handle complaints regarding multiple lines of insurance.

    The officers seek to determine what might be delaying resolution of a claim and ensure that insurance companies are complying with the law and their policies. However, they are not empowered to adjudicate such differences as factual disputes.

    “We try to move the ball forward, but we can’t be the judge and jury and say in this particular smoke damage claim you needed to test for these various things — asbestos, lead, chromium, etc. — and you need to do this type of restoration,” Cignarale said.

    He said a large number of smoke-damage cases arising out of the Jan. 7 fires and a lack of an industry standard for testing and restoration of the homes have complicated claims.

    Attorneys representing scores of Jan. 7 fire victims have filed suits against insurers and the California FAIR Plan Assn., the state’s insurer of last resort, over their handling of smoke-damage claims. Insurers deny treating policyholders unfairly.

    “I think the difficulty with mass disasters is the system is stressed, and there are going to be elements of the system that break down. And after every disaster, we find something new that could be improved,” said Rex Frazier, president of the Personal Insurance Federation of California, which represents major property and casualty insurers.

    Mediation is free for policyholders and available for cases involving claims exceeding $7,500 and disputes valued at more than $2,000. Policyholders can bring an attorney and have the right to reject participation in the process, but insurers are required to participate. Neither side is obligated to accept any offer.

    The program has its origins in a pilot program initiated to close hundreds of unresolved complaints after the 1994 Northridge earthquake. It was made permanent in 2005 through a bill that established a $1,500 flat fee borne by insurers and paid to mediators for each case. The department maintains a panel of about 90 independent mediators, Cignarale said.

    Attorney Arnie Levinson, a veteran mediator who has handled disputes between homeowners and insurers, said he charges $12,000 a day, which includes reading the submitted documents and appearing at the hearing to try to resolve the dispute.

    He said smoke-damage and total-loss cases can be complicated, with disputes about materials and upgrades, the size of the rebuild and the need for foundations. The $1,500 flat fee is too low, he said.

    “To get a quality mediator for that kind of money, it’s going to be very tough,” said Levinson, a mediator with Signature Resolution.

    Amy Bach, executive director of United Policyholders, a San Francisco-based consumer advocacy group, said the process is helpful because it is inexpensive and can resolve disputes faster than litigation. However, there can be pitfalls.

    “It’s important that the compensation be at appropriate levels to attract skilled and impartial mediators, and that the overall process be monitored for quality control,” she said.

    Bach added that mediators need to ensure that policyholders are not “ganged up on” by experienced insurance company representatives during the mediation.

    Chen said she feared that policyholders would be at a disadvantage during the hearing.

    Soller said the department stands by the process.

    Marcia Belforte, 67, relied on a mediator to deal with her insurer after her Santa Rosa home burned down in the 2017 Tubbs fire, which destroyed more than 5,500 structures in Northern California.

    “I prepped for weeks and weeks on this, and I literally had my whole policy bookmarked,” Belforte said.

    She said she was intimidated when the hearing started as her insurer had three representatives, but she said her knowledge of her policy prompted the carrier to ask to put the mediation on hold, intimating a forthcoming settlement.

    Ultimately, she hired an attorney who extracted a payment 30% higher than what the carrier was offering, enabling her to rebuild her home.

    “They didn’t have a case with me, and that’s what we found out during mediation, and that’s why it was so critical to go,” she said.

    Carmen Balber, executive director of Consumer Watchdog, a Los Angeles advocacy group, said she feared that pushing hundreds of cases into mediation may allow insurers to escape discipline for any wrongdoing.

    “My concern is that prematurely sending folks to mediation is going to hamstring the department’s investigation into unfair claims handling practices,” she said.

    Cignarale said the department is gathering information on possible illegal practices by insurers through the complaint process, which led to the announcement last month of an investigation into State Farm General’s claims-handling practices.

    State Farm, the largest home insurer in the state, has been the focus of complaints from Eaton Fire Survivors Network members, who say the insurer has resisted hygienic testing of smoke-damaged homes and offered lowball settlements for remediation.

    The company also is facing multiple lawsuits related to the fires, including one filed last month by fire victims who accused the company of leaving them deliberately underinsured. State Farm denies any wrongdoing.

    “State Farm takes every complaint seriously and our goal is to work with customers to resolve any of their concerns. We seek to provide every customer all benefits to which they are entitled within the terms of the insurance policy,” said company spokesperson Bob Devereux.

    The department has announced the creation of a Smoke Claims and Remediation Task Force to set standards for insurers. This month, Lara appointed Cignarale to lead the panel.

    Laurence Darmiento

    Source link

  • Netflix, TikTok made the Menendez mansion into a true-crime landmark. Beverly Hills isn’t happy

    Netflix, TikTok made the Menendez mansion into a true-crime landmark. Beverly Hills isn’t happy

    First, it was a driver of a sedan slowing down to a crawl and pointing as they passed the Spanish-style mansion, draped in elm leaves and hidden behind a privacy fence.

