ReportWire

Tag: court trials

  • How CNN broke the news from Trump’s arraignment despite a courtroom ban on electronics | CNN Business

    How CNN broke the news from Trump’s arraignment despite a courtroom ban on electronics | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: A version of this article first appeared in the “Reliable Sources” newsletter. Sign up for the daily digest chronicling the evolving media landscape here.



    CNN
     — 

    The operation was devised on the eve of the arraignment.

    The chief judge presiding over the Miami federal court in which former President Donald Trump was arraigned on Tuesday had made the decision to prohibit electronics inside the courthouse, presenting a major hurdle for news organizations needing to quickly transmit information from the historic proceeding to the outside world. Without access to electronic devices, the rudimentary task was a formidable one.

    After surveying the courthouse on Monday, CNN’s team hatched a plan — one that ultimately led the news network to become the first to report that Trump was in custody and had entered a not guilty plea on 37 counts related to his alleged mishandling of classified intelligence documents.

    It started with hiring a group of local high school students to work as production assistants for the day. Noah Gray, CNN’s senior coordinating producer for special events, had grown up in the Miami area and attended Palmetto Senior High School. He contacted his former teacher, who heads the school’s television production program, and said that CNN wanted to quickly hire some of her students to help with its reporting effort.

    On Tuesday, several of the hired students were brought into the courthouse and seated in an overflow room with reporters Tierney Sneed and Hannah Rabinowitz. As the hearing unfolded and developments transpired, Sneed and Rabinowitz jotted down their reporting on notepads, tearing off sheets with urgent news, and handing it to one of the students. The students then ran the reporting to one of their classmates who was standing by at one of the courthouse’s only two pay phones.

    But there was a twist: the pay phones at the courthouse could only dial local telephone numbers. To overcome the final obstacle, CNN’s staff devised a plan to have the production assistant dial his own personal cell phone, which was located in a nearby RV that the network was using as a mobile headquarters.

    Brad Parks, a CNN regional newsgathering director stationed inside the RV, then picked up the phone, typed up the reporting and relayed the information to the outlet’s Washington, D.C. bureau. Once the reporting was cleared for air by senior leaders in Washington, it was then transmitted to the control room and the network at large. And, from there, it was finally communicated to CNN’s anchors, who delivered the news to viewers across the world.

    “In all my years of field producing, never have I been involved in an operation as complex as this literal game of professional telephone,” Gray told me on Tuesday, after the hearing concluded.

    The remarkable effort to report on the court proceeding was only necessary because of the archaic system in which U.S. federal courts operate. The public continues to have remarkably little access to proceedings in federal courts — no matter how consequential or extraordinary the case may be.

    There are no cameras. There are no audio feeds. There are no phone lines to listen in on. In this case, there was only a courtroom with limited seating and an overflow room in which the proceeding was broadcast. Courtroom sketches were the only visuals the public had the opportunity to see. The artists’ renditions are the only images that will be recorded in history books.

    Over the years, there have been efforts by advocacy groups to increase transparency in courtrooms. But the efforts have only resulted in some minor movement. Generally speaking, federal courts refuse to budge.

    However, given the mile-high stakes of a former president, who is once again running for office while facing criminal charges, calls to allow more transparency have been renewed. In fact, several times during television coverage of the arraignment on Tuesday, legal experts brought the important issue to the forefront.

    “I think this is long overdue,” Elie Honig, CNN’s senior legal analyst, told Jake Tapper, describing the federal courts as “stubbornly old fashioned” and “up on their high horse.”

    “There is this pearl clutching going on for decades among judges,” Honig said. “‘We don’t want our proceedings here to become a spectacle.’ Well, guess what? We need to see this. To put it not so finely, we have a right to see this.”

    Over on MSNBC, Neal Katyal, the former acting solicitor general, made a similar argument. Katyal contended that public access in this particular case would be a benefit to everyone.

    “I think the benefits for public access cut for both Trump and the prosecution,” Katyal told Nicolle Wallace. “Because Trump can be sure the public will watch for any perceived inequities. And a live stream can be used to combat any misinformation that Trump may try to spread.”

    “And so I think this is the people’s court, this is our American taxpayer dollars that pay for this,” Katyal added, “and all Americans should be able to see it.”

    Whether greater transparency is ultimately granted remains to be seen. But despite the obstacles the federal court system has in place, newsrooms will find a way to climb over them and deliver the news — as was evidenced Tuesday.

    Clarification: This story has been updated to reflect the order to bar electronics from the courthouse came from the chief judge in Miami.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Opening statements begin in the trial of Parkland school resource officer who stayed outside during shooting | CNN

    Opening statements begin in the trial of Parkland school resource officer who stayed outside during shooting | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The trial of the former school resource officer who remained outside a Parkland, Florida, high school five years ago while 17 people were gunned down inside started in earnest Wednesday, as prosecutors began presenting their opening statement.

    The state has accused retired Broward Sheriff’s Office Deputy Scot Peterson of failing to follow his active shooter training by staying outside Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on February 14, 2018, taking cover for at least 45 minutes while a former student carried out what remains the deadliest high school shooting in US history. Among the slain were 14 students and three staff members; 17 others were injured.

    The case highlights the expectations for officers responding to active shooters as the country faces a seemingly endless scourge of gun violence, with schools such as those in Parkland; Uvalde, Texas; and Newtown, Connecticut, etched in public memory as the scenes of some of the most devastating massacres.

    Peterson has pleaded not guilty to 11 counts – including seven of felony child neglect, three of culpable negligence and one of perjury – and maintains he did nothing wrong. The 60-year-old, who retired as criticism of his alleged failure mounted, has said he didn’t enter the unfolding scene of carnage in the school’s 1200 building because he couldn’t tell where the gunshots were coming from.

    Before the shooting, Peterson was a dedicated and decorated officer who had served for more than three decades, his attorney, Mark Eiglarsh, told CNN.

    “After a 32-year career, this loving husband and father of four went from hero, and in 4 minutes and 15 seconds, he went to criminal,” the defense lawyer said.

    Jury selection began last Wednesday, yielding a panel of six jurors and four alternates tasked with weighing the state’s unusual case, which experts have described to CNN as the first of its kind and a legal stretch.

    The Broward State Attorney’s Office charged Peterson under a Florida statute that usually applies to caretakers, arguing the then-deputy, in his capacity as a school resource officer, was a caregiver responsible for the protection of the high school’s students and staff.

    Peterson was at the school administration building on February 14, 2018, when the shooter opened fire on the first floor of the 1200 building, according to a probable cause affidavit. Peterson got to the building’s east entrance about 2 minutes later, per a timeline in the affidavit.

    Peterson moved about 75 feet away and “positioned himself behind the wall of the stairwell on the northeast corner of the 700 Building” – a third campus structure – the affidavit says, calling it a “position of cover” he held for the duration of the shooting.

    In a blow to both the state and the defense, the judge last week ruled jurors will not make a trip to the scene of the shooting, as the jury in the shooter’s trial did, CNN affiliate WPLG reported. Eiglarsh wanted the jury to see the exterior of the 1200 building, which has been preserved pending the trials of the shooter and Peterson, while prosecutors had wanted jurors to see the building’s interior, too.

    Beyond the child neglect and culpable negligence charges, Peterson was charged with perjury for telling investigators he heard only two or three gunshots after arriving at the scene of the shooting, the affidavit says, while other witnesses said they’d heard more.

    Peterson’s attorney intends to argue, in part, that his client’s confusion about the location of the shooter was reasonable and shared by others at the scene, including members of law enforcement, teachers and students, Eiglarsh told CNN. The lawyer also contends Peterson’s actions at the scene illustrate he was not negligent but reacting as well as he could with the information he had, he said.

    Additionally, Eiglarsh disagrees with the decision to charge his client under the caretaker statute, he told CNN, calling the choice “preposterous.”

    “He’s not a legal caregiver,” Eiglarsh said, acknowledging he understands the argument. “But he’s not a teacher, he’s not a parent, he’s not a kidnapper who’s responsible for the well-being of a child. He’s not hired by the school system.”

    In the past, Peterson and his attorneys have argued the caretaker statute does not apply to him, emphasizing one person is responsible for the deaths and injuries that day: the gunman, then-19-year-old Nikolas Cruz, who pleaded guilty to 17 counts of murder and 17 counts of attempted murder and was sentenced last year to life in prison without the possibility of parole after a jury declined to unanimously recommend the death penalty.

    That outcome angered and disappointed many victims’ families, including some who see Peterson’s trial as another opportunity for justice.

    “We should not portray or allow the defense team or the deputy who failed to act properly to portray himself as a victim,” Tony Montalto, the father of 14-year-old victim Gina Montalto told CNN before jury selection. “He was charged with keeping the students and staff safe, and he failed to do so.”

    “Regardless of the outcome in the trial,” he said, “I hope he’s haunted every day by the fact that his actions cost lives.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Prince Harry gives tense testimony in historic courtroom battle against British media | CNN Business

    Prince Harry gives tense testimony in historic courtroom battle against British media | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    London
    CNN
     — 

    Prince Harry has become the first senior British royal to give evidence on a witness stand in 132 years, as his bitter fight against the UK’s tabloid press came to a head in tense courtroom showdown on Tuesday.

    Harry is suing a big British newspaper group, Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN), alleging the publisher’s journalists hacked his phone and used other illicit means to gather information about his life between 1996 and 2009.

    Follow live updates from the courtroom here.

    As the landmark hearing got underway at the High Court in London, Prince Harry answered questions in a measured, almost hushed tone. He appeared nervous at first, and was at one point asked to raise his voice.

    He faced forensic and detailed questioning from MGN’s lawyer, Andrew Green who probed him on the specifics of his claims and occasionally left him scrambling to recall sections of his written statement or find pieces of evidence.

    But the Duke of Sussex brought to court an overriding argument that he has previously made on television programs and in podcast interviews: that the media’s intrusion and tactics caused him significant distress and wrecked some of his closest relationships.

    And he increasingly asserted himself as the testimony wore on, clashing at times with the publisher’s lawyer as they dissected reams of press coverage and legalese.

    “Some editors and journalists do have blood on their hands” for the distress caused to him, Harry told the court at one point – and “perhaps, inadvertently death,” he added, in reference to his mother Princess Diana.

    Here’s what we learned as Harry began giving evidence on Tuesday.

    Tuesday’s courtroom session touched on dozens of snippets from Harry’s youth, repeated aloud in court as the prince and MGN’s lawyer parsed over the fine details of several news articles.

    Harry’s diagnosis with the “kissing disease,” also known as mono; his teenage trips to the pub; his broken thumb and a back injury sustained in a game of polo; his gap year afternoons on the beach; and Princess Diana’s trips to collect him from school – all were all the subject of stories entered into evidence, and each was dissected by Green and the duke.

