ReportWire

Tag: force

  • Trump: US land action against alleged drug-trafficking networks in Venezuela will start ‘very soon’

    President Donald Trump suggested Thursday that the United States is preparing to take new action against alleged drug trafficking networks in Venezuela, telling service members during a Thanksgiving call that efforts for strikes in land will be starting “very soon.””In recent weeks, you’ve been working to deter Venezuelan drug traffickers, of which there are many. Of course, there aren’t too many coming in by sea anymore,” Trump told service members in the call.Video above: Foreign Terrorist Org: How a new designation could escalate U.S. military action in Venezuela”You probably noticed that people aren’t wanting to be delivering by sea, and we’ll be starting to stop them by land also,” the president continued. “The land is easier, but that’s going to start very soon.”We warn them: Stop sending poison to our country,” Trump added.Trump comments suggest he has made up his mind on a course of action in Venezuela following multiple high-level briefings and a mounting US show of force in the region earlier this month.Trump designated Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his government allies as members of a foreign terrorist organization earlier this week.The designation of “Cartel de los Soles,” a phrase that experts say is more a description of allegedly corrupt government officials than an organized crime group, as a foreign terrorist organization will authorize Trump to impose fresh sanctions targeting Maduro’s assets and infrastructure. It doesn’t, however, explicitly authorize the use of lethal force, according to legal experts.The US military has amassed more than a dozen warships and 15,000 troops in the region as part of what the Pentagon has branded “Operation Southern Spear.” The U.S. military has killed more than 80 people in boat strikes as part of the anti-drug-trafficking campaign.CNN reported earlier this month that Trump administration officials told lawmakers in a classified session the US was not planning to launch strikes inside Venezuela and doesn’t have a legal justification that would support attacks against any land targets right now.Lawmakers were told during the session that an opinion produced by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel to justify strikes against suspected drug boats does not permit strikes inside Venezuela itself or any other territories, four sources said.The officials did not rule out any potential future actions, one of the sources said.The administration has largely tried to avoid involving Congress in its military campaign around Latin America. A senior Justice Department official told Congress in November that the U.S. military could continue its lethal strikes on alleged drug traffickers without congressional approval and that the administration is not bound by a decades-old war powers law that would mandate working with lawmakers, CNN has reported.

    President Donald Trump suggested Thursday that the United States is preparing to take new action against alleged drug trafficking networks in Venezuela, telling service members during a Thanksgiving call that efforts for strikes in land will be starting “very soon.”

    “In recent weeks, you’ve been working to deter Venezuelan drug traffickers, of which there are many. Of course, there aren’t too many coming in by sea anymore,” Trump told service members in the call.

    Video above: Foreign Terrorist Org: How a new designation could escalate U.S. military action in Venezuela

    “You probably noticed that people aren’t wanting to be delivering by sea, and we’ll be starting to stop them by land also,” the president continued. “The land is easier, but that’s going to start very soon.

    “We warn them: Stop sending poison to our country,” Trump added.

    Trump comments suggest he has made up his mind on a course of action in Venezuela following multiple high-level briefings and a mounting US show of force in the region earlier this month.

    Trump designated Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his government allies as members of a foreign terrorist organization earlier this week.

    The designation of “Cartel de los Soles,” a phrase that experts say is more a description of allegedly corrupt government officials than an organized crime group, as a foreign terrorist organization will authorize Trump to impose fresh sanctions targeting Maduro’s assets and infrastructure. It doesn’t, however, explicitly authorize the use of lethal force, according to legal experts.

    The US military has amassed more than a dozen warships and 15,000 troops in the region as part of what the Pentagon has branded “Operation Southern Spear.” The U.S. military has killed more than 80 people in boat strikes as part of the anti-drug-trafficking campaign.

    CNN reported earlier this month that Trump administration officials told lawmakers in a classified session the US was not planning to launch strikes inside Venezuela and doesn’t have a legal justification that would support attacks against any land targets right now.

    Lawmakers were told during the session that an opinion produced by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel to justify strikes against suspected drug boats does not permit strikes inside Venezuela itself or any other territories, four sources said.

    The officials did not rule out any potential future actions, one of the sources said.

