ReportWire

Tag: court trials

  • Harvey Weinstein’s 2nd sexual assault trial begins with eight accusers set to testify, prosecutors say | CNN

    Harvey Weinstein’s 2nd sexual assault trial begins with eight accusers set to testify, prosecutors say | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Eight women who say they were sexually assaulted by movie producer Harvey Weinstein will testify at his criminal trial in Los Angeles over the coming weeks, prosecutors said in opening statements Monday.

    “Each of these women came forward independent of each other, and none of them knew one another,” prosecutor Paul Thompson told the jury, according to a pool report.

    Four of the women’s testimony will be directly connected to specific charges. These women include Jennifer Siebel Newsom, a filmmaker and the wife of California Gov. Gavin Newsom; Jane Doe 1, a model and actress who lived in Italy at the time; Jane Doe 2, a 23-year-old model and aspiring screenwriter; and Jane Doe 3, a licensed massage therapist, according to a pool report.

    The most recent indictment in the case indicated there were five women directly connected to charges. CNN is working to clarify the difference between that indictment and the prosecutors’ opening statements.

    In addition, four women will testify as “prior bad acts” witnesses, meaning their testimony isn’t related to a specific charge but can be used by the jury as prosecutors try to show Weinstein had a pattern in his actions. These women will testify about assaults outside of Los Angeles jurisdiction, Thompson said.

    Weinstein, 70, has pleaded not guilty to charges including rape and forcible oral copulation related to incidents dating from 2004 to 2013, according to the indictment.

    In court Monday, he appeared hunched over as he clambered from a wheelchair into a chair at the defense table. Wearing a suit and tie, he primarily looked at jurors throughout the proceedings.

    The trial in California is his second such sexual assault case since reporting by The New York Times and The New Yorker in 2017 revealed Weinstein’s alleged history of sexual abuse, harassment and secret settlements as he used his influence as a Hollywood power broker to take advantage of young women.

    At the time, Weinstein was one of the most powerful men in Hollywood and helped produce movies such as “Pulp Fiction,” “Clerks” and “Shakespeare in Love.”

    The revelations led to a wave of women speaking publicly about the pervasiveness of sexual abuse and harassment in what became known as the #MeToo movement.

    Weinstein was found guilty in 2020 in New York of first-degree criminal sexual act and third-degree rape and was sentenced to 23 years in prison. Yet he has maintained his innocence, and New York’s highest court agreed in August to hear his appeal in the case.

    In opening statements, Thompson outlined the women’s accusations and noted the similarities in their stories. The women will testify that Weinstein lured them into private meetings, often in hotel rooms, and then sexually assaulted them, Thompson said.

    “I’m shaking and I’m kind of being dragged to the bedroom,” he quoted one woman as saying, according to the pool report.

    Thompson also highlighted the women’s understanding of Weinstein’s imposing physical size as well as his power in Hollywood to make or break careers, the pool report said.

    “I was scared that if I didn’t play nice something could happen in the room or out of the room because of his power in the industry,” one woman said, according to Thompson.

    The women allegedly told friends and family members about their assaults, and those people may also be called to testify in the trial to confirm or deny such conversations.

    Notably, the licensed massage therapist told Mel Gibson, the famed actor and director, about her assault, Thompson said.

    The trial in Los Angeles comes two years after Weinstein was convicted in New York of similar charges featuring different women.

    The New York charges were based on testimony from Miriam Haley, who testified that Weinstein forcibly performed oral sex on her in 2006 at his Manhattan apartment, and from Jessica Mann, who testified that he raped her in 2013 during what she described as an abusive relationship.

    He did not testify in his own defense, but at his sentencing he offered an unexpected, rambling speech which oscillated between remorse, defense of his actions and confusion.

    “I’m not going to say these aren’t great people, I had wonderful times with these people, you know,” Weinstein said of the women who accused him of assault. “It is just I’m totally confused, and I think men are confused about all of these issues.”

    The former movie producer appeared in frail health during the trial and used a walker as he arrived to and left court each day. He used a wheelchair to arrive to the sentencing in March 2020 as well as in a court hearing in Los Angeles in July 2021. His attorneys have argued the lengthy prison sentence was a de facto life sentence due to his failing health.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jury finds Kevin Spacey not liable for battery | CNN

    Jury finds Kevin Spacey not liable for battery | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    In a victory for Kevin Spacey, a New York jury on Thursday afternoon found him not liable for battery on allegations he picked up actor Anthony Rapp and briefly laid on top of him in a bed after a party in 1986.

    Jurors deliberated for about an hour, and concluded Rapp did not prove that Spacey “touched a sexual or intimate part” of Rapp.

    Judge Lewis Kaplan formally dismissed the case. Attorneys seated on either side of Spacey immediately put their hands on his back when the verdict was read.

    “We are very grateful to the jury for seeing through these false allegations,” Jennifer Keller, one of Spacey’s attorneys, said later while leaving court. Spacey did not speak to reporters when he left.

    Best known for his role in “Star Trek: Discovery,” Rapp had alleged that in 1986, Spacey, then 26, invited Rapp, then 14, to his Manhattan home where he picked Rapp up, laid him down on his bed, grabbed his buttocks and pressed his groin into Rapp’s body without his consent.

    The judge dismissed Rapp’s claim of assault before the trial started and dismissed his claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress after Rapp’s attorneys rested his case, leaving the jury to decide only the battery claim. Under New York law, battery is touching another person, without their consent, in a way that a reasonable person would find offensive.

    CNN Legal Analyst Joey Jackson saw Thursday’s verdict as a huge win for Spacey, one that demonstrates a jury can tune out the noise involving a celebrity’s alleged reported misdeeds in the Me Too movement and evaluate a case based on the facts presented in court.

    The case was also problematic legally, with two counts tossed by the court – assault and intentional infliction of emotional distress – leaving the jury to consider only the battery claim, Jackson said.

    “The jury clearly did not accept factual assertions made by Rapp, thereby not finding him credible,” Jackson added.

    But the win was a “Pyrrhic victory” for Spacey given other charges that “hang over him, including criminal charges in the UK,” CNN Legal Analyst Paul Callan said.

    “Spacey has now notched two victories in sex abuse charges against him including this case and the one previously dropped in Nantucket,” Callan said. “He, however, faces an uphill battle facing other accusers and more serious criminal charges in UK.”

    Spacey was charged with four counts of sexual assault against three men and one count of causing a person to engage in penetrative sexual activity without consent by Britain’s Crown Prosecuting Service in May. Spacey has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

    In the Nantucket case, a man alleged Spacey groped him when he was an 18-year-old busboy at a restaurant. Spacey had pleaded not guilty. Prosecutors eventually dropped the criminal case against Spacey after the accuser pleaded the Fifth on the witness stand when being questioned about his missing cellphone and about whether he deleted text messages.

    In his closing argument, Rapp’s attorney Richard Steigman suggested Spacey twisted his testimony at trial to suit his defense, pointing to Spacey’s 2017 apology to Rapp when he first came forward.

    “Don’t listen to what I said in real time. I’m defending a lawsuit now. Listen to me now. I’ve got it straightened out,” Steigman said, mocking Spacey’s attempt to convince the jury he was coerced by publicists to give the statement he testified he now regrets.

    Steigman called Spacey’s testimony rehearsed in comparison to the raw testimony given by his client.

    “When you’re rehearsed, and a world class actor and you’re following the script and following the testimony of someone else, you can take that stand and be perfectly polished,” Steigman said. “When you’re merely coming to court coming forward and telling the truth of your experience, especially one like this that’s a little bit complicated.”

    Steigman also batted down the defense argument that Rapp wanted to out Spacey as gay.

    “The point of the story is not that Kevin Spacey is gay. It’s that he sexually abused him when he was 14. That’s what he’s sharing with people, he’s sharing his experience – nothing more, nothing less. Where’s the proof that he said to any media outlet, you know, Kevin Spacey is gay, you really should run with this?”

    A courtroom sketch of Kevin Spacey  being questioned by attorney Richard on Tuesday.

    Keller, Spacey’s attorney, began her closing argument by addressing the shadow of the Me Too movement on the case, stating that Rapp “hitched his wagon” to the movement when he came forward.

    “This isn’t a team sport where you’re either on the Me Too side, or you’re on the other side,” Keller told the jury. “This is a very different place. Our system requires evidence, proof, objective support for accusations provided to an impartial jury. However polarized as society may be today, it really should not have a place here.”

    Keller suggested that Rapp cribbed his allegations against Spacey from a nearly identical scene from the Broadway show “Precious Sons,” which Rapp was performing in with Ed Harris in 1986 at the time of the alleged incident.

    “We’re here because Mr. Rapp has falsely alleged abuse that never occurred at a party that was never held in a room that did not exist,” she said.

    Spacey’s attorney concluded her remarks by asking the jury not to compromise their verdict by finding Spacey liable of battery but only awarding Rapp a single dollar in damages.

    “You’re here to be judges of the facts. Did it happen? It didn’t happen. One penny is too much for something that did not happen,” Keller said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kevin Spacey finishes testifying in civil sexual misconduct trial | CNN

    Kevin Spacey finishes testifying in civil sexual misconduct trial | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    After about five hours on the witness stand, Kevin Spacey finished testifying in his defense in a sexual misconduct trial, stemming from allegations made by actor Anthony Rapp.

    Rapp, best known for his role in “Star Trek: Discovery,” claims that in 1986, Spacey, then 26, invited Rapp, then 14, to his Manhattan home where he picked Rapp up, laid him down on his bed, grabbed his buttocks and pressed his groin into Rapp’s body without his consent.

    He is suing Spacey for battery.

    Spacey grew emotional multiple times during his testimony, including when he discussed a statement he put out shortly after Rapp went public with his allegations in 2017 to BuzzFeed.

    Spacey has said in his testimony that his publicity team at the time advised him that he’d be labeled a victim blamer if he pushed back.