    Overall, the prince alleges that about 140 articles published in titles belonging to Mirror Group contained information gathered using unlawful methods, and 33 of those articles have been selected to be considered at the trial.

    In the courtroom on Tuesday, Harry said that “every single article has caused me distress.”

    “All of these articles played an important role – a destructive role – in my growing up,” Harry said. The newspapers in question were on constantly display “in every single palace, unfortunately,” while he was growing up. At school, fellow students and others would read the articles, he said. Harry described the level of coverage as “incredibly invasive.”

    Green began by attempting to establish whether Harry remembered reading the articles in question at the time of publication. When the duke conceded he could not always recall, Green pressed him on how he could realistically argue they could have affected him so strongly. It was a theme to which Green would often return.

    In a written statement entered into the court record on Tuesday, Harry expressed concern that his conversations with family and friends may have been intercepted. He noted that he and his brother, Prince William, “naturally discussed personal aspects of our lives as we trusted each other with the private information we shared.”

    He said private information about his life was raised on voicemails left on the phones of his father Charles and his mother Diana.

    Prince Harry at his school, Eton, in 2003. The period being examined in the trial covers Harry's teenage years and his early 20s.

    Harry said that he would discuss “private and sensitive matters regarding our family and personal lives” on voicemails left on the phone of the then Kate Middleton, now the Princess of Wales, he said. The Duke listed a number of other friends with whom he had been in contact, including the late TV presenter Caroline Flack, in his witness statement.

    He said he recalled “unusual mobile activity” relating to his voicemails that he dismissed at the time, but now alleges was caused by phone hacking.

    “I remember on multiple occasions hearing a voicemail for the first time that wasn’t ‘new’,” he wrote. “I would simply put it down to perhaps a technical glitch, as mobile phones were still relatively new back then, or even just having too many drinks the night before (and having forgotten that I’d listened to it).”

    Also in his written statement, Harry argued that the press actively tried to ruin his relationships. “I always felt as if the tabloids wanted me to be single, as I was much more interesting to them and sold more newspapers,” Harry wrote.

    “Whilst they would, of course, report on my successes in life, it seemed to me that they took far greater pleasure in knocking me down, time and time again,” he added.

    Harry claimed that papers would go about that task by putting “strain” on his relationships and creating distrust between him and his partners. He spoke regularly about one of his former girlfriends, Chelsy Davy, alleging journalists would find out about flight details to photograph her at airports, and would book rooms in the same hotels as the couple when they were on vacation.

    The duke evidently believes that continues to be the case since his marriage to Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. “This twisted objective is still pursued to this day even though I’m now married,” he wrote.

    There was a throng of media outside the court on Tuesday.

    The atmosphere in court was occasionally tense. “Are we not, Prince Harry, in the realms of total speculation,” Green asked Harry at one point on Tuesday, after an exchange over a story about the teen prince breaking his thumb. Green had quizzed the duke about which specific illicit means of newsgathering Harry was alleging.

    “I’m not the one who wrote the article,” Harry replied.

    “No, but you’re the one who’s bringing the claim,” Green said.

    Earlier in the morning, when discussing Harry’s use of a landline phone to talk to his mother from school, Harry suggested that either that phone or Diana’s could have been hacked.

    “That’s just speculation you’ve come up with now,” Green said in response.

    The exchanges between Harry and Green ultimately settled into a predictable pattern; when a new article was brought up, Green would press Harry on how he could know that the information was obtained illegally, and not through typical means.

    Harry would often respond that he couldn’t fathom how information would have made its way into newspapers without illicit involvement. And he would repeatedly assert that the journalists who wrote the stories, not the subject of the stories, should answer questions about their sourcing.

    There were times during the back-and-forth between Harry and Green when the prince appeared uncomfortable or unaware of the minutiae of his case.

    Harry at one point joked that he was being put through a “workout” by having to repeatedly reach for bundles of evidence, stacked in folders beside him.

    Green offered to arrange for someone to help the prince navigate the evidence, and Harry would often reply “if you say so,” when Green sought to establish details of the articles the prince’s team entered into evidence.

    After a brief mid-morning recess, the judge asked Harry to raise his voice to ensure he could be heard throughout the courtroom, telling the duke that a number of observers in the courtroom had struggled to hear him.

    The questioning was far more intense and detailed than anything Harry has experienced in the many television and podcast interviews he has given on the topic of press intrusion.

    And Green sought to poke a number of holes in Harry’s argument, including that Harry was initially unaware of several specific stories, or that details in those stories could not have come through phone hacking as they had already been reported by other outlets.

    In a lengthy witness statement and over the course of an hours-long testimony, the Duke of Sussex touched on a number of topics. They included:

    The British government: Harry criticized the current Conservative government in his written testimony, in particular for what he described as an overly close relationship with the media.

    “On a national level as, at the moment, our country is judged globally by the state of our press and our government – both of which I believe are at rock bottom,” Harry wrote.

    He added that Rishi Sunak’s government “clearly have no appetite” for press regulation, “because their friends in the press said so.”

    Piers Morgan: The British broadcaster was the editor of The Mirror from 1995 to 2004, and has been intensely critical of the duke and his wife, Meghan, in recent years. “The thought of Piers Morgan and his band of journalists earwigging into my mother’s private and sensitive messages … makes me feel physically sick,” Harry wrote in his evidence.

    He claimed that, in response to his lawsuit, “myself and my wife have been subjected to a barrage of horrific personal attacks and intimidation from Piers Morgan,” suggesting that Morgan has taken the stance “in the hope that I will back down.”

    Morgan has been unapologetic about his criticism of the pair, calling them “repulsive narcissistic hypocrites” in one December tweet.

    The Queen’s concerns: Harry said he had recently learned that Queen Elizabeth II had a member of her staff secretly fly to Australia in 2003, and stay in a house down the road from where Harry was staying on his gap year.

    “She was concerned about the extent of the coverage of my trip and wanted someone I knew to be nearby, in case I needed support,” Harry wrote.

    At the time Harry had been photographed on the beach with friends – photos that Harry claims must have been obtained illicitly, because he did not understand how any journalists would know he was there.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Man indicted for the murder of rapper Takeoff | CNN

    Man indicted for the murder of rapper Takeoff | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A grand jury in Harris County, Texas, on Thursday indicted a man for the murder of Takeoff, a member of the rap group Migos.

    Patrick Clark, 33, was arrested in connection with the death in December.

    Takeoff, 28, was shot to death outside a private party at 810 Billiards and Bowling in Houston on November 1. “There was an argument outside the bowling alley which led to the shooting,” Houston Police Chief Troy Finner said at the time. Another man, Cameron Joshua, was arrested and charged with unlawful carrying of a weapon in relation to the shooting.

    Police described Takeoff as an “innocent bystander” to the argument that preceded the shooting.

    In the arraignment document, the state claims Clark “unlawfully, intentionally and knowingly commit the felony offense of Deadly Conduct by knowingly discharging a firearm at and in the direction of” Takeoff.

    Clark’s defense attorney, Letitia Quiñones-Hollins, told CNN that the indictment was expected.

    “We would ask people to remember that getting an indictment requires meeting a very, very minimal standard of proof,” she said in a statement. “When we get inside a courtroom and in front of a jury, where we will be able to put on our evidence and cross-examine the state’s witnesses – where the standard of proof is guilt beyond reasonable doubt – we expect the jury will come back with a verdict of not guilty.”

    Clark remains under house arrest on $1 million bond.

    Takeoff was the youngest member of the trio Migos, alongside his uncle Quavo and rapper Offset. Artists including Justin Bieber and Drake remembered Takeoff as a talented rapper and loving friend and family member at his memorial last year.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jim Brown Fast Facts | CNN

    Jim Brown Fast Facts | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Here’s a look at the life of activist, actor and Pro Football Hall of Fame running back Jim Brown. He played his entire career with the Cleveland Browns.

    Birth date: February 17, 1936

    Birth place: St. Simons Island, Georgia

    Birth name: James Nathaniel Brown

    Father: Swinton Brown, a professional boxer

    Mother: Theresa Brown, a housekeeper

    Marriages: Monique Gunthrop (1997-present); Sue Jones (1958-1972, divorced)

    Children: with Monique Gunthrop: Aris and Morgan; with Sue Jones: Kim, Kevin (twins) and James Jr.; with Kim Jones: Kimberly; with Brenda Ayres: Shellee; mother’s name unavailable publicly: Karen Brown Ward

    Education: Syracuse University, B.A., 1957

    At Syracuse, Brown played football, lacrosse, basketball and ran track.

    Qualified for the 1956 Olympics as a decathlete, but did not compete in order to focus on football.

    Inducted into the the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 1971, the College Football Hall of Fame in 1995 and National Lacrosse Hall of Fame in 1983.

    Led the NFL in rushing eight out of his nine seasons.

    Played in nine straight Pro Bowls, for the 1957-1965 seasons.

    NFL’s MVP in 1957, 1958 and 1965.

    Starred in movies such as “The Dirty Dozen,” “Ice Station Zebra” and “100 Rifles.”

    1957 – First round draft pick, sixth player overall, by the Cleveland Browns. Later named Rookie of the Year and also Most Valuable Player.

    1960s – Founds the Negro Industrial and Economic Union (later renamed the Black Economic Union) to support black entrepreneurship.

    1964 – “Off My Chest,” Brown’s autobiography, with Myron Cope, is published.

    1964 – Film debut in “Rio Conchos.”

    December 27, 1964 – The Cleveland Browns defeat the Baltimore Colts 27-0 in the NFL Championship Game. (The Super Bowl replaced the NFL Championship Game in 1967).

    July 24, 1965 – A jury finds Brown not guilty of assault and battery against 18-year-old Brenda Ayres, after an incident in his hotel room.

    July 14, 1966 – After nine seasons and 118 games, retires from professional football at the age of 30.

    1968 – Brown is charged with assault with intent to commit murder after model Eva Bohn-Chin is found beneath the balcony of Brown’s second floor apartment. The charge is later dismissed after Bohn-Chin refuses to name him as her assailant. Brown also pays a $300 fine for striking a deputy sheriff during the same incident.

    1969 – Stars in “100 Rifles” with Raquel Welch. It is one of the first major studio films to feature an interracial love scene.

    February 5, 1970 – A jury finds Brown not guilty of assault and battery charges, stemming from a traffic accident in 1969.

    1971 – Is inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame, in his first year of eligibility.

    1978 – Is sentenced to one day in jail for beating and choking his golfing partner, Frank Snow. Brown is also fined $500 and receives two years’ probation.

    1985 – Brown is charged with raping and assaulting a 33-year-old woman in his home. The judge later dismisses the charges based on inconsistent testimony.

    August 1986 – Brown is arrested for assaulting live-in girlfriend Debra Clark. The charges are later dropped after Clark refuses to prosecute.