    Then came a group of teenage girls running out of a van for selfies, followed by bikers, who stopped to see what all the ruckus was about. In the end, they all had the same question.

    “Is that the right house?”

    In recent weeks, the quietude of this affluent Beverly Hills neighborhood has been filled with the buzzing of tourists and true crime fanatics all swarming to peek at the infamous Menendez mansion on Elm Drive — where two brothers murdered their parents in 1989. The case has received renewed attention after a Netflix show and documentary profiled their case and L.A. County Dist. Atty. George Gascón announced he recommends they be resentenced after new evidence that they had been molested by their father came to light, which could make them eligible for parole.

    A person takes a photo of the Menendez brothers’ former mansion in Beverly Hills.

    (Michael Blackshire / Los Angeles Times)

    In just the last month, Beverly Hills police officials say, officers have responded to 18 calls for service related to noise complaints and trespassing concerns around the mansion.

    “There’s people all hours of the night,” said Elm Drive resident Mindy R., who declined to provide her full name out of concern for her safety because of all the recent visitors. “People are getting out of their cars, blocking our driveway.”

    Now she and her neighbors call the police and tow companies to manage the crowd. It was nothing but the occasional tour bus through the neighborhood before, Mindy said.

    “I didn’t register that [the mansion] was across the street from me,” she said of when she first moved in a few years ago. “It’s been pretty quiet until the Netflix show came out.”

    In September, Netflix released its dramatization of the case, “Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story,” as the latest chapter in its true crime anthology series. A two-hour documentary featuring new audio interviews with the siblings, “The Menendez Brothers,” was released by Netflix a month later. The scripted show and documentary introduced a new generation to a case that had their parents and grandparents glued to television screens during the first trial in 1993.

    The trial, one of the first of its kind to be televised, created an appetite for a new American genre: true crime. The nation was engrossed in the tale of these two charismatic yet troubled young men who seemed to have it all between wealth and looks before they violently snapped, taking their parents’ lives with shotguns.

    The renewed celebrity status of the house has since become a goldmine of viral content for TikTokers who film the mansion and rehash the gruesome details of the murder scene for online audiences or raise the idea of a haunting.

    “This psychic visited the Menendez home. Do you see what I see?” says the caption of one TikTok video that has been viewed more than 2.5 million times, as it zooms ever closer to an upstairs window to suggest a shadow of Jose Menendez’s face.

    Natalie Gardena, a surgical technician from Pomona, said she’s seen content creators hopping the fence on social media to take photos on the porch to re-create a picture of the brothers standing in front of the mansion.

    Erik and Lyle Menendez in front of their Beverly Hills home.

    Erik Menendez, left, and brother Lyle outside their Beverly Hills home.

    (Ronald Soble / Los Angeles Times)

    The 25-year-old visited the mansion on Wednesday on her day off from work and said she was initially drawn to the home by her morbid fascination with true crime documentaries — she had also visited Benedict Canyon in Beverly Hills where the Manson murders happened. But watching the scripted Netflix series also caused her to sympathize with the brothers’ experiences of alleged abuse under their father.

    “The system just failed them,” Gardena said. She thinks it was unfair that the trial focused on the brothers’ spending spree after the killings without fully acknowledging the sexual assault allegations. “If they were sisters, they would have been out long time ago. But since they’re men, no one believed men could be sexually abused back then.”

    Though the mansion is no longer owned by the Menendez family — it was sold for $17 million in March and is vacant as it undergoes renovation — that apparently hasn’t stopped its appeal at home or abroad.

    A tour bus filled with people

    A tour bus drives past the Menendez brothers’ former mansion in Beverly Hills.

    (Michael Blackshire / Los Angeles Times)

    On a recent Wednesday afternoon, visitors were walking or driving by the home virtually every minute. Among them were tourists from France and South Africa who stopped by to take pictures of the mansion’s front-facing facade and the residence’s numbers on the driveway.

    “In Italy, the show is very popular,” said Fabrizio Serra, a 23-year-old who was visiting Los Angeles and decided to include the Menendez mansion on his itinerary. “It’s fascinating to visit this place … something that you always see on the screens … you have the opportunity in real life [to see it].”

    Nicholas Chavez, Cooper Koch and Javier Bardem

    Nicholas Chavez as Lyle Menendez, left, Cooper Koch as Erik Menendez, middle, and Javier Bardem as Jose Menendez in “Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story.”

    (Miles Crist / Netflix)

    For others, seeing the residence brings up a deep sense of personal loss and grief.

    Rebecca Hecht, who went to Beverly Hills High School a year ahead of Erik Menendez, lives about a mile away from the home and was walking by the house with a labradoodle on a recent afternoon.

    “I just feel a very heavy presence being here,” Hecht said. “It feels very ominous on the street.”