    “I was being encouraged to apologize and I’ve learned a lesson which is never apologize for something you didn’t do,” Spacey testified on Monday. “I regret my entire statement.”

    On Tuesday, Spacey added: “It was beyond horrifying that I was being accused of doing something that in my heart I knew I had not done.”

    Rapp’s attorney Richard Steigman pushed Spacey to take accountability for the statement despite whatever advice he may have taken from his team.

    “The buck stops with you, right, sir?” he asked.

    “It does in the end,” Spacey said.

    The next witness called by Spacey’s attorneys will be Alexander Bardey, a psychiatrist.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jury recommends life without parole for Nikolas Cruz | CNN

    Jury recommends life without parole for Nikolas Cruz | CNN

    [ad_1]

    The parents of 14-year-old Alyssa Alhadeff, who was among the 17 people killed in the Parkland massacre, said they were “disgusted” with the jury’s decision to recommend life in prison over the death penalty for the gunman.

    Lori and Ilan Alhadeff spoke to reporters shortly after the recommendation was read in court.

    Ilan said his family was “beyond disappointed with the outcome,” adding it “should have been the death penalty — 100%.”

    “I’m disgusted with our legal system,” the visibly angry father said outside court. “I’m disgusted with those jurors.”

    Both parents questioned the purpose of the death penalty in Florida’s legal system if not for the case of a mass school shooter.

    “What is the death penalty for?” Lori asked.

    She also called on law enforcement to do more to prevent school shootings, and to act more aggressively to stop them.

    “Law enforcement needs to do their job,” the mother said. “Your job as a police officer is to go in, engage and take down the threat. And if you can’t do that, don’t do the job.”

    The Alhadeffs said they will continue to work through their nonprofit, Make Schools Safe, to advocate for tougher school safety policies.

    Ilan thanked the state for its prosecution of the Parkland gunman, while condemning the trial’s outcome.

    “The system continues to fail us,” he said.

    About Alyssa Alhadeff: Alyssa, 14, was a student at Stoneman Douglas and a soccer player for Parkland Travel Soccer.

    “Alyssa Alhadeff was a loved and well respected member of our club and community,” Parkland Travel Soccer said on Facebook. “Alyssa will be greatly missed.”

    Lori told HLN she dropped her daughter off at school the day of the shooting and said, “I love you.” When the mother heard about the attack, she hustled to school, but was too late.

    “I knew at that point she was gone. I felt it in my heart,” she said. 

    You can read about all of the victims here.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jury awards nearly $1 billion to Sandy Hook families in Alex Jones case | CNN Business

    Jury awards nearly $1 billion to Sandy Hook families in Alex Jones case | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    (Pool/WFSB)

    Erica Lafferty, the daughter of Sandy Hook Elementary principal Dawn Hochsprung, who was killed during the school shooting, told reporters Wednesday that the verdict against Alex Jones is a moment “years in the making.”

    Lafferty recounted how difficult it was for her and her family to deal with the threats fueled by the conspiracy theories led by Jones.

    “As I was upstairs testifying about the rape threats that were sent to me, Alex Jones was standing right here holding a press conference. After almost a decade of threats and messages from conspiracy theorists led by Jones, this is a moment years in the making,” she said.

    Lafferty went on to say how she wished she could tell call her mother to tell her about the verdict and the years leading up to it.

    “And in this big moment, like in every big moment, since the shooting, I wish I could just call my mom and tell her about it. I would tell her about the horror of watching Alex Jones hold court with the press outside, right here. About the disappointment of so many news outlets who’ve known us since 12-14 run his words unfiltered. The heartbreak of reliving the shooting as so many families shared stories of their slain loved ones. But I would also like to tell her about the bright spots. News stations, like NBC Connecticut, refused to give a dangerous conspiracy theorist a platform throughout this trial, and I thank them. The jury bravely bore witness to our pain, sitting through hours upon hours of testimony that will never leave their minds,” she said.

    Lafferty then thanked the people in her life who were by my side throughout this trial… You guys were my guideposts and my shining lights throughout all of this and I cannot thank you enough for your compassion, extreme expertise, and your friendship. I wish I could tell ,my mom about all of this. I wish I could tell her about so many things that can happen, that have happened since she was murdered. Mostly that I’ll never stop missing her.”

    She added that while she hopes to put this chapter of her life behind her, she and her family are aware of the stain Jones’ actions have left on their lives.

    “I wish that after today, I could just be a daughter grieving her mother and stop worrying about conspiracy theorists sending me threats or worse. But I know that this is not the end of Alex Jones in my life. I know that his hates, his hate, lies and conspiracy theories will follow both me and my family through the rest of our days. But I’m also hopeful for what happened here today. That it may save other families from high-profile tragedies from the cycle of abuse and re-traumatization that we have all been put through as we simply tried to survive the hardest days, weeks, and years of our lives,” Lafferty said.

    She continued, “I’m incredibly proud and thankful for the message that was sent here today. The truth matters. And those who profit off of other people’s pain and trauma will pay for what they have done. There will be more Alex Joneses in this world, but what they learned here today is that they absolutely will be held accountable.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk’s deposition in Twitter dispute postponed amid revived talks to complete acquisition | CNN Business

    Elon Musk’s deposition in Twitter dispute postponed amid revived talks to complete acquisition | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN Business
     — 

    Lawyers for Elon Musk and Twitter have agreed to postpone the Tesla CEO’s deposition in the court fight over their $44 billion acquisition agreement, a source familiar with the negotiations told CNN. The decision comes as the two sides renew negotiations to complete the deal.

    Musk’s deposition had been set to begin Thursday, per a notice filed earlier this week.

    The two sides are in the midst of negotiations over how to proceed with the deal after Musk on Monday sent a letter proposing to complete the acquisition on the originally agreed upon terms. In the letter, Musk said his offer to proceed was contingent on staying the litigation proceedings over his initial effort to pull out of the deal and adjourning the trial that is set to begin in less than two weeks.

    As of Wednesday, the two sides had yet to reach a deal, a separate source told CNN. Delaware Chancery Court chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick, the judge who is overseeing the litigation, said in a Wednesday court filing that neither side had filed to stay the proceedings and she was continuing to prepare for trial to begin on Oct. 17.

    On Thursday, McCormick filed a letter to both sides laying out deadlines for responding to discovery motions, noting that the “trial is fast approaching.”

    Legal experts have said that Twitter

    (TWTR)
    may want to continue the litigation process as a way to keep pressure on Musk until the acquisition is completed. But the postponement of Musk’s deposition may be a sign that the two sides are nearing an agreement, some legal experts say.

    It’s not clear whether a new date has been set for Musk’s deposition, but Twitter could end up pushing to complete it early next week if a deal is not reached.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Prosecutors ask jury to recommend death sentence for Parkland shooter | CNN

    Prosecutors ask jury to recommend death sentence for Parkland shooter | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Prosecutors have called on a Florida jury to recommend the Parkland school shooter be put to death, saying in a closing argument Tuesday he meticulously planned the February 2018 massacre, and that the facts of the case outweigh anything in his background that defense attorneys claim warrant a life sentence.

    “What he wanted to do, what his plan was and what he did, was to murder children at school and their caretakers,” lead prosecutor Michael Satz said of Nikolas Cruz, who pleaded guilty to 17 counts of murder and 17 counts of attempted murder for the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, in which 14 students and three school staff members were killed. “That’s what he wanted to do.”

    But Cruz “is a brain damaged, broken, mentally ill person, through no fault of his own,” defense attorney Melisa McNeill said in her own closing argument, pointing to the defense’s claim that Cruz’s mother used drugs and drank alcohol while his mother was pregnant with him, saying he was “poisoned” in her womb.

    “And in a civilized humane society, do we kill brain damaged, mentally ill, broken people?” McNeill asked Tuesday. “Do we? I hope not.”

    With closing arguments, the monthslong sentencing phase of Cruz’s trial is nearing its end, marking prosecutors’ last chance to convince the jury to recommend a death sentence and defense attorneys’ last opportunity to lobby for life in prison without parole.

    Prosecutors have argued Cruz’s decision to commit the deadliest mass shooting at an American high school was premeditated and calculated, while Cruz’s defense attorneys have offered evidence of a lifetime of struggles at home and in school.

    Each side was allotted two and a half hours to make their closing arguments.

    Jury deliberations are expected to begin Wednesday, during which time jurors will be sequestered, per Broward Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer.

    If they choose to recommend a death sentence, the jurors must be unanimous, or Cruz will receive life in prison without the possibility of parole. If the jury does recommend death, the final decision rests with Judge Scherer, who could choose to follow the recommendation or sentence Cruz to life.

    In his remarks, Satz outlined prosecutors’ reasoning, including the preparations Cruz made. For a “long time” prior to the shooting, Satz said, Cruz thought about carrying it out.

    Revisiting ground covered in the trial, the prosecutor said Cruz researched mass shootings and their perpetrators, including those at a music festival in Las Vegas; at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado; at Virginia Tech; and at Colorado’s Columbine High School.

    Cruz modified his AR-15 to help improve his marksmanship; he accumulated ammunition and and magazines; and he searched online for information about how long it would take police to respond to a school shooting, Satz said.

    Then, the day of, Satz said, Cruz hid his tactical vest in a backpack and took an Uber to the school, wearing a Marjory Stoneman Douglas JROTC polo shirt to blend in. Based on his planning, he told the Uber driver to drop him off at a specific pedestrian gate, knowing it would be open soon before school let out.

    “All these details he thought of, and he did,” Satz said.

    Satz also detailed a narrative of the shooting, which he called a “systematic massacre,” recounting how the shooter killed or wounded each of his victims, whose families and loved ones filled the courtroom gallery. Prosecutors also showed jurors a video of the shooting, which was not shown to the public.

    Cruz, wearing a striped sweater and flanked by his public defenders, looked on expressionless, occasionally looking down at the table in front of him or talking to one of his attorneys.