    1988 – Founds the Amer-I-Can program, an organization dedicated to stopping gang violence and helping individuals “take charge of their lives and achieve their full potential.”

    1989 – Brown’s memoir, with Steve Delsohn, “Out of Bounds,” is published.

    June 15, 1999 – Following a domestic disturbance with his wife Monique Gunthrop Brown, Brown is arrested and charged with making terrorist threats toward his wife. In the 911 tape, Monique Brown accuses Brown of threatening to kill her, a claim she later recants.

    September 10, 1999 – A jury finds Brown guilty of vandalism for smashing his wife’s car with a shovel during the June incident. He is later fined $1,800 and sentenced to three years’ probation, one year of domestic violence counseling and 400 hours community service or 40 hours on a work crew.

    January 5, 2000 – Brown is sentenced to six months in jail for refusing the court-ordered counseling and community service hours handed down in 1999. He serves almost four months in the Ventura County jail in 2002.

    2002 – Spike Lee’s documentary, “Jim Brown: All American,” is released.

    2005-2010 – Executive adviser to the Cleveland Browns.

    2008 – Files a lawsuit against Electronic Arts, alleging that the video game company used his likeness in the Madden NFL video games without his consent.

    2009 – A federal judge dismisses Brown’s 2008 lawsuit against Electronic Arts. An appeals court upholds the ruling in 2013.

    May 29, 2013 – Is named special adviser to the Cleveland Browns.

    July 2014 – Files a lawsuit against sports memorabilia dealer Lelands, alleging that the online auction dealer was selling Brown’s stolen 1964 championship ring. Lelands countersues Brown in August 2014.

    October 2015 – The lawsuit is settled, and Brown’s ring is returned.

    September 18, 2016 – A bronze statue of Brown is unveiled outside FirstEnergy Stadium, home of the Cleveland Browns. It is the first statue outside the stadium to honor a former player.

    October 11, 2018 – Along with Kanye West, Brown meets with President Donald Trump in the Oval Office.

    November 22, 2019 – Brown is announced as one of the 100 greatest players in NFL history as part of the NFL 100 All-Time Team.

    January 13, 2020 – ESPN names Brown the number one greatest player in college football’s 150 year history.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • NYC bike path terrorist set to be sentenced to life in prison after avoiding death penalty verdict at trial | CNN

    NYC bike path terrorist set to be sentenced to life in prison after avoiding death penalty verdict at trial | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A terrorist convicted of striking and killing eight people with a rented truck on a New York City bike path in an attack for ISIS is scheduled to be sentenced to serve life in prison Wednesday.

    Sayfullo Saipov effectively learned his sentence in March, when the jury in the penalty phase of his trial in Manhattan federal court told a judge it was unable to reach an undivided decision favoring the death penalty on any of the nine capital counts against him.

    The capital counts each carry a mandatory life imprisonment sentence by law after the jury didn’t unanimously vote for the death penalty.

    Saipov’s case was the first death penalty case under the Biden administration.

    About 25 surviving victims and family members of those killed in the attack are expected to give victim impact statements at the sentencing hearing Wednesday morning, according to court filings.

    Of the eight people killed in the attack, five were from Argentina, two were Americans, and one was from Belgium. The majority of those participating in the Manhattan federal court hearing are traveling from Argentina and Belgium, the prosecutors said in a memo.

    The convicted terrorist will have an opportunity to address the court before he is sentenced, but it is unclear if he will do so.

    On Halloween in 2017, Saipov drove a rented U-Haul truck into cyclists and pedestrians on Manhattan’s West Side bike path, then crashed the vehicle into a school bus, authorities said.

    After leaving the truck while brandishing a pellet gun and paintball gun, he was shot by a New York City Police Department officer and taken into custody, officials said.

    The jury convicted Saipov in January of all 28 counts against him for the fatal attack.

    Those counts included murder in aid of racketeering activity, assault with a dangerous weapon and attempted murder in aid of racketeering activity, attempted murder in aid of racketeering activity, provision of material support to ISIS, and violence and destruction of a motor vehicle.

    Saipov is expected to serve his life sentence at the Federal Bureau of Prisons ADX facility in Florence, Colorado, in solitary confinement at least 22 hours a day, his attorneys said during trial.

    Federal prosecutors who say Saipov deserves no leniency want District Judge Vernon Broderick to sentence Saipov to the fullest extent of the sentencing guidelines for his 28-count conviction; eight consecutive life sentences, a consecutive term of 260 years’ imprisonment and two concurrent life sentences.

    “Because Saipov deliberately committed the most abhorrent crime imaginable for which he has expressed no remorse, he deserves no leniency. Only the maximum punishment on each count of conviction will reflect the unimaginable harm inflicted and send the appropriate message that terrorist attacks on innocent civilians will be punished as harshly as the law allows,” prosecutors said in a pre-sentencing court filing.

    The harshest sentence, prosecutors wrote, would be “an exercise of such discretion to hold the defendant fully accountable for his crimes, and to send the appropriate message to the defendant, the public, and any others who might contemplate an attack on U.S. soil.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • McDonald’s found liable after child suffers burns from ‘hot’ chicken nuggets, Florida jury finds | CNN Business

    McDonald’s found liable after child suffers burns from ‘hot’ chicken nuggets, Florida jury finds | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    A South Florida jury returned a split verdict in a civil lawsuit filed against McDonald’s and one of its franchisees that alleged “dangerously hot” chicken nuggets from a Happy Meal burned a toddler, according to CNN affiliate WPLG.

    The jury on Thursday found that McDonald’s and franchise owner Upchurch Foods liable for failing to properly warn or provide reasonable instructions on the possible harm from the hot McNuggets dispensed at a Tamarac, Florida, drive-thru, the news station reported. However, only Upchurch Foods was found to be negligent. Jurors also found there was no inherent defect in putting McNuggets on the market and no breach of implied warranty.

    The suit was filed in 2019 against McDonald’s and Upchurch Foods. The Fort Lauderdale jury said both were at some fault for the burns sustained by Philana Holmes and Humberto Caraballo Estevez’s daughter when the hot nuggets fell on to her lap, WPLG reported.

    The complaint said Holmes bought and paid for the Happy Meal from the drive-thru and then drove away. The nugget fell and became lodged between her 4-year-old daughter’s leg and car seat, the law firm representing the plaintiffs said.

    “The Chicken McNuggets inside of that Happy Meal were unreasonably and dangerously hot (in terms of temperature),” and caused her “skin and flesh around her thighs to burn,” the complaint alleged, leaving her “disfigured and scarred.”

    The complaint said the franchise should have known the nuggets were “unfit for human handling,” had a duty not to sell them, and it should have adequately trained and supervised its employees.

    The law firm representing the plaintiff, Fischer Redavid, said in a blog post that the case will go to a second trial to “determine the damages owed to our client.”

    The case echoes the infamous McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit of the ’90s, in which a woman spilled coffee on her lap and suffered third-degree burns. A jury agreed with her contention that the coffee was unreasonably hot. Fischer Redavid noted that the plaintiff in that case was initially awarded nearly $3 million, but she settled for less after an appeal.

    “This is not the infamous Hot Coffee case; this is Olivia’s case,” the law firm said in a statement to WPLG. “She’s an adorable, innocent child who was severely burned through no fault of her own.”

    In a statement, McDonald’s called it an “unfortunate incident” but that they “respectfully disagree with the verdict.” McDonald’s defense said it had no control over the injuries and damages.

    “Our sympathies go out to this family for what occurred in this unfortunate incident, as we hold customer safety as one of our highest priorities,” local McDonald’s owner and operator, Brent Upchurch, said in a statement. “That’s why our restaurant follows strict rules in accordance with food safety best practices when it comes to cooking and serving our menu items, including Chicken McNuggets.”

    Upchurch said the Tamarac location “did indeed follow” safety protocols.

    Fischer Redavid’s statement said the verdict “reflected the truth, the facts, and the law.”

    “We don’t view this as a ‘split verdict.’ Two defendants went to trial, denying liability. A jury found both liable.”

    – CNN’s Danielle Wiener-Bronner contributed to this report

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Attorneys for Trump and E. Jean Carroll dispute character and evidence in closing arguments of civil rape trial | CNN Politics

    Attorneys for Trump and E. Jean Carroll dispute character and evidence in closing arguments of civil rape trial | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    E. Jean Carroll’s civil battery and defamation trial against Donald Trump neared a close Monday with closing arguments as her attorney told a federal jury in New York that no one is above the law, while Trump’s lawyer said not to hold any negative feelings about the former president against him.

    “In this country, even the most powerful person can be held accountable in court,” said attorney Roberta Kaplan. “No one, not even a former president, is above the law.”

    Trump attorney Joe Tacopina said he knows Trump is a divisive figure, but that shouldn’t matter to jurors when reaching a verdict.

    “People have very strong feelings about Donald Trump. That’s obvious,” Tacopina said. “There’s a time and a secret place to do that: it’s called a ballot box during an election.”

    “They want you to hate him enough to ignore the facts,” Tacopina added. “All objective evidence cuts against her.”

    Trump asked about infamous ‘Access Hollywood’ tape in deposition. See his reaction

    Carroll, a former magazine columnist, alleges Trump raped her in the Bergdorf Goodman department store in the spring of 1996 and then defamed her when he denied her claim, said she wasn’t his type and suggested she made up the story to boost sales of her book. Trump has denied all wrongdoing.

    Attorneys for Carroll and Trump rested their respective cases last Thursday. Carroll’s legal team put on 11 witnesses in her case, including the writer herself, over seven trial days. Trump did not put on a defense and ultimately opted not to testify, as is his right.

    Kaplan pointed out that Trump didn’t attend the trial, even though clips from his deposition were shown.

    “And you only saw him on video. He didn’t even bother to show up here in person,” Kaplan said.

    Carroll’s attorney showed clips of Trump’s video deposition taken last October including a moment where Trump mistook Carroll for his ex-wife. This shows, Kaplan said, that Carroll “was exactly his type.”

    Tacopina stressed that the former president did not need to appear in court to testify in his own defense.

    “How do you prove a negative?” Tacopina asked. “Challenging the story is our defense. There are no witnesses for us to call. There’s no witness for us to call because he was not there, it didn’t happen.”

    Tacopina said Trump did not defame Carroll when he denied her false accusations on social media. Trump’s lawyer told jurors not be confused by the verdict form when they see it. “If there’s no rape, there’s no defamation. There was no sexual assault and there was no defamation, they go hand in hand.”

    The jury again saw the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape and heard Trump describe how he aggressively moves on women without their consent because they let you “when you’re a star.”

    Trump revealed his “playbook” for handling women on the tape when he thought no one was listening, Kaplan said. “Telling you in his very own words how he treats women.”

    According to Kaplan, Trump and his lawyers want the jury to believe Carroll and the other witnesses in her case are a part of a huge “hoax” to take down the former president. “The big lie,” Kaplan called it.