    Her brother Adam taught Erik tennis, she said. The same summer the murders happened, Adam also mysteriously disappeared — a case that’s never been solved.

    “In 1989, I believe I lost three brothers,” said a tearful Hecht, who still can’t believe that a schoolmate of hers has been in prison for decades. “I understand what they went through, because I grew up in this town, I had a very similar father to them. But the abuse was far worse that they went through.”

    With the renewed attention drawn to the case, she finally mustered the courage to watch the entirety of the Menendez trial on YouTube. And while she doesn’t condone murder, she believes they deserve a second chance because of the alleged abuse.

    Lyle and Erik Menendez in blue prison uniforms.

    Lyle, left, and Erik Menendez leave a courtroom in Santa Monica in 1990 after a judge ruled that conversations between the two brothers and their psychologist after their parents were slain were not privileged and could be used as evidence in their murder case.

    (Nick Ut / Associated Press)

    “They’re model citizens in prison, and strangely, ironically, prison was probably a better life for them, and that’s why they were able to thrive,” Hecht said.

    As for the Netflix show, Hecht said it’s too personal to watch it.

    But she hopes the media attention has swayed the public’s and officials’ opinions in favor of the brothers.

    “I think any publicity is good publicity. I do think there’s a firestorm of attention right now, and I believe it’s pushing in the direction of their release,” she said.

    Jireh Deng

    Source link

  • D.A. says he will make decision on Menendez brothers by week’s end

    D.A. says he will make decision on Menendez brothers by week’s end

    L.A. County Dist. Atty. George Gascón announced that he would make a decision on the possible resentencing of the Menendez brothers by the end of the week.

    Erik and Lyle Menendez have spent 34 years behind bars after being convicted of the 1989 slaying of their parents, but evidence recently surfaced supporting the brothers’ claims that they were sexually abused by their father, prompting a reexamination of the case.

    Gascón had promised to offer a position on the case by a November hearing but told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Tuesday that he was accelerating this timeline in response to increased public attention.

    The famous case has soared back into the public eye thanks in part to a new Netflix miniseries and documentary that shone a light on the violent past of Jose Menendez, the brothers’ father. It has also sparked a heated public discourse over whether the brothers deserve a new shot at justice and if societal views of rape have evolved since the pair were sentenced to life in prison in 1996.

    Gascón, for his part, told Tapper it was concerning that one of the prosecutors made comments about “how men cannot be raped.”

    “There was certainly implicit bias that took place at that time that perhaps may have had an impact in the way the case was perceived and presented to the jury,” he said.

    He said prosecutors in his office today were split into two camps regarding a possible resentencing.

    “I have a group of people, including some that were involved in the original trial, that are adamant that they should spend the rest of their life in prison and that they were not molested,” he said. “I have other people in the office that believe they probably were molested and that they deserve to have some relief.”

    Gascón said the Menendez brothers were facing two possible forms of relief.

    The first is a petition filed by the brothers’ defense team arguing that new evidence challenges the argument prosecutors made during trial — that the murders were motivated by the boys’ desire to secure their $14-million inheritance and that Jose Menendez did not abuse his sons.

    This evidence includes a letter that attorneys say Erik Menendez wrote about the sexual abuse he endured as a teenager prior to committing the killings as well as new claims brought forward by Roy Rosselló, a former member of the boy band Menudo, who said he too was raped by Jose Menendez.

    The second possible form of relief is a California law that allows for the early release of prisoners who have already served long sentences and are not deemed a threat to the community, Gascón said.

    Gascón said he was considering both options and noted that either one would require a court approval.

    Clara Harter

    Source link

  • Criminal case against handyman who gunned down L.A. bishop paused amidst mental health concerns

    Criminal case against handyman who gunned down L.A. bishop paused amidst mental health concerns

    Criminal proceedings against a handyman who prosecutors say fatally shot a beloved L.A. bishop last year were suspended Thursday after attorneys raised doubts about his competence to stand trial.

    Carlos Medina, 61, was charged with murder in February 2023 for gunning down Bishop David G. O’Connell, 69, at his Hacienda Heights home. Medina was arrested the next day in Torrance, and law enforcement sources previously told The Times that he confessed to the killing.

    A motive in the homicide has remained unclear for more than 18 months. Medina’s wife worked for O’Connell as a housekeeper, and authorities said last year that the 61-year-old gave detectives several reasons for the shooting, but “none of them made sense to the investigators,” according to L.A. County Sheriff’s Department Lt. Michael Modica.

    O’Connell’s friends and parishioners had hoped Thursday’s preliminary hearing — usually the first time prosecutors have to present significant evidence in a case in open court — would provide some motive for the out-of-nowhere shooting. But L.A. County Deputy Public Defender Pedro Cortes told the court he had doubts about Medina’s ability to aid in his own defense.

    Cortes said concerns about Medina’s mental health were based on interactions with the defendant going back to the time of his arrest, observations of his behavior in jail and the opinions of an independent medical expert.