    The administration has largely tried to avoid involving Congress in its military campaign around Latin America. A senior Justice Department official told Congress in November that the U.S. military could continue its lethal strikes on alleged drug traffickers without congressional approval and that the administration is not bound by a decades-old war powers law that would mandate working with lawmakers, CNN has reported.

    Source link

  • Trump calls Democrats ‘traitors’ for urging military to ‘refuse illegal orders’

    President Trump on Thursday said he believed Democratic lawmakers who publicly urged active service members to “refuse illegal orders” amounted to seditious behavior, which he said should be punishable by death.

    “It’s called SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL. Each one of these traitors to our Country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL. Their words cannot be allowed to stand — We won’t have a Country anymore!!! An example MUST BE SET,” Trump said in a social media post.

    Trump went on to amplify more than a dozen social media posts from other people, who in reaction to Trump’s post called for the Democrats to be arrested, charged and in one instance hanged. Trump then continued: “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

    The president’s remarks were in reaction to a joint video released by six Democrat lawmakers in which they urged military and intelligence personnel to “refuse illegal orders.”

    The Democratic lawmakers who released the video — Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, Michigan Sen. Alyssa Slotkin, Pennsylvania Rep. Chris Deluzio, New Hampshire Rep. Maggie Goodlander, Pennsylvania Rep. Chrissy Houlahan and Colorado Rep. Jason Crow — served in the military or as intelligence officers.

    They did not specify which orders they were referring to. But they said the Trump administration was “pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professional against American citizens” and that threats to the Constitution were coming “from right here at home.”

    The video, which was posted on Tuesday, quickly drew criticism from Republicans, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth who characterized it as “Stage 4 [Trump Derangement Syndrome].” But Trump, who first reacted to the video on Thursday, saw the video as more than partisan speech.

    “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS!!! LOCK THEM UP???” Trump said in another post.

    When asked Thursday if the president wanted to execute members of Congress, as suggested in one of his social media posts, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said “no.”

    But, Leavitt said, the president does want to see them be “held accountable.”

    “That is a very, very dangerous message and it is perhaps punishable by law,” Leavitt said. “I’ll leave that to the Department of justice and the Department of War to decide.”

    What the law says

    Under a federal law known as “seditious conspiracy,” it is a crime for two or more individuals to “conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States” or to “prevent, hinder or delay the execution of any law of the United States” by force.

    A seditious conspiracy charge is punishable by up to 20 years in prison.

    Federal courts and legal scholars have long emphasized that seditious conspiracy charges apply only to coordinated efforts to use force against the government, rather than political dissent.

    The last time federal prosecutors pursued seditious conspiracy charges was in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. Members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers were convicted of seditious conspiracy and other charges for plotting to prevent by force the transfer of presidential power to Joe Biden.

    Among the convicted individuals was former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio, whose 22-year sentence was the stiffest of any of the Jan. 6 rioters. Trump pardoned him earlier this year.

    Hours after the president’s posts, the six Democratic lawmakers issued a joint statement, calling on Americans to “unite and condemn the President’s calls for our murder and political violence.”

    “What’s most telling is that the President considers it punishable by death for us to restate the law,” the lawmakers said in a statement posted to X. “Our service members should know that we have their backs as they fulfill their oath to the Constitution and obligation to follow only lawful orders.”

    Democratic leaders in Washington and across the country denounced Trump’s post.

    House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said in a statement with other Democratic leaders that Trump’s comments were “disgusting and dangerous death threats against members of Congress.” They added that they had been in contact with U.S. Capitol Police to ensure the safety of the Democrat lawmakers and their families.

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom reacted to the posts by saying Trump “is sick in the head” for calling for the death of Democratic lawmakers.

    Ana Ceballos

    Source link

  • Dick Cheney dies; vice president unapologetically supported wars in Iraq, Afghanistan

    Richard B. Cheney, the former vice president of the United States who was the architect of the nation’s longest war as he plotted President George W. Bush’s thunderous global response to the 9/11 terror attacks, has died.

    Vexed by heart trouble for much of his adult life, Cheney died Monday night due to complications of pneumonia and cardiac and vascular disease, according to a statement from his family. He was 84.

    “For decades, Dick Cheney served our nation, including as White House Chief of Staff, Wyoming’s Congressman, Secretary of Defense, and Vice President of the United States,” the statement said. “Dick Cheney was a great and good man who taught his children and grandchildren to love our country, and to live lives of courage, honor, love, kindness, and fly fishing. We are grateful beyond measure for all Dick Cheney did for our country. And we are blessed beyond measure to have loved and been loved by this noble giant of a man.”