    “The appropriate sentence for Nikolas Cruz is the death penalty,” Satz concluded.

    In her own statement, McNeill stressed to jurors that defense attorneys were not disputing that Cruz deserves to be punished for the shooting.

    “We are asking you to punish him and to punish him severely,” she said. “We are asking you to sentence him to prison for the rest of his life, where he will wait to die, either by natural causes or whatever else could possibly happen to him while he’s in prison.”

    The 14 slain students were: Alyssa Alhadeff, 14; Martin Duque Anguiano, 14; Nicholas Dworet, 17; Jaime Guttenberg, 14; Luke Hoyer, 15; Cara Loughran, 14; Gina Montalto, 14; Joaquin Oliver, 17; Alaina Petty, 14; Meadow Pollack, 18; Helena Ramsay, 17; Alex Schachter, 14; Carmen Schentrup, 16; and Peter Wang, 14.

    Geography teacher Scott Beigel, 35; wrestling coach Chris Hixon, 49; and assistant football coach Aaron Feis, 37, also were killed – each while running toward danger or trying to help students to safety.

    The lengthy trial – jury selection began six months ago, in early April – has seen prosecutors and defense attorneys present evidence of aggravating factors and mitigating circumstances, reasons Cruz should or should not be put to death.

    The state has pointed to seven aggravating factors, including that the killings were especially heinous, atrocious or cruel, as well as cold, calculated and premeditated, Satz said Tuesday. Other aggravating factors include the fact the defendant knowingly created a great risk of death to many people and that he disrupted a lawful government function – in this case, the running of a school.

    Together, these aggravating factors “outweigh any mitigation about anything about the defendant’s background or character,” Satz said.

    Satz rejected the mitigating circumstances presented during trial by the defense, including that Cruz’s mother smoked or used drugs while pregnant with him. Those factors would not turn someone into a mass murderer, Satz argued, adding it was the jury’s job to weigh the credibility of the defense witnesses who testified to those claims.

    Satz cast doubt on the defense’s other proposed mitigators. In response to a claim that Cruz has neurological or intellectual deficits, Satz pointed to the gunman’s ability to carefully research and prepare for the Parkland shooting.

    In response to claims Cruz was bullied by his peers, Satz argued Cruz was an aggressor, pointing to testimony that he walked around in high school with a swastika drawn on his backpack, along with the N-word and other explicit language.

    “Hate is not a mental disorder,” Satz said.

    During trial, prosecutors presented evidence showing the gunman spent months searching online for information about mass shootings and left behind social media comments sharing his express desire to “kill people,” while Google searches illustrated how he sought information about mass shootings. On YouTube, Cruz left comments like “Im going to be a professional school shooter,” and promised to “go on a killing rampage.”

    “What one writes,” Satz said, referencing Cruz’s online history Tuesday, “what one says, is a window to someone’s soul.”

    Public defenders assigned to represent Cruz have asked the jury to take into account his troubled history, from a dysfunctional family life to serious mental and developmental issues, contending he was born with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.

    On Tuesday, McNeill reiterated the defense’s case, starting with one of the first witnesses called in August, Cruz’s older sister, Danielle Woodard. Woodard testified their mother, Brenda Woodard, used drugs and drank alcohol while pregnant with him.

    “Her brother, Nikolas Cruz never recovered from the drugs and the alcohol that Brenda put in her polluted womb,” McNeill said Tuesday.

    Several neighbors who knew Cruz when he lived with his late adoptive mother, Lynda Cruz, also testified about watching him grow up, McNeill reminded jurors Tuesday. They shared how they saw him behaving in ways they described as “strange” or “weird,” or saw him being bullied. One neighbor, McNeill said, had told jurors that “from the moment he set eyes on Nikolas, he could tell something was not right with him.”

    McNeill also revisited Cruz’s academic struggles throughout his childhood, recounting the “many people” – including educators and school counselors or psychologists – who testified they had concerns about his bad behavior or poor performance in school.

    Assistant Public Defender Melisa McNeill gives her closing argument in the trial of the Parkland shooter on Tuesday.

    Those struggles continued into adolescence, McNeill said: When he was 15 years old, Cruz’s skills in reading, writing and math were well below the levels they should have been. These academic struggles, along with his anxiety and depression, were indicators, McNeill said, of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.

    Various counselors and psychiatrists also testified, McNeill reminded the jury, offering their observations from years of treating or interacting with Cruz. One, former Broward County school district counselor John Newnham, testified that while Lynda Cruz was a caring mother, after the death of her husband, she was “overwhelmed” and did not take advantage of the support available.

    This was a factor in Cruz’s failure to receive the proper help, McNeill told jurors Tuesday.

    “Everybody told you that Lynda never truly appreciated what was wrong with Nikolas … But the evidence has shown you that Lynda consistently minimized, enabled, ignored, excused, defended and ultimately lied to the very people that were trying to help Nikolas.”

    “Sometimes the people who deserve the least amount of compassion and grace and remorse are the ones who should get it,” she said.

    As part of the prosecution’s case, family members of the victims were given the opportunity this summer to take the stand and offer raw and emotional testimony about how Cruz’s actions had forever changed their lives. At one point, even members of Cruz’s defense team were brought to tears.

    “I feel I can’t truly be happy if I smile,” Max Schachter, the father of 14-year-old victim Alex Schachter, testified in August. “I know that behind that smile is the sharp realization that part of me will always be sad and miserable because Alex isn’t here.”

    The defense’s case came to an unexpected end last month when – having called just 26 of 80 planned witnesses – public defenders assigned to represent Cruz abruptly rested, leading the judge to admonish the team for what she said was unprofessionalism, resulting in a courtroom squabble between her and the defense (the jury was not present).

    Defense attorneys would later file a motion to disqualify the judge for her comments, arguing in part they suggested the judge was not impartial and Cruz’s right to a fair trial had been undermined. Prosecutors disagreed, writing “judicial comments, even of a critical or hostile nature, are not grounds for disqualification.”

    Scherer ultimately denied the motion.

    Prosecutors then presented their rebuttal, concluding last week following a three-day delay attributed to Hurricane Ian.

    Their case included footage of Cruz telling clinical neuropsychologist Dr. Robert Denney he chose to carry out the shooting on Valentine’s Day because he “felt like no one loved me, and I didn’t like Valentine’s Day and I wanted to ruin it for everyone.”

    Denney, who spent more than 400 hours with the gunman, testified for the prosecution that he concluded Cruz has borderline personality disorder and anti-social personality disorder.

    But Cruz did not meet the criteria for fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, as the defense has contended, Denney testified, accusing Cruz of “grossly exaggerating” his “psychiatric problems” in tests Denney administered.

    When read the list of names of the 17 people killed and asked if fetal alcohol spectrum disorder explained their murders, Denney responded “no” each time.

    Correction: An earlier version of this story misspelled the first name of defense attorney Melisa McNeill.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Filmmaker Jennifer Siebel Newsom, wife of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, is set to testify against Harvey Weinstein in his Los Angeles sexual assault trial | CNN

    Filmmaker Jennifer Siebel Newsom, wife of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, is set to testify against Harvey Weinstein in his Los Angeles sexual assault trial | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Jennifer Siebel Newsom, an award-winning filmmaker and wife of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, is set to testify in the sexual assault trial of disgraced movie producer Harvey Weinstein in Los Angeles, her attorneys told CNN Monday.

    “Like many other women, my client was sexually assaulted by Harvey Weinstein at a purported business meeting that turned out to be a trap,” said Beth Fegan, one of Newsom’s attorneys.

    “She intends to testify at his trial to seek some measure of justice for survivors and as part of her life’s work to improve the lives of women,” Fegan said.

    Weinstein, 70, is set to go on trial again, more than two years after he was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual act and third-degree rape charges in New York and sentenced to 23 years in prison.

    After he was found guilty in New York, the once-powerful movie mogul was moved to Los Angeles, where he’s been serving his prison sentence.

    In Los Angeles, Weinstein faces multiple sexual assault charges that he has pleaded not guilty to last year, including four counts of rape, four counts of forcible oral copulation, sexual penetration by force and sexual battery by restraint in incidents dating from 2004 to 2013.

    Jury selection for Weinstein’s trial began Monday in Los Angeles County Superior Court. Newsom will likely testify “on or around November 8” but this could change as the schedule is fluid, attorney Mark Firmani said.

    As the trial in Los Angeles is set to get underway, Weinstein has maintained his innocence and denied all allegations against him. New York’s highest court in August agreed to hear his appeal challenging his 2020 conviction on sex crime charges.

    The allegations against Weinstein helped fuel the global #MeToo movement, encouraging women around the globe to speak out against sexual abuse.

    Just a day after The New York Times published its bombshell report on Weinstein in October 2017, Newsom wrote an opinion editorial for the Huffington Post where she shared that she had an experience very similar to the allegations reported by the Times.

    “I was naive, new to the industry, and didn’t know how to deal with his aggressive advances ― work invitations with a friend late-night at The Toronto Film Festival, and later an invitation to meet with him about a role in The Peninsula Hotel, where staff were present and then all of a sudden disappeared like clockwork, leaving me alone with this extremely powerful and intimidating Hollywood legend,” Newsom wrote.

    Weinstein spokesman Juda Engelmayer declined to comment on Newsom’s allegation.

    Siebel Newsom is a Stanford University graduate who has written, directed and produced several documentaries, including “Miss Representation,” “The Mask You Live In” and “The Great American Lie.” During her time as California’s First Partner, Siebel Newsom has advocated for working mothers and launched initiatives focused on closing the pay gap, among other efforts, and has been involved in several social activism campaigns.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jury finds former Uber security chief guilty of concealing data breach | CNN Business

    Jury finds former Uber security chief guilty of concealing data breach | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    A San Francisco jury has found Uber Technologies Inc’s former chief security officer Joseph Sullivan guilty of criminal obstruction for failing to report a 2016 cybersecurity incident to the authorities, a spokesperson from the Department of Justice confirmed on Wednesday.