    “The defense team has been diligently working to thoroughly investigate the events that transpired, including all contributing factors, such as Mr. Medina’s mental health, to ensure a comprehensive and fair representation of the facts,” Cortes and his co-counsel, Deputy Public Defender Jessica Arteaga, said in a statement.

    L.A. County Deputy Dist. Atty. Hilary Williams said the defense team informed her of their concerns about Medina only moments before the hearing and had not independently verified any issues.

    Medina is due back in the Hollywood Mental Health Court on Oct. 31. If found competent and convicted of murder, he could face 35 years to life in prison.

    James Queally

    Source link

  • A top detective alleges the LAPD is toxic toward women. Will her lawsuit bring change?

    A top detective alleges the LAPD is toxic toward women. Will her lawsuit bring change?

    Even as a young street cop trying to work her way up the ranks of the Los Angeles Police Department in the mid-90s, Kristine Klotz says she was quick to call out sexism on the job. Right is right and wrong is wrong, she used to tell herself, knowing that she would ruffle some feathers in the process.

    So she didn’t hesitate to speak up last summer when she learned that a male supervisor in the vaunted Robbery-Homicide Division where she worked had allegedly compared female detectives to sex workers on Figueroa Street.

    To make it in the LAPD, department veterans say, you need a thick skin. But Klotz, 54, alleges the Figueroa comments were just the tip of an iceberg of verbal abuse women in the unit faced.

    Klotz said that after repeated complaints about her mistreatment at the hands of department officials went ignored, she and another female Robbery-Homicide detective reached out for help from the Board of Police Commissioners, the LAPD’s civilian oversight body. For weeks, they heard nothing.

    A response eventually came, just not the one Klotz expected.

    In a whistleblower lawsuit filed this year in Los Angeles County Superior Court, Klotz claims the LAPD retaliated against her. She alleges she was demoted, reassigned and put under internal investigation in the span of a few months.

    The lawsuit accuses several current senior LAPD officials, including Deputy Chief Marc Reina, and Capts. Scot Williams and Robin Petillo of inflicting emotional distress and creating a hostile work environment. The suit names two women, Petillo and Lt. Blanca Lopez; the rest of the defendants are men. A follow-up letter to the Police Commission names the supervising detective who allegedly made the Figueroa comments, Christopher Marsden.

    Emails from The Times to the work accounts of the officials singled out in the suit went unreturned.

    The LAPD said it doesn’t discuss pending litigation and referred questions to the city attorney’s office, which didn’t respond to an email seeking comment. A private law firm that is representing the defendants, including the city, has asked a judge for more time before responding to Klotz’s suit in court.

    A 29-year department veteran with a long list of high-profile criminal investigations to her name, Klotz said she had no choice but to turn to the court system while fighting to restore both her career and reputation. The months-long ordeal, she said, “opened my eyes to a completely different way of thinking when there was so much pride I had in this organization.”

    Tackling persistent sexual harassment complaints will be among the pressing issues facing incoming LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell, who was appointed to the job this month, pending City Council approval. He will also be expected to overhaul a disciplinary system that some argue seems to penalize the accuser more than the accused.

    Since 2019, the city of Los Angeles has paid out at least $11 million in damages for cases of discrimination, retaliation and other workplace strife based on gender brought by LAPD officers, according to a Times review of data obtained through a public records request. That figure doesn’t include at least $12 million in damages awarded by juries to women at the LAPD that the city is appealing after having been defeated in court.

    In addition, a dozen or so cases involving complaints by female officers about harassment and discrimination are pending. Several claims have previously gone unreported, including a sergeant who says she was denied a transfer in “direct retaliation” for cooperating with an Internal Affairs investigation into a former assistant chief accused of planting a tracking device on the car of his former domestic partner, a fellow LAPD officer.

    In another case, an auto theft detective says she was tormented by a male colleague after their relationship fell apart. And in the Hollenbeck Division, which has seen investigations and leadership changes in recent months, several sworn and civilian female employees alleged they faced retaliation for reporting misconduct.

    While some longtime LAPD observers argue that decades of damning reports and court orders have forced the department to confront the problem, others, including civil rights attorney Connie Rice, say a crude, misogynistic culture still exists and women in uniform continue to face obstacles to advancement.

    Much of the abuse has moved online to pro-LAPD social media groups that feature a “frat-boy sort of MAGA misogyny thing going on,” she said.

    “I think that the DNA of the culture is still ‘Women shouldn’t be here,’” Rice said. “There’s not a welcome mat, it’s more like a no-trespassing mat.”

    Toward the end of her time at Robbery-Homicide, Klotz said, she felt as though she had a target on her back.

    Klotz contends that she was ordered to perform menial tasks and forced to check in whenever she left the office, much like a high-schooler requesting a hall pass. If she stepped away to rinse out her coffee mug or use the copier, she said, her supervisor would text her demanding to know where she was. Then one day last summer, she showed up to work to find that her keycard access had been revoked.