    To supporters and detractors alike, Cheney was widely viewed as the engine that drove the Bush White House. His two-term tenure capped a lifetime of public service, both in Congress and on behalf of four Republican presidents.

    It often fell to Cheney, not President Bush, to make an assertive, unapologetic case for the American-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and for the controversial antiterrorism measures such as the Guantánamo Bay prison. And after the election of President Obama, it was once again Cheney, not Bush, who stood among the new president’s fiercest critics on national security.

    In an October 2009 speech — one emblematic of the role he embraced after leaving the White House — Cheney blasted the Obama administration for opening a probe of “enhanced” interrogations of suspected terrorists conducted during the Bush years.

    “We cannot protect this country by putting politics over security, and turning the guns on our own guys,” he said. The rhetoric was textbook Cheney: blunt, unvarnished, delivered with authority.

    While Cheney at the time was attempting to occupy the leadership vacuum in the GOP in the age of Obama, there was little doubt that he also was motivated to preserve a legacy that appears to be as much his as former President Bush‘s. For eight years, Cheney redrew the lines that defined the vice presidency in a way no predecessor had. His office enjoyed greater autonomy than others before it, while working to keep much of his influence from plain sight. That way of operating led to a challenge before the Supreme Court as well as a criminal investigation over a leak of classified information.

    Moreover, the image of a powerful backroom operator managing the Bush administration’s “war on terror,” combined with his service as Defense secretary during the Persian Gulf War and his stint as a chairman of defense contracting giant Halliburton, made Cheney a towering bête noire to liberals worldwide. To them, he embodied a dangerous fusion of politics and the military-industrial complex — and they viewed his every move with deep suspicion.

    To his champions, however, he was the firm-jawed, hulking, resolute defender of American interests.

    Standing with the administration was more than a duty to Cheney; it was an article of faith. The invasion of Iraq “was the right thing to do, and if we had to do it over again, we’d do exactly the same thing,” Cheney said in a 2006 interview, even as the nation slowly learned that U.S. intelligence suggesting Saddam Hussein’s regime possessed weapons of mass destruction was simply not true.

    Three years earlier, Cheney had pledged that the U.S. would be greeted in Iraq as “liberators” — a comment that haunted him as insurgents in the country gained strength, killed thousands of allied troops and extended the conflict for years. The war in Afghanistan would drag on for 20 years, ending in 2021 as it had begun, with the Taliban back in control.

    While Cheney will largely be remembered for his leading role in the response to the 9/11 terror attacks, he had long worked the corridors of power in Washington. He was a White House aide to President Nixon and later chief of staff to President Ford. As a member of the House from Wyoming, he rose quickly to become part of the Republican leadership during the 1980s. In the early ’90s, he ran the Pentagon during the Gulf War.

    Richard Bruce “Dick” Cheney was born in Lincoln, Neb., on Jan. 30, 1941, and spent much of his teenage years in Casper, Wyo. His father worked for the U.S. Soil Conservation Service.

    As a young man, he was more interested in hunting, fishing and sports than in academics, and a stint at Yale University was short-lived. He eventually obtained bachelor’s and master’s degrees from the University of Wyoming and studied toward a doctorate at the University of Wisconsin.

    In 1964, he married Lynne Ann Vincent, who became a lifelong political partner while strongly influencing Cheney’s conservatism. Daughter Elizabeth, who was elected to Congress in 2017, was born in 1966 and her sister, Mary, arrived three years later. The sisters became embittered years later when Elizabeth — who preferred Liz — took a stance opposing same-sex marriage, which seemed a slap to Mary and her wife. Cheney, however, offered his support for such unions, an early GOP voice for same-sex marriage. Years later, he came to Liz’s defense when she broke with fellow Republicans and voted to impeach President Trump following the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol. In addition to his wife and daughters, Cheney is survived by seven grandchildren.

    A fellowship sent Cheney to Washington, where he soon began working for a politically shrewd House member who also was a lifetime influence, Donald H. Rumsfeld. When Rumsfeld joined the Nixon administration, Cheney followed.