    Sullivan, who was fired from Uber

    (UBER)
    in 2017, was found guilty on two counts, namely obstruction of justice and deliberate concealment of felony.

    “Sullivan affirmatively worked to hide the data breach from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and took steps to prevent the hackers from being caught,” said Stephanie Hinds, US Attorney for the Northern District of California.

    The case pertains to a breach at Uber’s systems that affected data of 57 million passengers and drivers. The company did not disclose the incident for a year.

    In July, Uber accepted responsibility for covering up the breach and agreed to cooperate with the prosecution of Sullivan over his alleged role in concealing the hacking, as part of a settlement with US prosecutors to avoid criminal charges.

    Sullivan’s lawyer David Angeli and the FTC did not immediately respond to Reuters’ requests for comment.

    Sullivan was originally indicted in September 2020. Prosecutors had said at the time he arranged to pay the hackers $100,000 in bitcoin and had them sign nondisclosure agreements that falsely stated they had not stolen data.

    Sullivan was also accused of withholding information from Uber officials who could have disclosed the breach to the FTC, which had been evaluating the San Francisco-based company’s data security following a 2014 breach.

    In September 2018, Uber paid $148 million to settle claims by all 50 US states and Washington, D.C., that it was too slow to disclose the hacking.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Twitter-Musk trial is now on pause | CNN Business

    The Twitter-Musk trial is now on pause | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN Business
     — 

    The judge overseeing the acquisition dispute between Elon Musk and Twitter on Thursday ruled to pause the legal proceedings until Oct. 28 following a request from the Tesla CEO, meaning the trial that was set to begin Oct. 17 will not go ahead as planned.

    Twitter had opposed Musk’s motion to stay the proceedings and raised concerns that he might not follow through on his word to quickly close the deal.

    “If the transaction does not close by 5 p.m. on October 28, 2022, the parties are instructed to contact me by email that evening to obtain November 2022 trial dates,” the judge, Delaware Chancery Court chancellor Kathaleen St. Judge McCormick, said in the order.

    Lawyers for Elon Musk on Thursday filed a motion to stay the legal proceedings in its dispute with Twitter and to remove from the court’s calendar the trial that had been set to begin Oct. 17, noting “changed circumstances that have effectively mooted this action,” according to a Thursday court filing.

    The filing — which says the stay is “pending the closing of the transaction” — comes after Musk earlier this week proposed proceeding with the $44 billion acquisition of Twitter at the originally agreed upon terms after having spent months trying to get out of the deal.

    The filing states that Musk is “willing to close the transaction at $54.20, the Debt Financing parties are working cooperatively to fund the close, and closing is expected on or around October 28.”

    But the filing also alludes to resistance from Twitter to halt the legal proceedings. “Twitter will not take yes for an answer. Astonishingly, they have insisted on proceeding with this litigation,” according to the letter.

    Lawyers for Twitter issued a sharp response to Musk’s filing. “The obstacle to terminating this litigation is not, as Defendants say, that Twitter is unwilling to take yes for an answer,” the letter states. “The obstacle is that Defendants still refuse to accept their contractual obligations.”

    It notes that for months, Musk has been attempting to exit the deal and “now, on the eve of trial, Defendants declare they intend to close after all. ‘Trust us,’ they say, ‘we mean it this time.’”

    “Until Defendants commit to close as required, Twitter is entitled to its day in Court,” Twitter’s letter states. “Defendants can and should close next week. Until they do, this action is not moot and should be brought to trial.”

    The back-and-forth offers the clearest indication yet that Musk’s financing may now be the central issue in the dispute between the Tesla CEO and Twitter over halting the legal proceedings and completing the deal. Musk has previously said he would pay for the acquisition through a mix of debt commitments from financial institutions, equity financing from investors and his own assets.

    But legal experts have raised concerns that debt financiers may now want to pull out of the deal in light of recent changes to the debt market and declines in value of social media companies. Twitter, according to experts, would likely want to maintain the litigation as pressure on Musk unless he agrees to close the deal with or without the debt financing.

    In the Thursday filing, Musk’s legal team stated that Twitter has resisted a stay based on concerns that Musk has made his offer to close the deal contingent on the receipt of the debt financing, and that payment could fall through. “Counsel for the debt financing parties has advised that each of their clients is prepared to honor its obligations,” Musk’s filing states.

    The filing asks the court to stay the proceedings and order Twitter to complete the deal.

    “Proceeding toward trial is not only an enormous waste of party and judicial resources, it will undermine the ability of the parties to close the transaction,” the filing states. “Instead of allowing the parties to turn their focus to securing the Debt Financing necessary to consummate the transaction and preparing for a transition of the business, the parties will instead remain distracted by completing discovery and an unnecessary trial.”

    In its response letter, Twitter’s lawyers state that Musk’s team has refused “to commit to any closing date.” It added that a representative for one of the banks set to lend to Musk testified Thursday morning that “Mr. Musk has yet to send them a borrowing notice and has not otherwise communicated to them that he intends to close the transaction, let alone on any particular timeline.”

    Twitter’s lawyers added: ‘Defendants should be arranging to close on Monday, October 10.”

    Earlier Thursday, lawyers for Musk and Twitter agreed to postpone the Tesla CEO’s deposition in the court fight, a source familiar with the negotiations told CNN. Musk’s deposition had been set to begin Thursday, per a notice filed earlier this week. It’s not clear whether a new date has been set for Musk’s deposition, but Twitter could end up pushing to complete it early next week if a deal is not reached.

    As of Wednesday, the two sides had yet to reach a deal to close the acquisition, a separate source told CNN. Delaware Chancery Court chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick, the judge who is overseeing the litigation, said in a Wednesday court filing that neither side had filed to stay the proceedings and she was continuing to prepare for trial to begin on Oct. 17.

    On Thursday, McCormick filed a letter to both sides laying out deadlines for responding to discovery motions, noting that the “trial is fast approaching.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Australian court to hear claims over alleged sexual assault in Parliament House | CNN

    Australian court to hear claims over alleged sexual assault in Parliament House | CNN

    [ad_1]


    Brisbane, Australia
    CNN
     — 

    A highly anticipated sexual assault trial began in Australia Tuesday in a case that has raised questions about the culture in the nation’s Parliament and the actions of ministers when the claims emerged.

    Former Liberal Party staffer Bruce Lehrmann has pleaded not guilty to sexual intercourse without consent relating to the alleged assault of his ex-coworker Brittany Higgins at Parliament House in Canberra in March 2019.

    The alleged assault was said to have taken place in the former defense minister’s office, a location that prompted criticism and questions over security levels within the nation’s political hub.

    Witnesses are expected to include politicians, security officials and the journalists who broke the story in February 2021, when Higgins went public with the allegations.

    ACT Supreme Court Justice Lucy McCallum is presiding over the trial, which is expected to last four to six weeks before a 12-member jury retires to deliver its verdict.

    The prosecution’s case is being led by the ACT’s director of public prosecutions, who must prove beyond reasonable doubt that Lehrmann acted without consent. The charge of sexual intercourse without consent carries a potential prison term of up to 12 years.

    The trial had been repeatedly delayed, partly due to media commentary around the high-profile case that attracted significant press attention when Higgins came forward.

    Higgins has since become a prominent advocate for women’s rights.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • E. Jean Carroll battery and defamation trial against Donald Trump begins: What to know | CNN Politics

    E. Jean Carroll battery and defamation trial against Donald Trump begins: What to know | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    The civil battery and defamation trial for columnist E. Jean Carroll against former President Donald Trump is set to begin Tuesday.

    Carroll alleges Trump forcibly raped and groped her in a Manhattan luxury department store dressing room in the mid 1990’s. Trump denies the charges and has said Carroll is “not my type.”

    Unlike his dramatic courtroom appearance in New York state court earlier this month, Trump is unlikely to appear in the Manhattan federal courtroom, his lawyers have said, unless he is called to testify in Carroll’s case or opts to take the stand in his own defense. Because it is a civil case, he is not required to appear.

    Jury selection begins Tuesday and the trial is expected to last up to two weeks.

    Trump is not being criminally prosecuted on Carroll’s rape allegations. Carroll did not specify an amount in her civil lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court but is seeking monetary damages and a retraction of an October 2022 social media statement Trump made about Carroll.

    Here’s what to know:

    Nearly four years after Carroll first went public with the allegations in 2019, a jury is expected to be empaneled. Federal District Judge Lewis Kaplan is expected to winnow down a pool of about 100 prospective jurors.

    The attorneys have asked the judge to quiz the jury pool on issues like their potential biases and their knowledge of Carroll, Trump and the pending legal matters Trump is facing in unrelated cases like his recent indictment in New York County criminal court.

    The jury will remain anonymous to the public and the attorneys, the judge ruled. The decision was in part influenced by Trump’s threats to the state Supreme Court judge overseeing his criminal case in New York.

    Attorneys for Carroll and Trump could give opening statements late in the day Tuesday.

    Carroll filed the suit last November under New York’s 2022 Adult Survivors Act that opened a look-back window for sexual assault allegations like Carroll’s with long-expired statutes of limitations.

    The former Elle columnist first came forward with her story in June of 2019 publishing an excerpt from her book “What Do We Need Men For” in New York Magazine ahead of the book release.

    “And, while I am not supposed to say it, I will. This woman is not my type,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

    “In the meantime, and for the record, E. Jean Carroll is not telling the truth, is a woman who I had nothing to do with, didn’t know, and would have no interest in knowing her if I ever had the chance. Now all I have to do is go through years more of legal nonsense in order to clear my name of her and her lawyer’s phony attacks on me. This can only happen to ‘Trump’!”

    The lawsuit argues the denial of Carroll’s allegations is defamatory and caused her emotional, reputational and professional harm.

    Trump’s lawyer corrects him after error during deposition

    Carroll’s account of the alleged rape after encountering Trump at Bergdorf Goodman in the fall of 1995 or spring of 1996 is detailed in the lawsuit.