    Determined not to take the humiliation “sitting down,” Klotz and a colleague, Det. Jennifer Hammer, wrote a letter to the Police Commission in September 2023 asking it to intervene in “the recent harassment, discrimination, and retaliation she and other female officers had endured.”

    “The misconduct has not stopped and has increasingly worsened,” the letter said. Hammer has filed her own complaint against the department.

    Klotz has been the subject of at least two internal investigations. She says the complaints against her — one for allegedly making an inappropriate gesture to another officer and the other for accosting a civilian employee — were “fabricated” as a way of punishing her for speaking out.

    In January, she was demoted to a lower-ranking detective position, sent to an auto theft unit in the San Fernando Valley. She took an 18% pay cut and now reports to a younger detective previously under her command.

    Even after years on the job, Klotz has maintained her uncommonly cheerful manner. But her jaw clenches and voice thickens with emotion when she describes the humiliation she felt walking into the Van Nuys police station for the first time earlier this year, and feeling the stares from her colleagues.

    The last few months have taken a heavy mental toll, she said. She started smoking again, nearly a decade after quitting cold turkey. More than once, she said, she has broken down and cried in her car outside of work.

    “I didn’t think at the end of my career I would be subjected to the ongoing harassment, the retaliation that I have endured by upper management and command officers,” Klotz said.

    Growing up in Long Beach on a steady diet of “Charlie’s Angels” reruns, Klotz dreamed of going into law enforcement from an early age. A high school class on courts and the law further piqued her interest. She said she had job opportunities at other area departments in her early 20s, but she held out for an offer from the LAPD.

    Her dream was always to work her way up to detective, preferably investigating murders. She eventually achieved her goal, joining a Valley-area homicide unit. That led to her first encounter with what she alleges is a toxic culture.

    Before blowing the whistle at Robbery-Homicide, Klotz was among a group of female detectives who sued over what they described as a frat-like atmosphere in the Valley, where some male colleagues were vulgar and abusive toward women in the office.

    Klotz and other women said they were routinely referred to as “tourists” who didn’t belong. One male detective allegedly boasted of sexual exploits with the wife of a now-deputy chief and was accused of sending an inappropriate email from his work account to a female Los Angeles County deputy district attorney.

    The city has denied the allegations raised in the suit, which remains under litigation.

    Klotz said the experience in that case taught her to document everything, including the numerous pleading emails she sent to department higher-ups asking them to intervene at Robbery-Homicide.

    Like other women who have reported misconduct, she said she has mostly learned to tune out the office gossip and rumors about her demotion. Some of the grapevine talk has gotten back to her — how she’s a loose cannon or stirring the pot to cover up for complaints accusing her of misconduct.

    None of it is true, she says. And she’s not looking for a payday either, she says, rebutting another common criticism of department whistleblowers.

    Corinne Bendersky, a UCLA professor of management and organizations who studied work culture across city of Los Angeles departments, said the poor handling of complaints by women and ethnic minorities is not isolated to the LAPD.

    “Race relations are worse in the Police Department, gender relations are worse in the Fire Department,” said Bendersky, who performed surveys, focus groups and interviews with thousands of city employees. She said the surveys revealed strong resentment across gender and racial lines toward the Police Department’s ongoing efforts to hire more women and officers of color.

    Klotz said the department conducted investigations into her complaints and deemed them unfounded, despite evidence she presented that she was the subject of retaliation for reporting misconduct committed by higher-ups.

    Last week — after The Times inquired about her case — Klotz was summoned to a meeting with Deputy Chief Emada Tingirides. Klotz says she was informed that she was being returned to her previous detective rank, which restores her pay. She remains stationed in the Valley, investigating car thefts.

    She is planning to retire at the end of the year, but Klotz said she will continue to fight in court to bring accountability after years of the LAPD failing to improve itself.

    “The damage is done, they have harmed me and they can never take it back. They will never be able to repair me,” she said before her old rank was restored. “They’ve ruined me at the end of my career.”

    Libor Jany

    Source link

  • Ex-convict makes DA kill himself, attacks judge

    Ex-convict makes DA kill himself, attacks judge

    Isaac Wright, spent 8 years in prison became a paralegal helping other inmates & practicing his own case. He got a police officer to admit the states attorney was bribing & lying. The state attorney commited suicide before the trial. He then had to fight against the other charges he had, and was released
    Wright is the only person in the US history to have been Sentenced to life in prison, Securing his own release and exoneration, and then being granted a license to practice Law by the very court that condemned him

    Source link

  • Spotty redactions and public records reveal names of deputies in case against DA advisor

    Spotty redactions and public records reveal names of deputies in case against DA advisor

    One deputy was convicted of driving drunk with a loaded gun in the car. Another was suspended for failing to promptly report an on-duty traffic accident. An experienced detective was accused of lying on his job application. And a commander was demoted to captain for turning a blind eye to a cheating scandal in a popular law enforcement relay race.