    After Ford succeeded Nixon in the wake of Watergate, Rumsfeld served as chief of staff, with Cheney at his side. Ford eventually appointed Rumsfeld secretary of Defense, and Cheney, at 34, ran the White House. Even then, his calm reserve was a hallmark.

    Although nearly everyone working for him was older, “He was very self-assured,” James Cannon, a member of Ford’s White House team, said years later. “It didn’t faze him a bit to be chief of staff.”

    Ford lost a narrow election to Jimmy Carter in 1976, but Cheney’s Washington career was just getting underway. He headed back to Casper and in little more than a year was running for Congress.

    His health, though, already was a factor. In 1978, at age 37 and in the midst of a primary election campaign, he had a heart attack, the first of several. He would undergo multiple surgeries, including a quadruple bypass, two angioplasties, installation of a heart pump and — in 2012 — a transplant. His frequent trips to the hospital and seeming indestructibility provided fodder for late-night talk show hosts during Cheney’s vice presidency.

    With the help of television ads reminding voters that Dwight D. Eisenhower and Lyndon B. Johnson had served full White House terms despite having had heart attacks, he narrowly won the Republican nomination and, in November 1978, secured election to the House of Representatives from Wyoming’s single district.

    In Congress, he was known as a listener more interested in problem-solving than conservative demagoguery, even as he quietly built a voting record that left no doubt about where he stood on the political spectrum. He quickly moved into the ranks of GOP leadership.

    Cheney stepped into the public spotlight after he was named Defense secretary by President George H.W. Bush in 1989. As the Berlin Wall fell and the Cold War cooled, Cheney was charged with overseeing a Pentagon that was more fractious than usual. In a test of political and managerial will, he oversaw major reductions in the Defense budget, a profound downsizing of forces and the closing of obsolete military bases. He helped implement the U.S. invasion of Panama in 1989 to oust the country’s leader, Manuel Noriega, for drug trafficking and racketeering.

    But Cheney — along with his hand-picked chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Colin Powell — made his mark in the American response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990. Cheney played a key role in persuading the Saudi royal family to allow American troops to be stationed in Saudi Arabia to defend against a looming attack from Hussein’s forces.

    The Cheney-led Pentagon then shifted to offense in 1991, amassing an enormous American force that totaled more than 500,000 soldiers, nearly twice the number employed in the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. The U.S. military, with help from allied countries, overwhelmed the Iraqi forces in Kuwait in only 43 days and easily entered Iraq.

    Characteristically, Cheney would defend the then-controversial decision to halt the U.S. advance toward Baghdad, which left Hussein in power. “I would guess if we had gone in there, we would still have forces in Baghdad today. We’d be running the country,” he said in a 1992 speech. “We would not have been able to get everybody out and bring everybody home.”

    Cheney’s efforts to station U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, considered critical to the push to repel Iraq, would have unforeseen ramifications. The military presence there helped radicalize young Islamic militants such as Osama bin Laden.

    After President Clinton’s victory in 1992, Cheney left government service. Three years later, he assumed the helm of Halliburton, one of the world’s leading oil field companies and a prominent military contractor. The company thrived under Cheney’s leadership: Its relationship with the Pentagon flourished, its international operations expanded and Cheney grew wealthy.

    In 2000, then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush, the Republican nominee for president, asked Cheney to head up the search for his running mate, then ultimately chose Cheney for the job instead. He brought to the ticket an element of maturity and Washington gravitas that the inexperienced Bush did not possess.

    Cheney’s lack of design on the presidency, and his willingness to return to government 10 days shy of his 60th birthday, seemingly gave Bush the benefit of his experience and earned Cheney a measure of trust — and thus authority — commanded by few presidential advisors.

    Once in office, Cheney, mindful of lessons learned in the Ford White House, sought to revitalize an executive office he believed had become too hemmed in by Congress and the courts. He termed it a “restoration.”

    “After Watergate, President Ford said there was an imperiled president, not an imperial presidency,” said presidential historian Robert Dallek. Cheney, he said, felt “he badly needed to expand the powers of the presidency to assure the national security.”

    In office barely a week, Cheney created a national energy policy task force in response to rising gasoline prices. A series of meetings with top officials from the oil, natural gas, electricity and nuclear industries were closed to the public, and Cheney refused to reveal the names of the participants. Cheney would exert similar influence over environmental policy and, with an office on Capitol Hill, forcefully advance the president’s legislative agenda.