    “There is only one person here who is lying and that person is Donald Trump,” Kaplan said.

    In order to side with Trump’s defense, “You’d need to conclude that Donald Trump, the nonstop liar, is the only person in this room telling the truth.”

    Tacopina responded by criticizing Trump’s language on the tape but said the crude nature still doesn’t make Carroll’s allegations true.

    “They’re trying to take parts of Donald Trump that you dislike or even hate,” Tacopina said. “You can think Donald Trump is a rude and crude person and that her story makes no sense. Both of those things can be true.”

    Carroll’s attorney also showed the jury a chart mapping how allegations from Carroll, Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff reveal a pattern of aggressive behavior. In each woman’s testimony at trial they described how Trump first engaged them in a semipublic place, then allegedly grabbed them suddenly, then later denied the allegations and said “she is too ugly for anyone to assault,” Kaplan said.

    Trump has denied Leeds’ and Stoynoff’s allegations against him.

    “Three different women, decades apart, but one single pattern of behavior. What happened to Ms. Carroll is not unique in that respect. Trump’s physical attacks and verbal attacks are his standard operational procedure,” Kaplan said.

    The jury in this case can award Carroll damages if they believe her account.

    “For E. Jean Carroll this lawsuit is not about the money,” Kaplan said. “It’s about getting her good name back.”

    “I’m not going to stand here and tell you how much you should award E. Jean Carroll in damages. What is the price for decades of living alone without companionship? No one to cook dinner with, no one to walk your dog with, no one to watch TV with. And feeling for decades that you’re dirty and unworthy,” Kaplan said. “I’m not going to put a number on that.”

    Responding in his closing, Tacopina accused Carroll of fabricating her rape allegations to sell her book and make money.

    “She’s abused this system, bringing false claims for, amongst other things, money, status, and political reasons,” Tacopina told the jury. “You cannot let her profit to the tune of millions of dollars for her abuse of this process.”

    District Judge Lewis Kaplan (no relation to Roberta Kaplan) is expected to instruct and charge the jury to begin deliberations on Tuesday.

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump will not testify in E. Jean Carroll battery trial | CNN Politics

    Trump will not testify in E. Jean Carroll battery trial | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump will not testify in the E. Jean Carroll civil battery and defamation trial after his attorney did not inform the court of any change in strategy before a judge-imposed deadline of 5 p.m. Sunday.

    While attorneys for Carroll and Trump rested their respective cases in the trial in Manhattan federal court on Thursday evening, District Judge Lewis Kaplan had left a window for Trump to testify, even as the former president’s attorney said that would be highly unlikely.

    The judge said he had ordered the precautionary measure in light of Trump’s public comments suggesting he would make an appearance in court before the trial ended.

    Carroll, a former magazine columnist, alleges Trump raped her in the Bergdorf Goodman department store in the mid-1990s and then defamed her when he denied her claim, said she wasn’t his type and suggested she made up the story to boost sales of her book. Trump has denied all wrongdoing.

    Closing arguments in the case are set to get underway Monday. The jury will likely get the case on Tuesday.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Woman pleads guilty to 1990 murder of a Florida mother while dressed as a clown but still denies committing the crime | CNN

    Woman pleads guilty to 1990 murder of a Florida mother while dressed as a clown but still denies committing the crime | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Three decades after a woman in Florida was fatally shot by a person dressed as a clown, the longtime suspect – who went on to marry the victim’s widower – has pleaded guilty even as her lawyers maintain she is innocent.

    Sheila Keen-Warren, 59, withdrew her earlier plea of not guilty and entered a guilty plea on Tuesday as part of a plea deal with prosecutors just weeks before the case was set to go to trial.

    She pleaded guilty to second-degree murder in the May 1990 killing of Marlene Warren, who was shot and killed at her home near West Palm Beach, Florida, as her son and his friends were eating breakfast inside.

    On the morning of the killing, Warren answered her door to find someone dressed as clown and clutching two balloons and a flower arrangement. The costumed person handed Warren the gifts and then pulled out a gun and shot her in the face, authorities said.

    Warren died in a hospital two days later.

    Twenty-seven years after the killing, Keen-Warren, who had since married Marlene Warren’s widowed husband, was arrested and charged with the crime in 2017.

    As part of her plea deal, Warren will be sentenced to 12 years in prison, with credit for the time she has been serving since her arrest.

    The victim’s son approved the plea terms, prosecutor Reid Scott said in court.

    “After years of professing her innocence, Sheila Keen Warren has finally been forced to admit that she was the one who dressed as a clown and took the life of an innocent victim,” State Attorney for Palm Beach County Dave Aronberg said in statement.

    Keen-Warren’s attorney, however, told CNN that she maintains her innocence but is happy with the plea terms.

    “This woman should never have been arrested or prosecuted,” her attorney Greg Rosenfeld said, “She was looking forward to her day in court.”

    Ultimately, Rosenfeld said, the plea deal was the best available option to Keen-Warren. “You never know what could happen in trial,” he said.

    If the case had gone to trial, Scott said in part in court, evidence submitted by prosecutors “would lead a jury to find her guilty of the crime.”

    When asked by the judge if she agreed with the prosecutor’s statements, Keen-Warren replied, “Yes, sir.”

    When detectives were first investigating the case, they heard rumors that the victim’s husband, Michael Warren, was having an affair with Sheila Keen, but the pair denied being in a relationship at the time, authorities said in 2017.

    Twelve years after his late wife’s killing, Michael Warren married Sheila Keen, now Keen-Warren, authorities said.

    Though Keen-Warren had long been a suspect in the case, evidence available in 1990 was just not strong enough to secure a conviction, investigators said at the time of her arrest.

    A major break didn’t come until 2014, when the the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office cold case unit reopened the investigation and were able to use advancements in DNA technology to strengthen their evidence, the office said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fox News-Dominion trial abruptly delayed on eve of opening statements | CNN Business

    Fox News-Dominion trial abruptly delayed on eve of opening statements | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Wilmington, Delaware
    CNN
     — 

    Dominion Voting Systems’ high-stakes defamation trial against Fox News, which was supposed to begin Monday, was abruptly delayed on Sunday evening, in a stunning eleventh-hour twist that threw into question whether a settlement was in the works.

    Opening statements were expected on Monday, but the Delaware Superior Court said in a surprise announcement that “the start of the trial” will now be Tuesday.

    The judge’s statement did not provide an explanation for the delay.

    “The Court has decided to continue the start of the trial, including jury selection, until Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. I will make such an announcement tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 7E,” using the legal term “continue,” which means delay or postpone.

    But the announcement came as The Wall Street Journal, which is owned by Fox Corporation Chairman Rupert Murdoch, reported on Sunday evening that “Fox has made a late push to settle the dispute out of court,” citing people familiar with the matter.

    Neither Dominion nor Fox commented on the delay Sunday.

    “Dominion has seemed quite motivated, throughout this case, to play it out on a public stage and correct the larger record on election denialism,” said RonNell Anderson Jones, a First Amendment expert and professor of law at the University of Utah.

    “But Fox may be far more incentivized to move closer to whatever Dominion might be asking, after a very rough week of pretrial hearings last week and, especially, in light of the recent revelations from the ex-employee who is now in Dominion’s camp.”

    Dominion had sued Fox News for defamation seeking damages of $1.6 billion. It says it was defamed by the right-wing network when Fox hosts and guests claimed in 2020 that its voting systems illegally rigged the election against Donald Trump.

    Fox News has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, maintained it is “proud” of its 2020 election coverage, and argued that Dominion’s lawsuit represents a threat to the First Amendment. The network says the $1.6 billion figure is wildly inflated.

    As the case has progressed through the court system and more damning material has emerged, legal experts have expressed surprise that Fox has not settled the case. A settlement would avert what promises to be an excruciating and embarrassing several weeks for Fox.

    Some of the company’s highest-ranking executives and highest-profile hosts are scheduled to otherwise testify during the trial about the election lies promoted by the network in the wake of the 2020 election.

    If a panel of jurors side with Dominion during trial and award a sum of money near what the voting technology company is asking for, it would represent one of the largest defamation defeats ever for a US media outlet.

    Regardless of whether a case goes to trial, the evidence that has emerged from the case has battered Fox News’ credibility and reputation, exposing the network as a dishonest organization willing to push lies to its audience.

    Private text messages and emails released as part of the case have already revealed top personnel at the right-wing talk network didn’t believe the conspiracy theories that were being put on the air and spread to viewers.

    Prominent hosts such as Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity knew Trump’s lies about the election were detached from reality, the communications revealed, but they leaned into the voter fraud theories anyway on their shows.

    — CNN’s Jon Passantino contributed reporting

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What to know ahead of the Fox News and Dominion trial | CNN Business

    What to know ahead of the Fox News and Dominion trial | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    A trial in a defamation suit brought against Fox News by Dominion Voting Systems is set to begin this week. It could have significant ramifications for the right-wing cable channel.

    Dominion is an election technology company. After former president Donald Trump lost the 2020 presidential election to Joe Biden, Dominion alleged Fox pushed various pro-Trump conspiracy theories, including false and potentially damaging information about the company’s voting technology, because “the lies were good for Fox’s business.” Fox is arguing that it was merely reporting the claims made by the Trump administration and Donald Trump’s associates.

    It filed a defamation lawsuit in 2021. The trial is set to begin Monday in Delaware.

    Here are 5 things to know ahead of the trial.

    Dominion wants the network’s star hosts and top executives to appear on the witness stand during trial, it said in a court filing in March.

    Here’s who could appear as witnesses, if Dominion gets its way:

    • Suzanne Scott, Fox News CEO

    • Jay Wallace, Fox News president

    • Hosts Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Maria Bartiromo, Laura Ingraham and Bret Baier

    • Abby Grossberg, a former Fox News producer who alleged that the network’s lawyers coerced her into providing misleading testimony in a lawsuit filed March

    • In April, Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis said Dominion could compel Fox Corporation Chairman Rupert Murdoch and his son, CEO Lachlan Murdoch, to testify, in a big blow to Fox.

    “Both parties have made these witnesses very relevant,” Davis said, regarding the Murdochs. Fox was trying to block Dominion from having the Murdochs on the witness stand.

    Dominion is asking for $1.6 billion in damages and additional punitive damages.

    That could be a major financial hit to Fox. Fox Corporation, the right-wing news outlet’s owner, has an estimated $4 billion in cash on hand, according to its latest earnings statement. It’s also unclear how much insurance the company has, or what any insurance policy would cover.

    Punitive damages are, however, uncapped in Delaware, with no legal maximum limit.

    The network claims that number is a wildly overblown amount designed to grab attention in headlines.

    Fox argued in a statement the case is about protecting “the rights of the free press” and a verdict in favor of Dominion would have “grave consequences” for the fourth estate.