    For five months, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta’s office has fought to keep secret the names of eight Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies at the center of the case against Diana Teran, a top district attorney’s office advisor accused of misusing confidential personnel records as part of an effort to track cops with disciplinary histories. She is now facing six felony charges under what legal experts say is a “novel” use of the state’s hacking statute.

    Courtroom testimony during a preliminary hearing last month showed that the allegedly confidential records in question were actually court records. But state prosecutors still fought to hide the deputies’ names and the details of their past behavior by redacting identifying portions of key documents in the case.

    After comparing gaps in the government’s redactions to hundreds of public civil suits, appeals and publicly posted disciplinary records, the Los Angeles Times and the Los Angeles Public Press identified seven of the deputies and tracked down court and public law enforcement records that shed light on the allegations against them and their efforts to overturn their punishments. In five of the seven cases the disciplinary actions were reduced or overturned.

    “This just shows how Attorney General Rob Bonta has wasted the time of several Los Angeles judges by asking them to keep these court records secret,” said Susan Seager, the UC Irvine law professor who has been fighting on behalf of the LA Public Press for the release of the deputies’ names since May. “Anyone can go to the Los Angeles Superior Courthouse today and find all the deputy lawsuits challenging their discipline and post them online. What happens in our public courts belongs to the public.”

    Bonta’s office has argued that releasing the deputies’ names would be a violation of state laws that keep police personnel records secret, as members of the public would then be able to connect the deputies’ names to their past conduct and discipline.

    A review of the deputies’ legal filings shows that at least half of the identified officers were disciplined for incidents involving an allegation of dishonesty. The punishments included everything from terminations to demotions to suspensions.

    None of the deputies agreed to speak on the record, though one said he had never been officially informed about the case. James Spertus, the attorney representing Teran, said the news organizations’ efforts called into question the state’s theory of the case.

    “The fact the court orders at issue in Ms. Teran’s case were located independently by the LA Times and the LA Public Press establishes the arguments that we have been trying to make since the case was first filed,” he said Monday. “She does not need ‘permission’ to ‘use’ public court orders.”

    The California Department of Justice did not immediately offer comment.

    In a statement, Steve Johnson, the president of the Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association, vehemently disagreed with release of personnel information which he described as “stolen,” even though they were court records, and said that it would endanger deputies, families and peace officers who serve the community.

    *****

    The allegations at the center of the case against Teran date to 2018, when she worked as a constitutional policing advisor for then-Sheriff Jim McDonnell. Her usual duties included accessing confidential deputy records and internal affairs investigations.

    A few years after leaving the Sheriff’s Department, Teran joined the district attorney’s office. While there, in April 2021, she sent 33 names and a few dozen related court records to a subordinate to evaluate for possible inclusion in either of two internal databases prosecutors use to track officers with histories of dishonesty and other misconduct.

    One is known as the Brady database — a reference to the 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision Brady vs. Maryland, which says prosecutors are required to turn over any evidence favorable to a defendant, including evidence of police misconduct.

    According to a 2021 Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office manual, material relating to dishonesty, assaults, racial bias and acts of moral turpitude can all be relevant Brady material. Under office policy, prosecutors are required to turn over any material that could call into question the officer’s credibility — even if they believe that information might be false.

    The state Department of Justice alleged several of the names Teran sent to her subordinate to consider including in D.A. databases were those of deputies whose files she had accessed while working at the Sheriff’s Department years earlier.

    However, testimony during the preliminary hearing last month showed she did not download the information from the LASD personnel file system. In most cases she learned of the alleged misconduct when co-workers emailed her copies of court records from lawsuits filed by deputies hoping to overturn the department’s discipline against them.

    But after searching news articles and public records requests, state investigators said they found that 11 of the names hadn’t been mentioned in public records or major media outlets. Thus, prosecutors said Teran wouldn’t have been able to identify the deputies, or know to look for their court records, were it not for her special access while working at the Sheriff’s Department.

    At first, prosecutors charged Teran with 11 felonies under state hacking statutes — but they refused to release the names of the deputies or details of their misconduct, making it difficult for reporters or members of the public to fully understand the allegations at the center of the case.

    After the Los Angeles Public Press fought in court for more information, in June the state released two of the names. Both deputies — whose records were easily discoverable through a Google search — had been fired for incidents involving dishonesty or false statements.

    Without explanation, prosecutors later dropped the two counts against Teran involving those deputies, as well as a third count. According to what Spertus previously told The Times, the alleged victim described in the third count — identified as Deputy Doe 11 in court records — was a civilian employee and not a deputy.

    Last month, L.A. Superior Court Judge Sam Ohta tossed out two more of the counts against Teran following a four-day preliminary hearing at which he determined there was enough evidence to move forward to trial on the six remaining counts.