    She recalled telling Trump she was 52 at time. Both are now in their 70’s.

    She helped Trump shop for “a girl” when he recognized her leaving the store, Carroll says.

    “Hey, you’re that advice lady!” he said to her, according to the lawsuit. “Hey, you’re that real estate tycoon!” she replied.

    Trump steered what started out as light-hearted shopping to the lingerie department where he suggested Carroll try on a bodysuit, the suit alleges. Carroll says Trump then guided her toward a dressing room, where she jokingly suggested he try on the lingerie.

    Once in the dressing room Trump “lunged at Carroll, pushing her against the wall, bumping her head quite badly, and putting his mouth on her lips,” according to the lawsuit. With Carroll fighting back, Trump pushed her against the wall again, “jammed his hand under her coatdress and pulled down her tights,” the lawsuit says.

    “Trump opened his overcoat and unzipped his pants. Trump then pushed his fingers around Carroll’s genitals and forced his penis inside of her,” the suit alleges.

    Carroll eventually pushed him off with her knee and ran out of the dressing room to exit the store, according to the lawsuit.

    The former president categorically denies that the interaction and assault ever happened.

    After Carroll went public, Trump said he “never met this person.”

    Trump’s counsel has made several legal attempts to dismiss the litigation with Carroll and once tried to countersue her, alleging Carroll violated New York’s anti-SLAPP law prohibiting frivolous defamation lawsuits – a claim rejected by Judge Kaplan.

    Carroll first sued Trump for defamation in 2019 for statements he made denying the allegations at the time. That case has been paused pending further litigation about how to handle the case because Trump was president when he made the statements at issue in the lawsuit.

    Attorneys for the career advice columnist have indicated that Carroll will likely take the stand to tell her account to the jury.

    Trump, however, is unlikely to appear in the Manhattan federal courtroom, his lawyers have said, unless he is called to testify in Carroll’s case or opts to take the stand in his own defense.

    Trump’s attorney told the court that Trump wanted to attend the trial but claimed it would be a burden on the city and court staff to accommodate him given the security protection he receives.

    Judge Kaplan has not decided whether he’ll instruct the jury about Trump’s absence from the defense table.

    Jurors are expected to see at least some parts of Trump’s video deposition taken last October for this case. Excerpts of the deposition were previously unsealed in court filings ahead of the trial.

    Carroll’s lead attorney, Roberta Kaplan, a civil attorney who’s represented women in high-profile sexual assault litigation like victims of Jeffrey Epstein, indicated that her team can put on Carroll’s case without Trump making an appearance. (Carroll’s attorney and the judge are not related.)

    Two longtime friends of Carroll, who’ve confirmed that she confided in them soon after the alleged incident more than two decades ago, can testify to corroborate Carroll’s story, Judge Kaplan ruled over objections from Trump’s legal team.

    Carroll has said when she confided in journalist Lisa Birnbach, her friend told her she’d been raped and should report the incident to the police at the time.

    When she told former local TV anchor Carol Martin a day or so later, Martin warned Carroll that she was no match for Trump’s army of lawyers and said it was best to keep it to herself – which is ultimately what Carroll did until 2019, she says.

    Two other women who allege Trump physically forced himself on them can also testify about their allegations, the judge ruled.

    Jessica Leeds has alleged that Trump, seated next to her on a plane, groped her on a flight from Texas to New York in 1979. Leeds, who first came forward during the 2016 presidential election, said in a deposition for this case that Trump acknowledged remembering her from the plane when she saw him at an event sometime after the alleged incident.

    People Magazine writer Natasha Stoynoff similarly alleges that Trump groped her and tried to forcibly kiss her in 2005 when Stoynoff was at Mar-a-Lago to interview Trump and a then-pregnant Melania Trump on their first wedding anniversary.

    Trump denies both incidents ever happened.

    Attorneys for Carroll are expected to show the jury a black and white photo of Trump where he is interacting with several people, including with his then-wife Ivana, Carroll and her then-husband.

    A transcript of his October 2022 deposition revealed that Trump mistook Carroll for his ex-wife Marla Maples when he reviewed the photo during the deposition.

    “I don’t know who – it’s Marla,” Trump said when shown the photo. “That’s Marla, yeah. That’s my wife,” he says when asked to clarify.

    e. jean carroll new day 071619

    E. Jean Carroll: ‘I’m not sorry’ (2019)

    Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, then interjected and said “no, that’s Carroll,” according to the transcript.

    Carroll’s lawyers have said the photo proves Trump had in fact met Carroll and she could be his “type.”

    Trump’s comments on the 2016 campaign trail denying allegations from Leeds and Stoynoff can also be admitted as evidence, the judge ruled.

    Like Carroll, Trump has asserted that the allegations are false and implausible in part because the women aren’t attractive or his ‘type.’

    Jurors may also hear the controversial “Access Hollywood” tape on which Trump can be heard telling show host Billy Bush how he would use his stardom to aggressively come on to women.

    Trump has chalked up his graphic language on the tape, which first surfaced during his 2016 Presidential election campaign, as “locker room talk” that wasn’t actually true.

    Judge Kaplan ruled that a jury could reasonably find that Trump admitted in the Access Hollywood Tape “that he in fact has had contact with women’s genitalia in the past without their consent, or that he has attempted to do so,” and the jury may view accounts from Leeds and Stoynoff as support for that argument.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Supreme Court limits federal prisoners’ ability to bring some post-conviction challenges | CNN Politics

    Supreme Court limits federal prisoners’ ability to bring some post-conviction challenges | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the conviction of a federal prisoner who argued he should be able to challenge his 27-year sentence for firearms possession based on changes in the law since his trial.

    The court’s decision will make it harder for federal prisoners to bring certain types of post-conviction challenges.

    Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the 6-3 opinion in the case. The three liberal justices, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented.

    “Because of how Justice Thomas and the other conservative justices read the relevant statutes and the Constitution, there will now be a significant number of federal prisoners who are unable to bring potentially meritorious collateral challenges to their convictions and sentences once their direct appeal has ended,” said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law.

    Marcus Jones was convicted in 2000 of two counts as a felon in possession of a firearm and one count of making false statements to acquire a firearm. At trial, he said he knew he had previously been convicted of a felony, but he thought his record had been wiped clean. Nevertheless, the jury was not told that it had to find that Jones knew he was a convicted felon. Eventually, he was sentenced to 327 months for unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon and 60 months for making false statements.

    In 2002, he went back to court and filed what is called a 2255 motion meant to challenge his original conviction, but he lost.

    Seventeen years later, in a case called Rehaif v. United States, the Supreme Court narrowed the felon in possession statute. The court held that the government has to prove the defendant knew he was still a felon at the time of his new offense in order to convict him.

    Jones appealed in federal court hoping to wipe away his felon in possession of a firearm conviction. He cited the Rehaif decision in his petition, noting that the Supreme Court had changed the rules. Lower courts ruled against him.

    In Thursday’s opinion, the court ruled against him as well, holding that under 2255 there are limited conditions in which Congress has permitted federal prisoners to bring second or successive collateral attacks on their sentences.

    “The inability of a prisoner with a statutory claim to satisfy those conditions does not mean that he can bring his claim in a habeas petition under the savings clause,” Thomas wrote in his majority opinion.

    “It means he cannot bring it at all. Congress has chosen finality over error correction in his case,” he said.

    Sotomayor and Kagan, in a jointly written dissent, argued that the majority opinion “yields disturbing results.”

    A prisoner who is “actually innocent, imprisoned for conduct that Congress did not criminalize” is forever barred from raising that claim “merely because he previously sought postconviction relief,” they wrote.

    Jackson filed her own dissent. She said that because the Rehaif case “changed the scope of a criminal statute” it should apply “retroactively to individuals (like Jones) whose conviction had become final at the time it was issued.”

    She wrote that she was also “deeply troubled by the constitutional implications of the noting-to-see here approach that the majority takes with respect to the incarceration of potential legal innocents.”

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • E. Jean Carroll and Donald Trump rest their cases in civil rape trial, but Trump could still testify | CNN Politics

    E. Jean Carroll and Donald Trump rest their cases in civil rape trial, but Trump could still testify | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Attorneys for E. Jean Carroll and Donald Trump rested their respective cases in the battery and defamation trial against the former president in Manhattan federal court on Thursday evening.

    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.

    While resting his case means Trump legally waived his right to testify in his own defense, District Judge Lewis Kaplan left a window for Trump to change his mind over the weekend.

    Kaplan ruled that Trump’s legal team has until 5 p.m. Sunday to petition the court to reopen the defense case for the sole purpose of allowing Trump to testify. The judge said he ordered the precautionary measure in light of Trump’s public comments made earlier Thursday suggesting he would make an appearance in court before the trial ended.

    Trump, who has not appeared in the courtroom at any point during the trial, told reporters in Ireland on Thursday he’ll “probably attend” the trial.

    “I have to go back for a woman that made a false accusation about me, and I have a judge who is extremely hostile,” Trump said in Doonbeg, Ireland, according to Reuters.

    During a sidebar on Thursday afternoon, Trump’s attorney tried repeatedly to reassure Kaplan that his client would not take the stand and implied that the judge has an idea of what it’s like representing the former president.

    “I know you understand what I am dealing with,” Joe Tacopina told the judge, according to a court transcript.

    If Trump does not change his mind, the parties are set to give closing arguments to the jury at 10 a.m. on Monday.

    Carroll’s legal team put on 11 witnesses in her case including the writer herself over seven trial days.

    Republican panelist: Trump’s glorification of accused Jan 6 rioters is “disgusting.”

    Earlier Thursday the jury saw more clips of Trump’s video-recorded deposition taken last October for this case in which Trump vehemently denies Carroll’s rape allegations against him.