    A lawsuit seeking information about the task force made its way to the Supreme Court, which ruled in the vice president’s favor in 2004. One of the justices in the majority was Antonin Scalia, who was a friend and, it was later revealed, had recently gone duck hunting with the vice president.

    Another hunting trip gone awry earned Cheney embarrassing headlines in 2006 when he accidentally shot and wounded a member of the party with a round of birdshot while quail hunting on a Texas ranch.

    More troubling to Cheney was a federal criminal probe in connection with the 2003 leak of the identity of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson. The investigation resulted in the conviction four years later of Cheney aide I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby for perjury and obstruction of justice. Libby was later pardoned by President Trump.

    Cheney, however, will be largely remembered for his unwavering belief that the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq — especially the latter — were essential, a stance he maintained even as the missions in both theaters evolved from rooting out suspected terrorists to nation-building, and even as the casualties skyrocketed and it became clear the 20-year mission was doomed.

    When U.S. troops and civilians were pulled out of Afghanistan in a fraught and fatal departure in 2021, it was Cheney’s daughter who spoke up.

    “We’ve now created a situation where as we get to the 20th anniversary of 9/11, we are surrendering Afghanistan to the very terrorist organization that housed al Qaeda when they plotted and planned the attacks against us,” Rep. Liz Cheney (R.-Wyo.) said.

    The former vice president’s steely resolve was captured years later in “Vice,” a 2018 biographical drama in which Christian Bale portrayed Cheney as a brainy yet uncompromisingly uncharismatic leader.

    It was Cheney who insisted early on that Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. “There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us,” Cheney said in August 2002. The U.S. eventually determined that Iraq had no such weapons.

    He argued forcefully that Hussein was linked to the 2001 terror attacks. When other administration officials fell silent, Cheney continued to make the connections even though no shred of proof was ever found. In a 2005 speech, he called the Democrats who accused the administration of manipulating intelligence to justify the war “opportunists” who peddled “cynical and pernicious falsehoods” to gain political advantage.

    Cheney also frequently defended the use of so-called extreme interrogation methods, such as waterboarding, on al Qaeda operatives. He did so in the final months of the Bush administration, as both the president’s and Cheney’s public approval ratings plunged.

    “It’s a good thing we had them in custody and it’s a good thing we found out what they knew,” he said in a 2008 speech to a friendly crowd at the Conservative Political Action Conference.

    “I’ve been proud to stand by him, the decisions he made,” Cheney said of Bush. “And would I support those same decisions today? You’re damn right I would.”

    Oliphant and Gerstenzang are former Times staff writers.

    Staff writer Steve Marble contributed to this story.

    James Oliphant, James Gerstenzang

    Source link

  • LAPD captain claims city pushed misleading statement to justify police tactics at protest

    It was April 2021 and the LAPD was facing sharp criticism over its handling of mass protests against police brutality. The Black Lives Matter-Los Angeles complaint accused officers of firing less-lethal weapons at demonstrators who posed no threat, among other abuses.

    Smith said the assistant Los Angeles city attorney wanted his signature on a prewritten sworn declaration that described how LAPD officers had no choice but to use force against a volatile crowd hurling bottles and smoke bombs during a 2020 protest in Tujunga.

    He refused to put his name on it.

    Instead, eight months later, Smith filed his own lawsuit against the city, alleging he faced retaliation for trying to blow the whistle on a range of misconduct within the LAPD.

    Los Angeles Police Department Capt. Johnny Smith.

    (LAPD)

    Smith and his attorneys declined to be interviewed by The Times, but evidence in his lawsuit offers a revealing look at the behind-the-scenes coordination — and friction — between LAPD officials and the city attorney’s office in defense of police use of force at protests.

    Smith’s lawsuit says he felt pressured to give a misleading statement to cover up for reckless behavior by officers.

    The captain’s claim, filed December 2021 in Los Angeles Superior Court, has taken on new significance with the city facing fresh litigation over LAPD crowd control tactics during recent protests against the Trump administration.

    The 2020 protests led to a court order that limits how LAPD officers can use certain less-lethal weapons, including launchers that shoot hard-foam projectiles typically used to disable uncooperative suspects.