    At the same time, in response to motions filed by lawyers for The Times and LA Public Press, Ohta ordered the release of unredacted exhibits that would identify most of the deputies. But he held the release of that information for three weeks to give the state time to file for appellate relief — which it did, arguing in a petition that the deputies’ “disciplinary matters here do not implicate any Brady obligations and/or were determined to be unfounded by the superior court in the litigation of those matters.”

    The court of appeals denied the request.

    But the redacted documents already made public contain distinctive notes and markings, as well as identifying dates and apparent redaction oversights, which make it possible to match them to public court records containing the deputies’ names.

    On one exhibit, state prosecutors left public the department identification numbers corresponding to Deputy Does 7, 8 and 9. On another, they left public a connected civil case number. In at least four cases, handwritten margin notes and signatures made it possible to match redacted exhibits to the public versions of the same documents already in L.A. Superior Court records.

    To narrow down which court records to scour for matching pages, reporters created a database of disciplinary files already made public by the Sheriff’s Department then searched those records for a series of dates referenced in an affidavit the state filed in June to justify the charges.

    Of the seven deputies identified through those methods, at least two had legal appeals easily discoverable through a Google search. One had been demoted as part of an incident covered in 2013 both by The Times and by the news blog Witness LA.

    Then-commander Patrick Jordan was knocked down to captain after a cheating scandal at the 2012 Baker to Vegas Challenge Cup Relay race, a 120-mile foot race that draws teams of law enforcement officers from around the world.

    A team representing the Sheriff’s Department swapped out a deputy for an ineligible runner who was not a department employee. Though court records indicate Jordan didn’t learn about the switch until the morning after the race, he was later demoted because he failed to report it. He appealed unsuccessfully to the Los Angeles County Civil Service Commission, which upheld his discipline.

    In 2016, a judge denied Jordan’s final attempt to reverse the disciplinary action. One of the documents in his civil case matches an exhibit in the Teran case, including a handwritten mark in the margin and a description of the discipline imposed. His employee identification number matches the one listed in another exhibit. Jordan could not be reached for comment Monday.

    Another case involved a deputy working in Court Services. In 2009, Gerald Jackson used force on an incarcerated person who allegedly assaulted him and a fellow deputy, according to records from the lawsuit Jackson filed to overturn his discipline.

    A civil lawsuit filed by the incarcerated person — which was ultimately dismissed — alleged that Jackson struck the jailed man’s eye repeatedly with a container, and beat and pepper sprayed him after a verbal altercation.

    Jackson was investigated and eventually discharged in 2012, but court records show a judge reversed the decision two years later, when Jackson argued that the Sheriff’s Department had missed the deadline to impose discipline on him. A review of his court records showed that one document matches an exhibit in the Teran case, including a reference to the case number of another deputy who was involved in the same incident.

    Most of the cases involved deputies who entered their own disciplinary histories into court records when they filed suit. But in one case Sheriff’s Department officials brought the matter into the public record when they sued to challenge a decision by the Civil Service Commission to reduce a deputy’s discipline from discharge to a 15-day suspension.

    Andrew Serrata, a former police officer from the defunct Maywood Police Department, was hired by the Sheriff’s Department in 2011 and later fired when the department realized that Serrata had incorrectly answered questions on his application related to his legal history, liabilities and debt.

    Serrata had successfully been sued by an ex-girlfriend, had his wages garnished for several months, and still owed money — all of which he failed to disclose properly on his job application, according to a 2013 letter the department sent notifying him of its disciplinary decision.

    Serrata — whose employee number matched one listed as a Deputy Doe in the Teran case — later appealed his discharge to the Civil Service Commission. The Sheriff’s Department pushed back, vigorously petitioning the court to overturn that decision and writing that Serrata’s claims were “simply, inherently unbelievable, and inexplicable for one filling out a form which warns that dismissal would result from misstatements.”

    Ultimately, a judge sided with Serrata and the commission, and he kept his job until he retired in 2021. When reached by phone Monday, he declined to comment for this story.

    The other deputies reporters identified faced discipline for allegations ranging from criminal convictions to crashes, according to records from the civil lawsuits they filed to challenge their punishments.

    David Carbajal damaged his patrol vehicle and failed to promptly notify his supervisor about the damage or fill out the required forms to report the situation, resulting in a 10-day suspension.

    Rachel Levy got into an altercation with a driver and used profanity after already being relieved of duty stemming from a separate incident. She was fired but ultimately successfully appealed her discipline to a 30-day suspension.

    Salvatore Guerrero was discharged after a complaint stemming from a call for service in which a woman accused him of inappropriate behavior, including returning to the residence while off-duty. A judge ultimately ruled that the evidence did not support the allegations.

    Jordan Kennedy pleaded guilty in Orange County Superior Court to driving drunk with a loaded duty weapon in his car. He was notified of the planned punishment — a 20-day suspension — while he was deployed overseas with the military. When he returned, he said he’d never been properly notified of the disciplinary decision, and a judge eventually ordered the department to overturn it.