    “She’s accusing me of rape, a woman that I have no idea who she is. It came out of the blue. She’s accusing me of rape – of raping her, the worst thing you can do, the worst charge. And you know it’s not true too. You’re a political operative also. You’re a disgrace. But she’s accusing me and so are you of rape, and it never took place,” Trump said on video, addressing Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan.

    Trump stood by his social media posts published in 2019 and 2022 denying Carroll’s accusations and confirmed he personally wrote them.

    At one point during the deposition, Trump held a well-known black and white photo of himself, E Jean Carroll, her former husband news anchor John Johnson, and Trump’s then-wife Ivana.

    Trump recognized Johnson and recalled thinking he was good at his television job, but then mistook Carroll for his other ex-wife Marla Maples.

    “That’s Marla, yeah. That’s my wife,” he said.

    After the attorneys corrected him, Trump said the photo was blurry.

    He acknowledged the photo suggests he met Carroll at least once but said it must have been very brief at an event and he does not remember or know her.

    “I still don’t know this woman. I think she’s a whack job. I have no idea. I don’t know anything about this woman other than what I read in stories and what I hear. I know nothing about her,” the former president said.

    “She’s a liar and she’s a sick person in my opinion, Really sick. Something wrong with her,” Trump said during another point in the deposition.

    screengrab maggine haberman

    Haberman: Trump is personally bothered by the E. Jean Carroll case

    Carroll’s attorney asked Trump about his comments regarding Carroll, Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff all not being “his type.”

    He stood by the statements each time he was asked. At one point he said, “the only different between me and other people is I’m honest.”

    He also told Carroll’s attorney she’s not his type. “You wouldn’t be a choice of mine either to be honest,” Trump said.

    He also said he felt like he had a right to insult the women who’ve accused him falsely.

    “I don’t want to be insulting but when people accuse me of something I think I have a right to be insulting because they’re insulting me,” Trump said.

    The jury watched Trump view the “Access Hollywood” tape during his deposition. He didn’t appear to noticeably react as it was played.

    When asked about the tape he said it’s already been “fully litigated” and, “it’s locker room talk, I don’t know, it’s just the way people talk.”

    Former local news anchor Carol Martin testified Thursday that she remembers Carroll confiding in her soon after the alleged assault by Trump in the mid-1990s.

    Martin testified under direct examination that she didn’t remember when exactly it happened, but she knew it was some time while the two were working at the same cable network between 1994 and 1996.

    By Martin’s account the two friends had finished taping their respective shows and Carroll asked if she could come over Martin’s home near the studio. They talked in her kitchen for about an hour, Martin testified, and Carroll was “frenzied.”

    Carroll’s “effect was anxious and excitable, but she can be that way sometimes so that part wasn’t as different but what she was saying didn’t make any sense at first.” The conversation was not linear, Carroll started her account saying, “You won’t believe what happened to me the other night,” Martin recalled.

    “And I didn’t know what to expect,” Martin said she felt at the time. Carroll repeatedly said, “Trump attacked me,” according to Martin.

    “I think she said ‘he pinned me’ and I still didn’t know what she meant,” Martin testified.

    Martin testified that she told Carroll she shouldn’t tell anyone her story. “Because it was Donald Trump and he had a lot of attorneys and I thought he would bury her is what I told her,” Martin said.

    “I have questioned myself more times than not over the years. I am not proud that that’s what I told her in truth but she didn’t contest,” Martin added.

    During cross-examination, Tacopina read through a series of messages Martin has sent friends, many to Carroll, speaking negatively about Trump for years since he first ran for the presidency.

    Martin testified that as “very liberal feminist women,” they frequently discussed politics including their dislike for Trump. “We would often talk about ways to change the climate or work on issues of interest to us,” Martin testified.

    Tacopina also read the jury several messages Martin sent to friends and family about Carroll’s lawsuit against Trump that appeared to criticize Carroll. “She’s gonna sue when adult victims of rape law is passed in New York State or something. WTF that’s the defamation case and DOJ oversight or something. It’s gone to another level and not something I can relate to. For her, sadly, I think this quest has become a lifestyle,” Martin wrote in one text.

    Martin responded in court that at the time she sent the messages she was dealing with serious matters in her own personal life that affected her feelings toward Carroll’s situation. She testified that the texts do not reflect her current feelings.

    A marketing expert commissioned by Carroll testified it would take up to $2.7 million to run an effective marketing campaign to repair her reputation just from the damage of Trump’s October 12, 2022, comments denying her allegations.

    Northwestern University Professor Ashlee Humphreys said that Trump’s statement at issue in this trial reached somewhere between 13.7 and 18 million impressions.

    Humphreys and a team of researchers evaluated the post first published on Truth Social and how it spread across mediums like other social media platforms, websites and cable and network broadcast television.

    In a series of calculations Humphreys said about 21% of the people who viewed the statement in some capacity – about 3.7 to 5.6 million people – likely believed Trump. The analysis did not consider the effects of previous statements Trump made about Carroll.

    On cross examination Humphreys acknowledged that she did not consider damage done to Trump by Carroll’s statements against him.

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump once said a president under felony indictment would grind the government to a halt and create a constitutional crisis | CNN Politics

    Trump once said a president under felony indictment would grind the government to a halt and create a constitutional crisis | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump said in 2016 that a president under indictment would “cripple the operations of our government” and create an “unprecedented constitutional crisis” – years before he himself was indicted on federal charges while running for a second term as president.

    Trump made the comments nearly seven years ago about Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential campaign.

    “We could very well have a sitting president under felony indictment and ultimately a criminal trial,” Trump said during a November 5, 2016, campaign rally in Reno, Nevada, reviewed by CNN’s KFile. “It would grind government to a halt.”

    Just days earlier, on October 28, then-FBI director James Comey publicly announced they had reopened the investigation into Clinton’s handling of classified information related to her use of a private email server during her tenure as secretary of state.

    Now, Trump finds himself under the exact situation he repeatedly described after he was charged in early June with 37 federal counts related to retention of classified documents and conspiracy to obstruct justice.

    A tentative trial date had been set for mid-August by the case’s judge, but it is likely to be pushed back. The special counsel’s office asked for a December trial. The flexibility of when the trial will begin leaves uncertainty if the case will conclude before the 2024 election.

    But Trump, the current front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination, will not be disqualified from the presidency even if convicted, and he told Politico in June that he won’t leave the presidential race if he is convicted of the charges.

    At another rally on November 3, 2016, in Concord, North Carolina, Trump made similar comments.

    “If she were to win, it would create an unprecedented Constitutional crisis that would cripple the operations of our government,” he said. “She is likely to be under investigation for many years, and also it will probably end up – in my opinion – in a criminal trial. I mean, you take a look. Who knows? But it certainly looks that way.”

    “She has no right to be running, you know that,” Trump said. “No right.”

    Trump added at a November 5, 2016, rally in Denver that as “the prime suspect in a far-reaching criminal investigation,” Clinton’s controversies would make it “virtually impossible for her to govern.”

    The comments aren’t the only ones from Trump’s past campaigns that could have aged poorly with his legal troubles. In another comment, made when running for reelection, Trump acknowledged only the sitting president could reveal classified information.

    CNN previously reported in an exclusively obtained audio recording that Trump said as president he could have declassified a document about plans to attack Iran that he was showing aides after leaving office, but recognized he could not do so now that he is no longer president.

    “And you know the newspapers and the press and the fake news they went and said he just gave away classified information,” Trump said at a rally in Pennsylvania in September 2020 when discussing his conversations with author Bob Woodward on nuclear weapons. “First of all, I’m allowed to do it, I’m the President so I’m allowed to. I’m the one – I’m the only one that’s allowed.”

    In September, CNN’s KFile reported that Trump previously called for lengthy jail sentences for those who mishandled classified information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump legal team will look to challenge ‘every potential issue’ once indictment is unsealed | CNN Politics

    Trump legal team will look to challenge ‘every potential issue’ once indictment is unsealed | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Donald Trump’s legal team will look to challenge “every potential issue” in his indictment once the charges are unsealed, an attorney for the former president said Sunday.

    “We’re not doing anything at the arraignment because that would be showmanship and nothing more because we haven’t even seen the indictment yet. We will take the indictment, we will dissect it, the team will look at every – every – potential issue that we will be able to challenge and we will challenge it,” Joe Tacopina told CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union.”

    Tacopina and other Trump lawyers have done several TV interviews in anticipation of the former President’s first appearance in court Tuesday, when he will learn the charges that the Manhattan grand jury has approved against him.

    At times, the lawyers have vowed to ask for the charges to be dismissed. But the full slate of charges still aren’t known. And crucially, a judge will ultimately determine if the law is sound enough for the case to move forward to trial.

    Former Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance said in an interview with NBC News on Sunday, “We can speculate on what evidence we think they may or may not have, but even with the indictment published, we really will not know what the district attorney’s evidence is and what they would present at trial.”

    Vance’s team investigated the case but did not charge it, leaving it under the purview of his successor, Alvin Bragg.

    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.

    The Trump team’s court strategy could center around challenging the case because it may rely on business record entries that prosecutors tie to hush money payments to Daniels seven years ago, beyond the statute of limitations for a criminal case.

    Tacopina suggested in TV interviews Sunday that the statute of limitations may be passed, and said the Trump businesses didn’t make false entries.

    “They’re not false entries. But assuming they were, they’re misdemeanors way beyond the statute of limitations, so they had to cobble them together to try and get a felony,” he said.

    Tacopina on Sunday also said a request to move the case to a different New York City borough isn’t on the table yet for Trump’s legal team.

    “There’s been no discussion of that whatsoever,” he told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos in another interview. “It’s way too premature to start worrying about venue changes until we really see the indictment and grapple with the legal issues.”

    CORRECTION: This story has been updated to correct Cy Vance’s comments to NBC.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump again refuses to concede 2020 election while taking questions from New Hampshire GOP primary voters | CNN Politics

    Trump again refuses to concede 2020 election while taking questions from New Hampshire GOP primary voters | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump, the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination in 2024, once again refused to concede that he lost the 2020 election and repeated false claims about it being stolen at a CNN town hall in New Hampshire on Wednesday.