    “Dominion’s lawsuit is a political crusade in search of a financial windfall, but the real cost would be cherished First Amendment rights,” a Fox spokesperson said in a statement.

    Defamation cases are hard to win in the United States, because of the Supreme Court’s ruling in New York Times v. Sullivan in 1964. Defamation has to meet a high standard. An entity can’t have just lied, it must have known (or at least strongly suspected) it was lying at the time, and it has to have been done with “actual malice.” The court has already ruled on the first two, saying that Fox aired lies and knew they were lies, so instead of a question of truth, it’s about whether Fox did so maliciously.

    Though major figures at Fox privately acknowledged reality – that former President Donald Trump had lost to President Joe Biden in 2020 – Fox continued to air conspiracies and lies in order to keep its large audience engaged.

    A cache of private messages, emails and depositions revealed that Fox may not have upheld the journalistic responsibility to report the truth to audiences. The judge has rejected several of Fox’s First Amendment defenses and in pretrial rulings barred the network from arguing its guests’ alleged defamatory statements were “newsworthy” and deserving of coverage.

    Legal filings made public a trove of private text messages, emails and deposition transcripts, revealing how Fox hosts, producers, and executives really felt about Trump.

    The damning behind-the-scenes communications were included in roughly 10,000 pages of court documents that have been made public as part of the lawsuit, many of which are likely to be shown in the trial.

    For example, host Tucker Carlson said in one text message he “passionately” hates Trump. In one November 2020 exchange, Tucker Carlson said Trump’s decision to snub Joe Biden’s inauguration was “so destructive,” adding that Trump’s post-election behavior was “disgusting” and that he was “trying to look away.”

    Murdoch emailed New York Post’s Col Allan, describing Trump’s election lies as “bulls**t and “damaging.”

    Murdoch’s private messages revealed how his own thoughts contradicted what Fox espoused. “Maybe Sean [Hannity] and Laura [Ingraham] went too far,” Murdoch wrote in an email Fox News chief executive Suzanne Scott, apparently referencing election denialism after Trump’s loss to President Joe Biden.

    The trial will begin Monday in Delaware at 9 am ET, with expected opening statements at some point during the day. Jury selection is also expected to wrap up Monday morning, ending with a panel of 12 jurors and 12 alternates. It’s anticipated that opening statements will begin immediately after the jury is seated. The trial is expected to last five to six weeks.

    Dominion will need to convince the jury that Fox acted with “actual malice” — showing the right-wing network’s hosts and executives knew what was being said on-air was false but broadcast it anyway, or acted with such a reckless disregard for the truth that they should be held liable.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Opinion: Top secrets come spilling out | CNN

    Opinion: Top secrets come spilling out | CNN

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: Sign up to get this weekly column as a newsletter. We’re looking back at the strongest, smartest opinion takes of the week from CNN and other outlets.



    CNN
     — 

    In 1917, British analysts deciphered a coded message the German foreign minister sent to one of his country’s diplomats vowing to begin “unrestricted submarine warfare” and seeking to win over Mexico with a promise to “reconquer the lost territory in Texas, New Mexico and Arizona” if the US entered the world war. When it became public, the Zimmerman Telegram caused a sensation, helping propel the US into the conflict against Germany.

    “Never before or since has so much turned upon the solution of a secret message,” wrote David Kahn in his classic 1967 history of secret communications, “The Codebreakers.” The Germans had taken great pains to keep their intentions confidential, and the codebreakers in London’s “Room 40” had to do a lot of work to decipher the telegram.

    Their efforts stand in stark contrast to the ease with which secrets came tumbling out of a Pentagon intelligence network when 21-year-old Massachusetts Air National Guard cyber specialist Jack Teixeira allegedly posted hundreds of documents on a Discord chatroom known as “Thug Shaker Central.” The disclosures likely won’t start a war, but they could prove extremely damaging to the US and several of its allies, including Ukraine.

    Teixeira is one of more than one million people who have Top Secret clearance. “The Pentagon has already started taking steps to limit the number of people who have access to such sensitive information,” wrote Brett Bruen, a former US diplomat and Obama administration official. “But much more can be done. … Why do so many people, especially those working short stints in government, have access to information that can shape the fate of nations and their leaders?”

    Writing in the Financial Times, Kori Schake saw “some good news.”

    “While specific details will be incredibly valuable to Russia and other adversaries, these are not bombshell revelations: journalists had already reported Ukrainian ammunition running low; peace talks between Moscow and Kyiv were never likely; allies have long been aware that the US eavesdrops on them; and the disparaging assessment of Ukraine’s forthcoming offensive may prove no more accurate than previous predictions were.” These will not prove as damaging as the Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning disclosures.

    But, she warned, “Technology making data ever more portable, distribution more global and communications more bespoke will make it easier to amass information and distribute it — either privately or publicly.”

    04 opinion cartoons 041523

    06 opinion cartoons 041523

    In less than a week, the two Democrats expelled from the Tennessee House for their participation in a gun control protest were sent back to office by local officials.

    Writing for CNN Opinion, Rep. Justin Pearson noted, “This should be a chastening moment for revanchist forces in Tennessee’s legislature and across the country. Over the long haul, the undemocratic machinations employed to oust us from office are destined to fail. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. once famously said that the moral arc of the universe bends toward justice. Events this week demonstrated, more than ever, that this is indeed the case…”

    “Over two-thirds of Americans — including four out of 10 Republicans — support the kind of common sense gun safety laws that Rep. Jones, Rep. Johnson and I were protesting in favor of, in the wake of the senseless March 27 Covenant School massacre.”

    “And yet, calls for common sense gun reform measures fall on deaf ears in our legislature where a Republican supermajority is wildly out of step with most people’s values.”

    The politics of gun control have shifted, argued Democratic strategist Max Burns. The NRA’s internal struggles have weakened its influence while Democrats in office, who once feared touching the issue of guns, are increasingly speaking out. And they are making some progress in enacting new state laws, Burns noted.

    “The American people decisively support Democratic proposals for addressing the scourge of gun violence. Political watchers who criticized Democrats for talking too much about abortion during the 2022 midterm elections later ate crow after that once-dreaded culture war topic topped the list of voter concerns nationally…

    “Biden and the Democrats have the rare opportunity to build yet another winning coalition out of an issue once viewed as political poison.”

    01 opinion cartoons 041523

    On Friday, the Supreme Court issued an order that temporarily ensured access to a key drug used in many medication abortions. The move gave the justices more time to consider the issue after a Texas federal judge suspended the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the abortion pill 23 years ago.

    “If abortion opponents are successful, access to the pill — reportedly used in more than half of abortions in the United States — will be severely undercut,” wrote Michele Goodwin and Mary Ziegler.

    “Beyond the dangerous precedent this sets for challenges to other important FDA-approved drugs that some political factions don’t like, the case is an alarming expression of the way right-wing activists are using junk science to bypass the will of the American public and restrict abortion…”

    “There are no grounds for challenging mifepristone’s approval, especially 23 years after the fact. The drug received extensive review — more than four years — before FDA approval. Moreover, claims that mifepristone threatens the health of those who take it are unfounded. The drug has a better safety record for use than Viagra and penicillin. Notably, it was available and used for years without incident in Europe.”

    In 1986, Nicholas Daniloff, the Moscow bureau chief for US News & World Report, was seized by Soviet authorities and locked up in Lefortovo prison. He was the last American journalist to be arrested in Russia before last month’s detention of Wall Street Journal correspondent Evan Gershkovich, who like Daniloff, speaks Russian fluently. Gershkovich has been charged with espionage but US officials have concluded that he was “wrongfully detained.”

    As David A. Andelman noted, Daniloff’s detention in prison lasted for 13 days before he was put under house arrest and then eventually swapped for an accused Soviet spy. In a conversation with Andelman, Daniloff recalled his reaction when he was imprisoned. “I felt claustrophobic, and I felt like I wanted to get out of there immediately. Of course, there was no chance of that. The door slams, and you have all these thoughts and feelings that run through you, and then you settle down and you realize you’re going to be hanging around that cell for some time.”

    Gershkovich’s family in Philadelphia received a letter, handwritten in Russian, from the reporter Friday.

    “I want to say that I am not losing hope,” he noted. “I read. I exercise. And I am trying to write. Maybe, finally, I am going to write something good.”

    The Amazon series “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel” returns this month for its fifth and final season — and David Perry is here for it. The series brings back memories of visiting his grandparents Irma and Mordy in their “tiny rent-controlled Greenwich Village apartment,” an experience that helped shape his Jewish identity.

    “As a Jewish historian,” Perry wrote, “I worry about the tension between preserving the memory of past hardships while not locking our entire history into a tale of oppression. The moments of peace and joy are as vital as the moments of violence. In fact, it’s the periods of peace, of success, of interfaith community, that reveal the terrible truth about the violence: it wasn’t inevitable. People could have made different choices…”

    “A show like ‘The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel’ lets me revel in my personal New York Jewish heritage while also getting a little break from all the worry. It’s a warm, funny, sexy, extremely Jewish …. comedy that hits me straight in my glossy childhood memories. That isn’t to say the show isn’t also problematic — it most certainly is.”

    In the latest installment of CNN Opinion’s “Little Kids, Big Questions” series, 10-year-old Ronan wonders if animals are capable of being smarter than humans. With the help of the John Templeton Foundation, which is partnering on the project, the answer came from Jane Goodall, world renowned for her work with chimpanzees.

    “One of the attributes of intelligence is the ability to think and solve problems. In the early 1960s, I was told that this was unique to humans, and only we could use and make tools, only we had language and culture,” Goodall said. “But more and more research has proved that many animals are excellent at solving problems. Many use tools, and many show cultural differences. Some scientists believe that whales and dolphins are communicating with what may be a real language.”

    “Although the difference between humans and other animals is simply one of degree, our intellect really is amazing. …bees can count and do math, and that just shows how much we still have to learn about animal intelligence. But humans can calculate the distance to the stars.”

    05 opinion cartoons 041523

    Earlier this month, a Texas jury convicted Daniel Perry of murder for fatally shooting a Black Lives Matter protester in 2020. The jury deliberated for 17 hours and decided Perry’s action couldn’t be excused under the state’s “stand your ground” law. Prosecutors argued Perry had instigated the incident and they introduced into evidence messages that suggested the shooting was not a spur-of-the-moment act but a premeditated one.

    On the evening of the jury verdict, Fox News host Tucker Carlson criticized the decision and told viewers he had invited Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on the show to ask if he would consider pardoning Perry. Others on the right called for Abbott to issue a pardon, and the governor soon responded with an announcement that he would do just that, as long as the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles recommended that Perry should be granted one.

    “Trial verdicts are determined by judges and juries,” wrote Dean Obeidallah. “What Abbott is doing is not just wrong, it’s dangerous. His pardon, when it comes, is not what the rule of law looks like.”