    They could not be reached for comment, or did not respond.

    Jonathan Abel, an expert on Brady material and associate professor at UC Law San Francisco, reviewed court records from the seven deputies’ cases reporters identified.

    “There is nothing untoward about investigating these types of things,” he said, explaining that although dishonesty is the “core” of Brady material, past convictions could be a sign of “moral turpitude.” And sometimes uses of force can be relevant, as in cases in which a defendant accused of assaulting an officer aims to show the officer had a pattern of using excessive force.

    “To build that [Brady] list, you would have to sink a few dry wells,” he continued, explaining the need to evaluate material that might ultimately be irrelevant. “How can you know whether something’s Brady or not until you’ve read the documents?”

    A family member of one Deputy Doe — who asked to remain anonymous to avoid negatively affecting the deputy’s current job — said she’d been following the Teran case, even before the Sheriff’s Department reached out to alert the deputy to it several weeks after the matter became public. By that point, state prosecutors had already released two of the deputies’ names.

    “It almost feels like they keep getting punished over and over,” she said.

    This article was published in partnership with Los Angeles Public Press, a nonprofit news organization for the residents of Los Angeles County. Subscribe to its newsletter, and follow it on Instagram, X/Twitter, and Threads.

    Keri Blakinger, Emily Elena Dugdale

    Source link

  • Teen charged in shooting of 49ers’ Ricky Pearsall is ‘very sorry,’ attorney says

    Teen charged in shooting of 49ers’ Ricky Pearsall is ‘very sorry,’ attorney says

    The 17-year-old accused of shooting San Francisco 49ers wide receiver Ricky Pearsall during a botched armed robbery attempt last weekend was arraigned in juvenile court Wednesday, a day after he was charged with multiple felonies, including attempted murder.

    Judge Roger C. Chan read the charges against the teenager, who because he is a minor was referred to only by his initials. The allegations include personal use and intentional discharge of a firearm, assault with a semiautomatic firearm and attempted second-degree robbery,

    The young man, whom police have said lives in Tracy, about 70 miles east of San Francisco, sat facing forward through the short proceeding, next to his court-appointed public defender, Bob Dunlap. His parents sat in the front row of benches reserved for the public, a few feet from their son. His mother required a Spanish-speaking translator.

    Assistant Dist. Atty. David Mitchell said members of Pearsall’s family also attended the hearing, though he did not specify which relatives or whether they joined online or attended in person.

    Neither the suspect nor his family made any public comments. While taking questions from the media after the hearing, Dunlap said the teenager — whom he described as a high school senior — and his parents were “very sorry” about the shooting.

    “This is very, very hard on them,” Dunlap said. “They assured me, and from what little I know, that this is completely out of character for him.”

    Pearsall, 23, was walking back to his car alone after shopping in one of the luxury stores in San Francisco’s Union Square district on Saturday afternoon when, according to police, a gunman confronted Pearsall and tried to rob him, targeting his Rolex watch. A struggle ensued, and the attacker’s gun fired multiple times, San Francisco Police Chief Bill Scott said during a Saturday evening news conference. Both Pearsall and the assailant were shot.

    A bullet struck Pearsall in the chest and exited through his back, missing his vital organs, according to a social media post by his mother. He was treated at San Francisco General Hospital and released Sunday.

    The suspect was shot in his left arm and treated at the same hospital, according to police. Dunlap said his client is bandaged but recovering well.

    Dunlap said it was too early to address questions about why the teenager was in San Francisco, or his motives. Dunlap said he has read a police report on the incident, but has not yet been able to review video of the shooting that investigators are gathering from area surveillance cameras, which he believed would shed more light on what happened.

    He added that there were “extenuating circumstances” that he believed could factor into the case, but provided no details. He also said he wasn’t convinced the attempted murder charge would “hold water at the end of the day.”

    A probation official revealed during the hearing that the suspect has a pending juvenile court matter in San Joaquin County. Officials provided no details on that case, though Dunlap said his client would probably be transferred back to San Joaquin County after the San Francisco proceedings conclude.

    San Francisco Dist. Atty. Brooke Jenkins has not yet said whether she would seek to try the teenager in adult court. That would require a ruling by a judge that “essentially means that the juvenile system would not be equipped to rehabilitate that minor,” Jenkins said.

    Dunlap said it would be inappropriate for the case to be transferred out of juvenile court.

    “I think that my client certainly should be treated as a juvenile. He is a juvenile,” Dunlap said.

    Pearsall, who played for Arizona State and the University of Florida, was drafted by the 49ers in the first round of the 2024 NFL draft. He was sidelined with a shoulder injury during much of the NFL preseason.

    The 49ers have put Pearsall on the non-football injury list, meaning he will miss at least the first four regular-season games. Team officials have said they expect him to make a full recovery.

    Hannah Wiley

    Source link