    Taking questions from GOP primary voters at the town hall moderated by “CNN This Morning” anchor Kaitlan Collins, Trump remained defiant about the 2020 election as well as the myriad investigations into him – making clear that he’s sticking to the script he’s delivered over the past two years on conservative media.

    The town hall at Saint Anselm College – his first appearance on CNN since 2016 – came as unprecedented legal clouds hang over him as he seeks to become only the second commander in chief ever elected to two nonconsecutive terms. New Hampshire, home to the first-in-the-nation GOP primary, is also home to many swing voters and is a state he lost in both 2016 and 2020 after winning the primaries.

    The audience of Republicans and undeclared voters who plan to vote in the GOP primary cheered Trump throughout the evening, including when he attacked Tuesday’s jury verdict that found he sexually abused former magazine columnist E. Jean Carroll. Trump mocked Carroll on Wednesday while downplaying the significance of the $5 million the jury awarded her for battery and defamation.

    The former president said he would pardon “a large portion” of the rioters at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, and even pulled out a printout of his own tweets from that day in an attempt to deflect blame as Collins pressed him on why he waited three hours before telling the rioters to leave the Capitol.

    “I am inclined to pardon many of them,” Trump said Wednesday night.

    When Collins pressed Trump on the Manhattan federal jury finding Trump sexually abused Carroll in a luxury department store dressing room in 1996, Trump suggested it was helping his poll numbers.

    When asked if the jury’s decision would deter women from voting for him, the former president said, “No, I don’t think so.”

    Trump insulted Carroll, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and even Collins when she pressed him on a question about why he hadn’t returned classified documents he kept at Mar-a-Lago.

    “It’s very simple – you’re a nasty person, I’ll tell you,” Trump said on stage.

    Trump also took questions from New Hampshire voters on the economy and policy issues, such as abortion. The former president, who solidified the conservative majority on the Supreme Court that struck down Roe v. Wade, repeatedly declined to say whether he would sign a federal abortion ban if he won a second term.

    Trump suggested Republicans should refuse to raise the debt limit if the White House does not agree to spending cuts.

    “I say to the Republicans out there – congressmen, senators – if they don’t give you massive cuts, you’re going to have to do a default, and I don’t believe they’re going to do a default because I think the Democrats will absolutely cave, will absolutely cave because you don’t want to have that happen, but it’s better than what we’re doing right now because we’re spending money like drunken sailors,” Trump said.

    When Collins asked him to clarify whether the US should default if the White House doesn’t agree to cuts, Trump said, “We might as well do it now than do it later.”

    Trump pleaded not guilty last month to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. Trump also faces potential legal peril in both Washington, DC – where a special counsel is leading a pair of investigations – and in Georgia, where the Fulton County district attorney plans to announce charges this summer from the investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election in the Peach State.

    Still, the twice-impeached former president has repeatedly said that any charges will not stop him from running for president, dismissing all of the investigations as politically motivated witch hunts. That’s a view many GOP voters share, according to recent surveys. Nearly 70% of Republican primary voters in a recent NBC News poll said investigations into the former president “are politically motivated” and that “no other candidate is like him, we must support him.”

    Trump was pressed on the investigation into his handling of classified documents and why he didn’t return all of the documents in his possession after receiving a subpoena. He responded by pointing out the classified documents found at the homes of others – including President Joe Biden and former Vice President Mike Pence. But they both returned the documents once they discovered they had them in their possession.

    The FBI obtained a search warrant and retrieved more than 100 classified documents from Trump’s Florida resort in August 2022, which came after he had received a subpoena to return documents in June 2022 and after his attorney had asserted that all classified material in his possession had been returned.

    Asked during the town hall whether he showed the classified documents to anyone at Mar-a-Lago, Trump said, “Not really.”

    The former president would not say whether he wants Russia or Ukraine to win the war during Wednesday’s town hall, instead saying that he wants the war to end.

    “I don’t think in terms of winning and losing. I think in terms of getting it settled so we stop killing all these people,” he said.

    When asked again whether or not the former president wants Ukraine to win, Trump did not answer directly, but instead claimed that he would be able to end the war in 24 hours.

    “Russians and Ukrainians, I want them to stop dying,” Trump said. “And I’ll have that done in 24 hours.”

    Trump said he thinks that “(Russian President Vladimir) Putin made a mistake” by invading Ukraine, but he stopped short of saying that Putin is a war criminal.

    That’s something that “should be discussed later,” Trump said.

    “If you say he’s a war criminal, it’s going to be a lot tougher to make a deal to make this thing stopped,” he said.

    While a handful of rivals have entered the Republican presidential primary – and Trump’s biggest potential rival, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, has not yet officially launched a bid – Trump has maintained a healthy lead in early GOP primary polling. In a Washington Post/ABC News poll released Sunday, 43% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents named Trump unprompted when asked who they would like to see the party nominate in 2024, compared with 20% naming DeSantis, and 2% or less naming any other candidate.

    Trump’s participation in the town hall was indicative of a broader campaign strategy to try to expand his appeal beyond conservative media viewers, CNN’s Kristen Holmes reported earlier Wednesday. He’s surrounded himself with a more organized team and has been making smaller retail politics stops while scaling back larger rallies – signs of a more traditional campaign than his 2016 and 2020 operations. He lost that 2020 race by about 7 million votes, although he continues to falsely claim it was stolen from him – claims he stuck to on Wednesday night.

    There have been warning signs for the GOP that the obsession with the 2020 election isn’t palatable beyond the base. Many of Trump’s handpicked candidates who embraced his election lies in swing states lost in last year’s midterm elections. And his advisers acknowledge he still has work to do to engage with Republican voters outside of his loyal base of supporters, multiple sources told CNN.

    But that didn’t mean Trump was ready to acknowledge the reality that he lost the 2020 election. And if he becomes the GOP nominee in 2024, Trump said Wednesday he would not commit to accepting the results regardless of the outcome, saying that he would do so if he believes “it’s an honest election.”

    “If I think it’s an honest election, I would be honored to,” he said.

    This story has been updated with additional details from the town hall.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What to know about the Trump indictment on the eve of his court appearance | CNN Politics

    What to know about the Trump indictment on the eve of his court appearance | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Donald Trump, the first former president in history to face criminal charges, is heading to New York Monday for an expected arraignment on Tuesday after being indicted last week by a Manhattan grand jury.

    The expected voluntary surrender of a former president and 2024 White House candidate will be a unique affair in more ways than one – both for the Manhattan district attorney’s office and the New York courthouse where he’ll be arraigned and for a nation watching to see how it’ll shake up the GOP presidential primary.

    The former president has remained “surprisingly calm,” spending the weekend in Florida playing golf and mulling how to use it to boost his campaign, CNN reported Sunday night, after an indictment that caught him and his advisers “off guard.”

    Trump faces more than 30 counts related to business fraud, CNN has reported, but the indictment remains under seal.

    The Manhattan district attorney’s office has been investigating Trump in connection with his alleged role in a hush money payment scheme and cover-up involving adult film star Stormy Daniels that dates to the 2016 presidential election. Trump and his allies have already attacked Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg – and an advertised Tuesday night speech back at Mar-a-Lago will likely given Trump more opportunity to claim he’s being political persecuted.

    Here is what we know about the expected arraignment.

    Trump left Florida shortly after noon ET on Monday, and is scheduled to land at New York’s LaGuardia airport around 3 p.m. ET, according to a source familiar with his plans. The former president will stay at Trump Tower Monday night and is expected to depart New York immediately after Tuesday’s arraignment to head back to Florida, the source said.

    But even before Trump’s appearance, his presence will be felt in the Manhattan courthouse Tuesday, as all trials and most other court activity is being halted before he is slated to arrive.

    The Secret Service, the New York Police Department and the court officers are coordinating security for Trump’s expected appearance. The Secret Service is scheduled to accompany Trump in the early afternoon to the district attorney’s office, which is in the same building as the courthouse.

    Trump will be booked by the investigators, which includes taking his fingerprints. Ordinarily, a mug shot would be taken. But sources familiar with the preparations were uncertain as to whether there would be a mugshot – because Trump’s appearance is widely known and authorities were concerned about the improper leaking of the photo, which would be a violation of state law.

    Typically, after defendants are arrested, they are booked and held in cells near the courtroom before they are arraigned. But that won’t happen with Trump. Once the former president is finished being processed, he’ll be taken through a back set of hallways and elevators to the floor where the courtroom is located. He’ll then come out to a public hallway to walk into the courtroom.

    Trump is not expected to be handcuffed, as he will be surrounded by armed federal agents for his protection.

    “Obviously, this is different. This has never happened before. I have never had Secret Service involved in an arraignment before at 100 Centre Street,” Trump lawyer Joe Tacopina said on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday. “All the Tuesday stuff is still very much up in the air, other than the fact that we will very loudly and proudly say not guilty.”

    By the afternoon, Trump is expected to be brought to the courtroom, where the indictment will be unsealed and he will formally face the charges. After he is arraigned, Trump will almost certainly be released on his own recognizance. It is possible, though perhaps unlikely, that conditions could be set on his travel.

    Ordinarily, a defendant who is released would walk out the front doors, but Secret Service will want to limit the time and space where Trump is in public. So instead, once the court hearing is over, Trump is expected to walk again through the public hallway and into the back corridors to the district attorney’s office, back to where his motorcade will be waiting.

    Then he’ll head to the airport so he can get back to Mar-a-Lago, where he’s scheduled an event that evening to speak publicly.

    Several media outlets, including CNN, have asked a New York judge to unseal the indictment and for permission to broadcast Trump’s expected appearance in the courtroom on Tuesday.

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

    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.”

    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.

    Judge Juan Merchan is no stranger to Trump’s orbit.

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

    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.