    02 opinion cartoons 041523

    Two of the likeliest candidates for president in 2024 haven’t officially committed yet.

    President Joe Biden says he intends to run again but has delayed making a formal announcement. And Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is making all the moves a presidential contender usually makes, including hawking his new book and visiting New Hampshire, but he hasn’t joined fellow Republicans including former President Donald Trump, former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley and former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson in declaring.

    “DeSantis, who was neck and neck with the former president just a few months ago, may have lost a step or two in more recent polling. But his track record of successful governance in Florida should force GOP voters to think long and hard about what version of their party they want to put forward,” observed Patrick T. Brown.

    “A third Trump presidential nomination would indicate that Republican primary voters may prefer style over substance. But if they are serious about not just making liberals mad but advancing actual policy, GOP voters should consider other names, starting with the Florida governor.”

    Even without an official announcement by the president, wrote Julian Zelizer, the Biden-Harris campaign is very much under way. “By choosing to lie low while Republicans are gearing up for 2024, Biden is employing his version of what has become known as the ‘Rose Garden Strategy,’ whereby the incumbent campaigns by focusing on the business of being president and showing voters that he is the responsible figure in the race.”

    “The president’s understated strategy makes room for Republicans to stoke chaos, tear each other apart and make unforced errors while he remains above the fray for as long as possible. This strategy makes the GOP the focus of the election, allowing Biden to reinforce his message from 2020: do voters want someone who will govern and act in a serious manner or do they want a circus?”

    Gene Seymour: I am betting on Cousin Greg. But I am not a serious person (Spoiler alert)

    Frida Ghitis: Amid fallout of Macron-Xi meeting, another world leader tries his luck

    Michael Bociurkiw: How the battle for Bakhmut exposed Russia’s ‘meat-grinder’

    Peggy Drexler: Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s dilemma is a reminder of this universal question

    Christopher Howard: The overlooked problem with raising the retirement age for Social Security

    Elliot Williams: The justice system Trump and other white-collar defendants see is different than what most accused criminals get

    Phoebe Gavin: The hard lessons I learned the first time I was laid off

    Meg Jacobs: ‘Air’ celebrates those who do the hard work and get rewarded

    AND…

    Jill Filipovic recently took a domestic flight in South Africa. “Passengers and airport staff alike were friendly and polite. The airplane seat offered enough room for both of my legs and both of my arms. We took off on time and landed early. My shoes stayed on the whole time I was at the airport.”

    It was a vivid reminder of what’s possible in air travel — and of what’s usually lacking.

    Take the security system: “More than 20 years after Sept. 11, 2001, only passengers who pay for the privilege can avoid removing their shoes and laptops from their bags by submitting their personal information ahead of time and undergoing background checks.”

    Filipovic added, “Admittedly, I do pay — I don’t want to wait in a long security line, walk my stocking feet through a metal detector and have to un- and re-pack the MacBook I’ve carefully crammed into my carry-on. But the existence of pay-to-play shorter-line security options like Clear and TSA Pre-Check make clear that it is indeed possible to pre-screen a critical mass of passengers to avoid the morass of cranky people trying to pull on their shoes while re-packing their electronics.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Suspect charged in Pentagon documents leak case | CNN Politics

    Suspect charged in Pentagon documents leak case | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The suspect in the leak of classified Pentagon documents posted on social media has been charged with unauthorized retention and transmission of national defense information and unauthorized removal of classified information and defense materials.

    Jack Teixeira, a 21-year-old airman with the Massachusetts Air National Guard, made his first appearance in federal court in Boston Friday morning following his arrest by the FBI in North Dighton, Massachusetts, on Thursday.

    According to charging documents, Teixeira held a top secret security clearance and allegedly began posting information about the documents online around December 2022, and photos of documents in January.

    Teixeira’s arrest came a week after the initial public disclosure that the classified material had been posted online to a small Discord group, a social media platform popular with gamers. The documents, some of which have been reviewed by CNN, included a wide range of highly classified information, including eavesdropping on key allies and adversaries and blunt assessments on the state of the Ukraine war.

    Teixeira is believed to be the head of an obscure invite-only Discord chatroom called Thug Shaker Central, multiple US officials told CNN, where information from the classified documents was first posted months ago.

    Magistrate Judge David Hennessy informed Teixeira of the charges he’s facing and scheduled a detention hearing for Teixeira on Wednesday. He will remain detained until then. Teixeira did not enter a formal plea.

    Teixeira entered the courtroom wearing a tan shirt and pants from the detention center, as well as hiking boots. He entered the courtroom in shackles, though his hands were uncuffed before he sat down at the defense table.

    The Boston courtroom was full, including three people sitting on a bench reserved for family. When Teixeira entered the courtroom, he did not look at his family members.

    Teixeira spoke quietly during the hearing, whispering “yes” as the judge informed him of his rights as a criminal defendant.

    As the hearing ended, a man in the courtroom shouted, “Love you, Jack.” Teixeira did not look back, but responded, “you too, Dad.”

    Teixeira has held a Top Secret clearance since 2021, according to the affidavit unsealed Friday. He also “maintained sensitive compartmented access (SCI) to other highly classified programs,” the affidavit says. Many of the leaked documents posted on the online server Discord were marked Top Secret.

    At least one of the documents he allegedly posted was accessible to him by virtue of his employment with the Air National Guard, the affidavit says.

    According to a user of the Discord served interviewed by the FBI, Teixeira began posting information in December 2022, according to the affidavit, and began posting photos of documents around January 2023.

    The unnamed individual who spoke to the FBI said that Teixeira told him that he was concerned about making the transcription at work so “he began taking the documents to his residence and photographing them.”

    Teixeira also allegedly searched a classified government database for the word “leak” on April 6, when reports began emerging publicly of classified information being posted online.

    “Accordingly, there is reason to believe that TEIXEIRA was searching for classified reporting regarding the U.S. Intelligence Community’s assessment of the identity of the individual who transmitted classified national defense information, to include the Government Document,” the affidavit says.

    Investigators narrowed in on the potential members of the chat group with evidence collected following the discovery of the classified documents online. Teixeira was under surveillance for at least a couple of days prior to his arrest by the FBI on Thursday, according to a US government source familiar with the case.

    Four Discord users active in a different Discord chatroom where the documents later appeared told CNN the documents began circulating on Thug Shaker. Another user who was in the Thug Shaker chatroom told CNN they saw the original posts of classified documents but declined to speak further about them.

    Discord, which is not named in the affidavit but was previously identified by CNN, gave the FBI information on Wednesday about the account that had allegedly been posting the documents.

    Teixeira used his real name and home address in North Dighton, Massachusetts, for the billing information associated with his Discord account, the affidavit says.

    Teixeira was an Airman First Class in the Massachusetts Air National Guard, where he worked as a low-ranking IT official.

    In his role as a Cyber Transport Systems journeyman, Teixeria would have been working on a network that carried highly classified information, according to a defense official, which is why he needed a security clearance.

    Several former high school classmates of Teixeira’s told CNN Thursday that he had a fascination with the military, guns and war. He would sometimes wear camouflage to school, carried a “dictionary-sized book on guns,” and behaved in a way that made some fellow students feel uneasy.

    “A lot of people were wary of him,” said Brooke Cleathero, who attended middle school and high school with Teixeira. “He was more of a loner, and having a fascination with war and guns made him off-putting to a lot of people.”

    Teixeira grew up in the suburbs of Providence, Rhode Island, according to public records. He attended Dighton-Rehoboth High School where he graduated in 2020, according to the superintendent of the regional school district.

    Teixeira didn’t behave in a manner that rose to the level where “people felt the need to report him,” another former classmate said, but “he made me nervous.”

    The same student said she took his fascination with the military as a form of American nationalism, and was therefore surprised by the allegations against him. “I didn’t think he would be capable of doing something like this,” she said.

    Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Thursday that he is directing a review of intelligence access following Teixeira’s arrest.

    The Pentagon is still conducting a damage assessment of the disclosure of the classified material, which could be used as evidence against Teixeira.

    President Joe Biden, who hinted at the coming arrest while in Ireland on Thursday, was briefed regularly on the investigation as it proceeded over the past week, according to a US official.

    Biden was also briefed regularly on the efforts by his top officials to engage with allies who have been identified within, or unsettled by, the content of the leaked information, one official said.

    Before the arrest on Thursday, Biden downplayed the impact of the leaked documents. “I’m concerned that it happened, but there is nothing contemporaneous that I’m aware of that is of great consequence,” he told reporters.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Analysis: Fox News is about to enter the true No Spin Zone | CNN Business

    Analysis: Fox News is about to enter the true No Spin Zone | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    This is it.

    The media defamation trial of the century is on the precipice of kicking off in Wilmington, Delaware, in just days.

    Jury selection in Dominion Voting Systems’ monster $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit took place all of Thursday, with 300 potential jurors being summoned to court. Good progress was made and the presiding judge noted that there were “more than enough jurors” to start the trial as scheduled on Monday.

    It is there, in Courtroom 7E, where the biggest figures in Murdoch Media, accompanied by a throng of high-powered lawyers, will attempt to mount their defense after repeatedly failing to convince a judge to toss the now-historic case.

    A version of this article first appeared in the “Reliable Sources” newsletter. Sign up for the daily digest chronicling the evolving media landscape here.

    It’s, frankly, extraordinary to write those words. When I watched Fox News broadcast election lies in the aftermath of the 2020 election, never did I expect the network to be held accountable in a meaningful way.

    I’ve covered Fox News for a while now. I’ve watched thousands and thousands of hours of the right-wing channel’s programming. I’ve seen its hosts over the years undermine public health, make gross anti-immigrant remarks, peddle lies and propaganda and push deranged conspiracy theories that were once reserved for the right-wing’s furthest fringes.

    The network has always seemed to find a way to sail through the controversy, even the most hellish storms it has faced. Sometimes it has emerged even stronger and more emboldened than before.

    But this time is different. This time, the normal tricks the network turns to during times of crisis will not free it from trouble. This time, in a court of law, the network will need to put forward an honest, fact-driven argument.

    Fox News is about to enter the true No Spin Zone, where deception is strictly prohibited. Where it is not in charge. And where its top executives like Rupert Murdoch and Suzanne Scott and hosts like Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity cannot simply ignore a request for comment and resort to, instead, attacking “the media” on-air.

    In this setting, where lies cannot be casually told and truth cannot be distorted beyond reality to fit a dishonest narrative, it will be fascinating to see how the network fares. If the pre-trial hearings are any indicator, it won’t be pretty. The case hasn’t even started and the presiding judge has already lost his patience with Fox’s legal team and put them on notice.