    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 that he will likely 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.

    Tacopina told CNN’s Dana Bash Sunday that the former president will plead not guilty. His team “will look at every potential issue that we will be able to challenge, and we will challenge,” Tacopina said.

    The Trump team’s court strategy could center around challenging the case because it may rely on business record entries that prosecutors tie to hush money payments to Daniels seven years ago, beyond the statute of limitations for a criminal case. Tacopina suggested in TV interviews Sunday the statute of limitations may have passed, and said the Trump businesses didn’t make false entries.

    Trump’s legal team isn’t currently considering asking to move the case to a different New York City borough, Tacopina said. “There’s been no discussion of that whatsoever,” he told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos in another interview Sunday. “It’s way too premature to start worrying about venue changes until we really see the indictment and grapple with the legal issues.”

    Trump’s political advisers over the weekend were actively discussing how to best campaign off the indictment they have portrayed as a political hoax and witch hunt, according to sources close to Trump.

    His team has spent the last several days presenting the former president with polls showing him with a growing lead over Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, currently considered Trump’s biggest 2024 rival, in a head-to-head match up. And his team says it has raised more than $5 million dollars since he was indicted Thursday.

    Despite the initial shock of the indictment, Trump has remained surprisingly calm and focused in the days ahead of his court appearance, CNN’s Kristen Holmes reported.

    The former president has seemingly saved his rage for his social media site, escalating his attacks on Bragg and leveling threats.

    Many of Trump’s allies, critics and likely opponents in the 2024 Republican presidential primary race have similarly attacked Bragg before and after the indictment.

    But former Republican Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, who announced his presidential campaign on Sunday, doubled down on his call for Trump to drop out of the race now that he is facing criminal charges.

    “The office is more important than any individual person. So for the sake of the office of the presidency, I do think that’s too much of a sideshow and distraction,” Hutchinson said in an interview on ABC News. “He needs to be able to concentrate on his due process.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump is losing his capacity to control his fate with legal threats swirling | CNN Politics

    Trump is losing his capacity to control his fate with legal threats swirling | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    An ex-president who’s always on the attack will no longer be the sole orchestrator of his fate.

    When Donald Trump officially becomes a criminal defendant on Tuesday, he’ll be subject to a legal system he can’t control.

    Trump has long conjured political storms, alternative realities, legal imbroglios and media spectacles to blur the truth or discredit institutions that have constrained his rule-busting behavior. He’ll lose that ability when he steps before the court at his arraignment in a case related to a hush money payment to an adult film actress.

    Trump posts video from his motorcade while en route to New York for his arraignment

    And there are increasing signs that this new reality – which will come with hefty financial commitments in legal fees and locks on Trump’s calendar – could be multiplied at a time when he’s already facing the intense demands of another White House bid.

    That’s because the ex-president – the first to face criminal charges – also appears to face serious problems in a potentially more perilous case involving his alleged mishandling of secret documents being investigated by special counsel Jack Smith. Charges look like an increasing possibility as the Justice Department secures evidence about Trump’s handling of classified documents after leaving the White House.

    Smith’s prosecutors have secured daily notes, texts, emails and photographs and are focused on cataloguing how Trump handled classified records around Mar-a-Lago and those who may have witnessed the former president with them, CNN’s Katelyn Polantz and Evan Perez reported Monday. The new details coincide with signs the Justice Department is taking steps consistent with the end of an investigation.

    Trump’s former lawyer, Ty Cobb, told CNN’s Erin Burnett that the developments represent a serious turn in the case for the ex-president. “We’ve known the investigatory steps were under way, we just haven’t known alleged results until today,” Cobb said. “I think these are highly consequential.”

    The documents case may not be the end of it. Smith is also investigating Trump’s conduct in the run-up to the US Capitol insurrection. Then there’s also a possible prosecution in Georgia led by a district attorney probing the ex-president’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election result in the swing state.

    Trump denies any wrongdoing in all of these investigations. He has described his behavior in Georgia as “perfect.” And he has lambasted the sealed indictment in New York, where he faces more than 30 counts related to business fraud, as an example of politicized justice.

    But at a grave moment for the country, given that an ex-president and current presidential candidate is about to appear in court, there’s also growing sense of inexorably building pressure on Trump that will compromise his capacity to evade accountability.

    Trump made a big show on Monday of his return to New York ahead of his arraignment. The snaking motorcade of black Secret Service SUVs to and from his private Boeing 757 in its sparkling new livery carried overtones of a presidential movement in a power play meant to send a message of strength.

    Dean Trump split vpx

    Watergate whistleblower says this Trump move would be a ‘terrible idea’

    Trump is itching to speak publicly. After court Tuesday, he will return to his Mar-a-Lago resort and reclaim the media spotlight with a primetime speech he will likely use to proclaim his innocence, attack the New York case as political persecution and try to distract from the fact he will be a criminal defendant.

    Multiple people familiar with Trump’s thinking tell CNN’s Kaitlan Collins and Kristen Holmes, however, that he has weighed speaking even earlier, in Manhattan, even as advisers caution the former president that any unplanned remarks put him at high risk of hurting his case. His speech Tuesday night is expected to have legal eyes on it before he delivers it.

    But despite his bravura and talk by pundits that he will alchemize his legal problems into political gold, Monday was a dark day for Trump. He was returning to his old stomping ground in Manhattan under duress, to turn himself in on Tuesday over the first-ever criminal charges ever laid against an ex-president. Trump has long been a force of nature who rebels against constraints and has always been impossible for his staff to control. But now he will be subject to the dictates of a judge and the rules and conventions of the legal system, which will be far harder for him to disrupt and divert than the institutions of political accountability he has subverted.

    At times, he may be compelled to appear in court. The grueling pre-trial process, with its numerous legal argument deadlines and heaps of evidence the defense must sift through, will impose severe demands on a legal team that has often struggled to act coherently. Ahead of his appearance Tuesday, for instance, Trump made a late shuffle of his legal team, bringing in another attorney, Todd Blanche, to serve as his lead counsel – a move some saw as sidelining another attorney, Joe Tacopina. The ex-president’s camp pushed back on this interpretation, however.

    Trump legal team drama magic wall vpx

    ‘You can’t make this up’: The dramatic history within Trump’s legal team

    One criminal prosecution is onerous enough. Trump hasn’t been charged in any of the other cases, but a multi-front defense in multiple cases would represent an extraordinary storm. And it would further disrupt the ex-president’s capacity to dictate his political schedule and control his destiny. When he was under scrutiny in the Russia investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller, or during his two impeachments, Trump exploited his huge popularity with Republican voters to discredit accusations against him. He pressured most GOP senators, who knew they would pay with their careers if they voted to convict him in an impeachment trial.

    While public opinion will be critical in shaping the political impact of the New York case, the prosecution itself will be insulated. Acting New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan, who will preside over Trump’s arraignment, is immune to his political pressure. In fact, Trump’s attacks on prosecutors or the judge could backfire in a legal arena. And even a former president can’t disregard the choreography of a court case and rules of criminal procedure.

    The situation is somewhat similar to the 2020 election, when the will of voters prevailed because Trump’s attempts to have votes thrown out and results changed foundered in multiple courts because of the fact-based standards of evidence and the law.

    Trump’s lawyers attempted to wrest some control of the court proceedings on Monday, arguing against a request by news organizations, including CNN, to allow television cameras into Tuesday’s arraignment. The media outlets argued that the case was of such public interest that it should be broadcast. But Trump’s lawyers told the judge that “it will create a circus-like atmosphere at the arraignment, raise unique security concerns, and is inconsistent with President Trump’s presumption of innocence.”

    In a late-night ruling, Merchan turned down the request for broadcast cameras. Five still photographers will be allowed to take pictures of Trump and the courtroom before the hearing begins, however.

    But the irony of the ex-president complaining about being the subject of a media circus was rich indeed. Without his salesman’s talent for whipping up media circuses, he’d have never have been president. Trump built his “The Art of the Deal” mythology in New York by constantly providing fodder for the city’s ravenous tabloids with his famed celebrity feuds, colorful personal life and business hits and failures. His entire 2016 campaign and his single-term presidency were pageants of outrage, scandal and lawlessness stoked by his often unchained Twitter posts.

    If anyone knows how to thrive in a media circus, it is Trump. The difference, perhaps, in this case is that he fears being part of a media circus that he can no longer control.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • E. Jean Carroll asks judge to amend lawsuit to seek further damages for what Trump said at CNN town hall | CNN Politics

    E. Jean Carroll asks judge to amend lawsuit to seek further damages for what Trump said at CNN town hall | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    E. Jean Carroll has asked a judge to amend her initial defamation case against former President Donald Trump to seek additional punitive damages after he repeated his statements at a CNN town hall.

    The request was made in a letter to the judge seeking clarity on the initial lawsuit following a civil jury verdict earlier this month finding Trump sexually abused Carroll and awarding her $5 million.

    Carroll’s attorneys said Trump’s defamatory statements repeated during the town hall earlier this month go directly to the issue of punitive damages, which are intended to punish the person found liable.

    Carroll’s initial lawsuit was held up on appeal and relates to statements Trump made in 2019 while he was president. The trial involved a statement Trump made in 2022.

    An appeals court sent the initial lawsuit back to the lower court judge just before the trial. It is up to the judge to determine whether it moves forward.

    Carroll has alleged that the former president 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 denied all claims brought against him by Carroll and appealed the jury’s judgment.

    While the jury found that Trump sexually abused Carroll, sufficient to hold him liable for battery, the jury did not find that she proved he raped her.

    Trump was quick to jump on this aspect of the jury’s verdict at a CNN town hall hosted in New Hampshire the day after the jury came to its decision, saying “They said, ‘He didn’t rape her.’ And I didn’t do anything else either.”

    “I have no idea who this woman – this is a fake story, made up story,” Trump said, calling Carroll a “whack job” and going on a tangent about her ex-husband and pet cat.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link