    Perhaps the winds will shift for Fox News when the judge gavels in the trial on Monday. But if they play out like the last few weeks of court have, Fox News is in for a brutal ride.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Judge in Proud Boys case denies mistrial motion after jurors report being followed | CNN Politics

    Judge in Proud Boys case denies mistrial motion after jurors report being followed | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The federal judge overseeing the trial of five Proud Boys members who are accused of plotting to storm the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, denied a mistrial motion on Thursday after jurors reported being followed and confronted in public.

    In late March, several jurors reported two incidents in which they were approached outside the courthouse by members of the public, District Judge Timothy Kelly said in a sealed proceeding Thursday that was inadvertently streamed to a media room in the Washington, DC, federal courthouse. CNN reported last week that one juror believed she was being followed.

    Kelly denied a mistrial motion from all five defendants, saying that every member of the jury was questioned about the interactions and confirmed they could still judge the case fairly. Kelly also denied motions from the defendants to strike the jurors who said they had been confronted, adding that “none of the jurors expressed a concern that any of this would affect their jury service.”

    Kelly said that he instructed the jury to disregard those interactions, and that “when I read this instruction to the jury, I watched many of them nod as if to say, ‘Okay, let’s get on with the case.’”

    The ruling ends a dayslong argument over how to handle the alleged incidents involving a total of four jurors who were approached in public, the latest in a series of mishaps that have plagued the trial.

    Kelly described the interactions in detail during the under-seal proceeding, bringing to light additional information about the incidents. A coalition of media outlets, including CNN, previously fought for access to the sealed arguments, but Kelly denied that request.

    In one instance, three jurors were walking away from the courthouse when they were approached by a man on a bike, Kelly said. The man began discussing a trial he was watching at the courthouse, and while it is not clear if he mentioned the Proud Boys defendants by name, the man said that the case was interesting and called a recent defense witness “crazy.”

    “The individual did not say that he knew they were jurors,” Kelly said.

    The three jurors told Kelly that they thought the incident was “odd” and “weird,” but didn’t become concerned until they saw the same man sitting in the courtroom the next day, looking at them and whispering to someone else in the gallery. One juror told Kelly that seeing the man gave her a “weird feeling.”

    In another instance, Kelly said that a juror reported seeing the same man at a metro stop on four separate occasions. The first time she saw the man, the juror said that he asked her if she was serving on a jury but did not mention any case specifically.

    Kelly said the issue was referred to the US Marshals, who went to the metro station to find him and watched the man walk into a nearby homeless shelter. Kelly also saw two pictures of the man and said that “from my view of the photos, it was certainly plausible he was homeless.”

    The juror who was approached at the metro stop told Kelly that she “did not feel intimidated by this,” he added.

    After issuing his ruling Thursday, Kelly was informed by a courtroom staff member that video of the proceeding was being streamed elsewhere in the courthouse. Kelly then had the video stream cut, saying that “there is nothing we can do at this point. Let’s have them shut it off now.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Media organizations, including CNN, seek unsealing of Trump indictment and ask to broadcast Tuesday proceedings | CNN Politics

    Media organizations, including CNN, seek unsealing of Trump indictment and ask to broadcast Tuesday proceedings | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Several media outlets, including CNN, have asked a New York judge to unseal the grand jury indictment against former President Donald Trump. The news organizations are also asking for permission to broadcast Trump’s expected appearance in a Manhattan courtroom on Tuesday for his arraignment on the charges.

    In their letter Friday seeking to make the indictment public, the media outlets told Judge Juan Merchan – who is slated to preside over the historic proceedings – that “the right of access is at its zenith when applied to the first ever indictment of a former U.S. president.”

    The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal are among the outlets making the request.

    “And no higher values are served by keeping the indictment under seal. Aside from the fact that a former U.S. president is not a flight risk, maintaining the indictment under seal, despite the public disclosure of its existence, only fuels speculation as to its contents. Full disclosure of the indictment will enhance both the general public’s and the parties’ right to an accurate public understanding of the charges,” the request said. “As such, former President Trump’s indictment should be unsealed without delay.”

    If the judge does not grant the media outlets’ unsealing request, it is expected that the indictment will be made public when Trump appears in court Tuesday.

    With their request to broadcast those proceedings, the media outlets told the court that “the gravity of this proceeding – the unprecedented and historic arraignment of a former U.S. President – and, consequently, the need for the broadest possible public access, cannot be overstated.”

    The news organizations are asking for a “limited number of photographers, videographers, and radio journalists to be present at the arraignment,” and said in the letter that they are making “this limited request for audio-visual coverage in order to ensure that the operations of the Court will not be disrupted in any way.”

    “The News Organizations stand ready to work cooperatively with the Court to ensure that the public have an opportunity to observe this monumental and historical proceeding,” the media outlets said, while proposing that the court hold a hearing on the matter if it would helpful to making a decision.

    Merchan is expected to issue an order Monday on camera access in the courtroom for Trump’s Tuesday arraignment. On Sunday, he invited lawyers for Trump and for the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office to submit by 1 p.m. Monday any concerns or objections to the media outlets’ request to broadcast the arraignment.

    Trump faces more than 30 counts related to business fraud in the indictment. The investigation by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office began when Trump was still in the White House and relates to a $130,000 payment made by his then-personal attorney Michael Cohen to adult film star Stormy Daniels in late October 2016, days before the presidential election, to silence her from going public about an alleged affair with Trump a decade earlier.

    Trump has denied the affair.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Meet the judge presiding over Trump’s criminal arraignment | CNN Politics

    Meet the judge presiding over Trump’s criminal arraignment | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    When Donald Trump enters a New York courtroom on Tuesday, he’ll face a seasoned judge who is no stranger to the former president’s orbit.

    Acting New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan has sentenced Trump’s close confident Allen Weisselberg to prison, presided over the Trump Organization tax fraud trial and overseen former adviser Steve Bannon’s criminal fraud case.

    But Trump’s historic arraignment on Tuesday will perhaps be Merchan’s most high-profile case to date, even after a long career atop the state-level trial court.

    Merchan has been described by observers as a “tough” judge, yet one who is fair, no matter who is before him.

    Here’s what you need to know.

    Trump’s arraignment is likely to be a spectacle with a show of law enforcement and with the former president already fanning the flames on social media with his views on Merchan and his indictment.

    But in the courthouse, Merchan does not stand for disruptions or delays, attorneys who have appeared before him told CNN, and he’s known to maintain control of his courtroom even when his cases draw considerable attention.

    “Judge Merchan was efficient, practical, and listened carefully to what I had to say,” Nicholas Gravante, the attorney who represented Weisselberg in his plea, said via email.

    “He was clear in signaling his judicial inclinations, which helped me tremendously in giving Mr. Weisselberg informed legal advice. Judge Merchan was always well-prepared, accessible, and – most importantly in the Weisselberg matter – a man of his word. He treated me and my colleagues with the utmost respect, both in open court and behind closed doors.”

    Karen Friedman Agnifilo, a private practice attorney who previously worked as the chief assistant district attorney in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, supervising cases Merchan presided over, echoed that sentiment.

    “[Merchan] doesn’t let the prosecutors or the defendants create any issues in his courtroom. He doesn’t let a media circus or any other kind of circus happen. I don’t think Donald Trump attacking him and threatening him is going to bode very well for him in the courtroom,” Agnifilo said.

    “The judge is the kind of judge where he will ignore it and not hold it against Donald Trump. He’s not vindictive in any way like that.”

    Merchan showed some of his tough side when Weisselberg was sentenced, telling the former Trump associate that if he had not already promised him a five-month sentence, he would have handed him a “much greater” sentence after having listened to evidence at trial.

    When he presided over Bannon’s criminal fraud case, Merchan chastised the former Trump aide’s new team of attorneys for delaying the case when they asked for more time to review new evidence.

    In addition to the Trump cases, Merchan has also presided over other high-profile cases, including the “soccer mom madam” trial, in which he set a $2 million bond for suburban mom Anna Gristina, who was charged with running a $2,000-an-hour escort service for the wealthy, Bloomberg News reported.

    Merchan also handed a 25-years-to-life sentence to a Senegalese man who raped and murdered his girlfriend.

    Trump attorney Timothy Parlatore said during an interview Friday on CNN that Merchan was “not easy” on him when he tried a case before him, but echoed that the judge likely will be fair.

    “I’ve tried a case in front of him before. He could be tough. I don’t think it’s necessarily going to be something that’s going to change his ability to evaluate the facts and the law in this case,” Parlatore said.

    Merchan, however, is also credited by his peers for having helped create the Manhattan Mental Health Court, which he often presides over and where he has earned a reputation for “compassionate” rulings that give defendants second chances.

    “I watched a colleague of mine try a shooting case where someone got shot, so he’s able to try those very serious violent crimes and then switch,” said Brendan Tracy, a criminal defense attorney who previously served as an assistant district attorney in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office.

    “Maybe someone who was a serial shoplifter and then charged with grand larceny and is in mental health treatment court because they had mental health issues, he was able to handle the wide range of cases and do them all fairly,” Tracy added.

    Still, Earl Ward, a trial attorney and chair of public defender nonprofit The Bronx Defenders, said that having watched Merchan preside over cases in the Mental Health Court, the judge often sided with prosecutors.

    “He’s fair and his rulings are consistent with the law, but if it’s a close call, his reputation is that he lands on the prosecution’s side,” Ward said.

    Merchan launched his legal career in 1994 when he started off as an assistant district attorney in the trial division in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. Several years later, he moved on to the state attorney general’s office, where he worked on cases in Long Island.

    In 2006, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, then a Republican, appointed Merchan to Family Court in the Bronx, and Democratic Gov. David Paterson appointed him to the New York State Court of Claims in 2009, the same year he began serving as an acting New York Supreme Court Judge.

    Born in Bogota, Colombia, Merchan emigrated to the United States at the age of 6 and grew up in the New York City neighborhood of Jackson Heights, Queens, according to a New York Times profile of the judge. He was the first in his family to go to college. t

    Merchan initially studied business at Baruch College in New York before he dropped out of school to go work only to return several years later to finish school so that he could get his law degree, the Times reported.

    He eventually received his law degree from Hofstra University.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Gwyneth Paltrow testifies in a civil trial that she ‘froze’ in 2016 skiing crash at a Utah resort | CNN

    Gwyneth Paltrow testifies in a civil trial that she ‘froze’ in 2016 skiing crash at a Utah resort | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Gwyneth Paltrow, the award-winning actress facing a civil trial for a 2016 skiing crash at a Utah resort, testified that she “froze” when a man allegedly skied directly into her back, causing them to collapse to the ground as their skis tangled together.

    Paltrow testified on Friday that the collision forced her legs apart as she felt someone from behind her.

    “I was skiing, and two skis came between my skis, forcing my legs apart. And then there was a body pressing against me. And there was a very strange grunting noise. So, my brain was trying to make sense of what was happening,” Paltrow testified. “I froze when he slid between my skis. I absolutely froze.”

    “I was confused at first, and I didn’t know exactly what was happening. It’s a very strange thing to happen on the ski slope,” Paltrow continued.

    Paltrow and the man both fell slowly and were nearly spooning once they hit the ground, “and I moved away quickly,” Paltrow said previously in a deposition read during the trial Friday in Park City, Utah.

    Friday marked the fourth day in the skiing crash case against Paltrow, who is being sued by Terry Sanderson, a 76-year-old retired optometrist – the man she maintains crashed into her in February 2016 at Deer Valley Resort in Park City.

    Meanwhile, Sanderson claims that Paltrow crashed into him and caused him lasting injuries and brain damage while they were both skiing on a beginner’s run. Sanderson also accuses Paltrow and her ski instructor of skiing away after the incident without getting him medical care.

    Kristin A. VanOrman, an attorney representing Sanderson, questioned Paltrow for nearly two hours Friday. At one point, VanOrman asked whether Paltrow can demonstrate the crash with her in at the courtroom, but the judge declined that request.

    Instead, VanOrman walked around the courtroom trying to reenact where the skis were and how Paltrow and Sanderson were positioned, based on how Paltrow described the incident.

    VanOrman asked Paltrow whether the actress had been present when paperwork about the crash was filled out, and Paltrow said she was not but that her ski instructor stayed with Sanderson and made sure he was OK.

    Later, Paltrow said she stayed on the mountain “long enough for him to say that he was OK” and to stand up, saying it was “absolutely not” a hit-and-run.

    Paltrow didn’t seek medical treatment after that crash, she said, but she pointed out her knee felt like it had been “over-stretched” and her “back hurt” and decided to go for a massage later that day.

    Sanderson had initially sued Paltrow for $3.1 million dollars, later amending his complaint to seek more than $300,000 in damages, according to court documents.

    Paltrow has filed a counter lawsuit in which she is seeking $1 in damages plus attorneys’ fees.

    Court is slated to resume Monday.

    VanOrman pressed Paltrow more than once about whether the actress had sought information about Sanderson’s medical condition following the crash.

    “I think you have to keep in mind when you’re the victim of a crash, right, your psychology is not necessarily thinking about the person who perpetrated it,” Paltrow testified.

    Paltrow also did not ask anyone at the resort about Sanderson “because at the time I did not know that he had sustained injuries like that. I thought it was very minor on the day,” she said.

    Throughout the testimony, Paltrow maintained that Sanderson skied into her and that she did not cause the crash.

    “Mr. Sanderson categorically hit me on that ski slope, and that is the truth,” adding that she feels sympathetic for him.

    “I feel very sorry for him. It seems like he’s had a very difficult life, but I did not cause the accident so I cannot be at fault for anything that subsequently happened to him,” she testified.

    The collision happened on the first day of a family trip that Paltrow, her now-husband Brad Falchuk and both of their children were attending. It was the first time Paltrow and her then-boyfriend were introducing their children to each other to gauge whether they had a future as a “blended family.”

    According to Paltrow’s countersuit, she “was enjoying skiing with her family on vacation in Utah, when Plaintiff – who was uphill from Ms. Paltrow – plowed into her back. She sustained a full ‘body blow.’ Ms. Paltrow was angry with Plaintiff, and said so. Plaintiff apologized. She was shaken and upset, and quit skiing for the day even though it was still morning.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Your Trump questions answered. Yes, he can still run for president if indicted | CNN Politics

    Your Trump questions answered. Yes, he can still run for president if indicted | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

    A version of this story appeared in CNN’s What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here.



    CNN
     — 

    Could he still run for president? Why would the adult-film star case move before any of the ones about protecting democracy? How could you possibly find an impartial jury?

    What’s below are answers to some of the questions we’ve been getting – versions of these were emailed in by subscribers of the What Matters newsletter – about the possible indictment of former President Donald Trump.

    He’s involved in four different criminal investigations by three different levels of government – the Manhattan district attorney; the Fulton County, Georgia, district attorney; and the Department of Justice.

    These questions are mostly concerned with Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg’s potential indictment of Trump over a hush-money payment scheme, but many could apply to each investigation.

    The most-asked question is also the easiest to answer.

    Yes, absolutely.

    “Nothing stops Trump from running while indicted, or even convicted,” the University of California, Los Angeles law professor Richard Hasen told me in an email.

    The Constitution requires only three things of candidates. They must be:

    • A natural born citizen.
    • At least 35 years old.
    • A resident of the US for at least 14 years.

    As a political matter, it’s maybe more difficult for an indicted candidate, who could become a convicted criminal, to win votes. Trials don’t let candidates put their best foot forward. But it is not forbidden for them to run or be elected.

    There are a few asterisks both in the Constitution and the 14th and 22nd Amendments, none of which currently apply to Trump in the cases thought to be closest to formal indictment.

    Term limits. The 22nd Amendment forbids anyone who has twice been president (meaning twice been elected or served part of someone else’s term and then won his or her own) from running again. That doesn’t apply to Trump since he lost the 2020 election.

    Impeachment. If a person is impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate of high crimes and misdemeanors, he or she is removed from office and disqualified from serving again. Trump, although twice impeached by the House during his presidency, was also twice acquitted by the Senate.

    Disqualification. The 14th Amendment includes a “disqualification clause,” written specifically with an eye toward former Confederate soldiers.

    It reads:

    No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.

    Potential charges in New York City with regard to the hush-money payment to an adult-film star have nothing to do with rebellion or insurrection. Nor do potential federal charges with regard to classified documents.

    Potential charges in Fulton County, Georgia, with regard to 2020 election meddling or at the federal level with regard to the January 6, 2021, insurrection could perhaps be construed by some as a form of insurrection. But that is an open question that would have to work its way through the courts. The 2024 election is fast approaching.

    If he was convicted of a felony – reminder, he has not yet even been charged – in New York, Trump would be barred from voting in his adoptive home state of Florida, at least until he had served out a potential sentence.

    First off, there’s no suggestion of any coordination between the Manhattan DA, the Department of Justice and the Fulton County DA.

    These are all separate investigations on separate issues moving at their own pace.

    The payment to the adult-film actress Stormy Daniels occurred years ago in 2016. Trump has argued the statute of limitations has run out. Lawyers could argue the clock stopped when Trump left New York to become president in 2017.

    It’s also not clear how exactly a state crime (falsifying business records) can be paired with a federal election crime to create a state felony. There are some very deep legal dives into this, like this one from Just Security. We will have to see what, if anything, Bragg adds if he does bring an indictment.

    Of the four known criminal investigations into Trump, falsifying business records with regard to the hush-money payment to an adult-film actress seems like the smallest of potatoes, especially since federal prosecutors decided not to charge him when he left office.

    His finances, subject of a long-running investigation, seem like a bigger deal. But the Manhattan DA decided not to criminally charge Trump with regard to tax crimes. Trump has been sued by the New York attorney general in civil court based on some of that evidence.

    Investigations in Georgia with regard to election meddling and by the Justice Department with regard to January 6 and his treatment of classified data also seem more consequential.

    But these cases are being pursued by different entities at different paces in different governments – New York City; Fulton County, Georgia; and the federal government.

    “I do think that the charges are much more serious against Trump related to the election,” Hasen said in his email. “But falsifying business records can also be a crime. (I’m more skeptical about combining that in a state court with a federal campaign finance violation.)”

    One federal law enforcement source told CNN’s John Miller over the weekend that Trump’s Secret Service detail is actively engaged with authorities in New York City about how this arrest process would work if Trump is ultimately indicted.

    It’s usually a routine process of fingerprinting, a mug shot and an arraignment. It would not likely be a public event and clearly his protective detail would move through the building with Trump.

    New York does not release most mug shots after a 2019 law intended to cut down on online extortion.

    As Trump is among the most divisive and now well-known Americans in history, it’s hard to believe there’s a big, impartial jury pool out there.

    The Sixth Amendment guarantees “the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.”

    Finding such a jury “won’t be easy given the intense passions on both sides that he engenders,” Hasen said.

    A Quinnipiac University poll conducted in March asked for registered voters’ opinion of Trump. Just 2% said they hadn’t heard enough about him to say.

    The New York State Unified Court System’s trial juror’s handbook explains the “voir dire” process by which jurors are selected. Those accepted by both the prosecution and defense as being free of “bias or personal knowledge that could hinder his or her ability to judge a case impartially” must take an oath to act fairly and impartially.

    We’re getting way ahead of ourselves. He hasn’t been indicted, much less tried or convicted. Any indictment, even for a Class E felony in New York, would be for the kind of nonviolent offense that would not lead to jail time for any defendant.

    “I don’t expect Trump to be put in jail if he is indicted for any of these charges,” Hasen said. “Jail time would only come if he were convicted and sentenced to jail time.”

    The idea that Trump would ever see the inside of a jail cell still seems completely far-fetched. Hasen said the Secret Service would have to arrange for his protection in jail. The logistics of that are mind-boggling. Would agents be placed into cells on either side of him? Would they dress as inmates or guards?

    Top officials accused of wrongdoing have historically found a way out of jail. Former President Richard Nixon got a preemptive pardon from his successor, Gerald Ford. Nixon’s previous vice president, Spiro Agnew, resigned after he was caught up in a corruption scandal. Agnew made a plea deal and avoided jail time. Aaron Burr, also a former vice president, narrowly escaped a treason conviction. But then he left the country.

    That remains to be seen. Jonathan Wackrow, a former Secret Service agent and current global head of security for Teneo, said on CNN on Monday that agents are taking a back seat – to the New York Police Department and New York State court officers who are in charge of maintaining order and safety, and to the FBI, which looks for potential acts of violence by extremists.

    The Secret Service, far from coordinating the event as they might normally, are “in a protective mode,” Wackrow said.

    “They are viewing this as really an administrative movement where they have to protect Donald Trump from point A to point B, let him do his business before the court, and leave. They are not playing that active role that we typically see them in.”

    The New York Times published a report based on anonymous sources close to Trump on Tuesday that suggested he is, either out of bravado or genuine delight, relishing the idea of having to endure a “perp walk” in New York City. The “perp walk,” by the way, is the public march of a perpetrator into a police office for processing.

    “He has repeatedly tried to show that he is not experiencing shame or hiding in any way, and I think you’re going to see that,” the Times reporter and CNN political analyst Maggie Haberman said on the network on Tuesday night.

    “I do think there’s a part of him that does view this as a political asset,” said Marc Short, the former chief of staff to former Vice President Mike Pence, during an appearance on CNN on Wednesday. “Because he can use it to paint the other, more serious legal jeopardy he faces either in Georgia or the Department of Justice, as they’re politically motivated.”

    But Short argued voters will tire of the baggage Trump is carrying, particularly if he faces additional potential indictments in the federal and Georgia investigations.

    [ad_2]

    Source link