    The city is still fighting to have those restrictions lifted, along with others put in place as a result of a separate lawsuit filed in June by press rights organizations.

    Last month, City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto drew a rebuke from the City Council after she sought a temporary stay of the order issued by U.S. District Judge Hernán D. Vera.

    Feldstein Soto argued that the rules — which prohibit officers from targeting journalists and nonviolent protesters — are overly broad and impractical. Vera rejected Feldstein Soto’s request, but the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is taking up the matter, with a hearing tentatively set for mid-November.

    A counterprotestor is arrested after approaching Trump supporters holding a rally in Tujunga in 2020.

    A counterprotestor is arrested after approaching Trump supporters holding a rally in Tujunga in 2020.

    (Kyle Grillot / AFP / via Getty Images)

    Smith said in his lawsuit that he wouldn’t put his name on the Tujunga declaration because he had reviewed evidence that showed officers flouting LAPD rules on beanbag shotguns, as well as launchers that fire 37mm and 40mm projectiles — roughly the size of mini soda cans — at over 200 mph.

    Smith’s lawsuit said the launchers are intended to be “target specific,” or fired at individuals who pose a threat — not to disperse a crowd.

    Smith said he raised alarms for months after the Tujunga protest, which occurred amid outrage over the police killings nationwide of Black and Latino people at the end of President Trump’s first term.

    But it wasn’t until the city got sued, Smith’s complaint said, that incidents he flagged started to receive attention.

    The city has denied the allegations in Smith’s lawsuit, saying in court filings that each LAPD use of force case was thoroughly investigated.

    Smith’s lawsuit cites emails to senior LAPD officials that he says show efforts to sanitize the department’s handling of excessive force complaints from the protests.

    An internal task force deemed most of the citizen complaints “unfounded.” Yet nearly two dozen of those cases were later reopened after Smith and a small team of officers found that the department’s review missed a litany of policy violations, his lawsuit says.

    Smith also called out what he saw as “problematic bias” in the way what occurred at the Tujunga protest was reported up the chain of command.

    His complaint describes a presentation given to then-Chief Michel Moore that downplayed the severity of the damage caused by less-lethal projectiles. According to Smith, the report omitted photos of “extensive injuries” suffered by one woman, who said in a lawsuit that she had to undergo plastic surgery after getting shot in the chest at close range with a beanbag round.

    The LAPD stopped using bean-bag shotguns at protests after a state law banned the practice, but the department still allows officers to use the weapons in other situations, such as when subduing an uncooperative suspect.

    LAPD officers try to stop confrontation between Trump supporters and counterprotestors at pro-Trump rally in Tujunga in 2020

    Los Angeles police officers attempt to stop a confrontation between Trump supporters and counterprotestors during a pro-Trump rally in Tujunga in 2020.

    (Kyle Grillot / AFP / via Getty Images)

    Alan Skobin, a former police commissioner and a friend of Smith’s, told The Times he was in the room when Smith received a call in April 2021 from the city attorney’s office about the declaration he refused to sign.

    The exchange appeared to turn tense, Skobin recalled, as Smith repeated that details contained in the document were a “lie.”

    Skobin said he wondered whether the assistant city attorney went “back and examined the videotaped and all the other evidence.”

    “That’s what I would hope would happen,” Skobin said.

    A spokesperson for the Los Angeles city attorney, Karen Richardson, provided The Times with a California State Bar report that said there was insufficient evidence to discipline the lawyer involved; the case was closed in June 2024.

    Richardson declined further comment, citing Smith’s pending lawsuit.

    According to Smith, other high-ranking LAPD officials went along with the misleading story that the officers in Tujunga acted in response to being overwhelmed by a hostile crowd.

    Smith claims he faced retaliation for reporting a fellow captain who said police were justified in using force against a protester who held a placard turned sideways “so that the pole can be used as a weapon against officers.”

    Body camera footage showed a different version of events, Smith said, with officers launching an unjustified assault on the man and others around him.

    The colleague that Smith reported, German Hurtado, has since been promoted to deputy chief.

    The city has denied the allegations in court filings. When reached for comment on Friday, Hurtado said he was limited in what he could say because the litigation is ongoing.

    “From what I understand all that’s been investigated and it was unfounded,” he said, referencing Smith’s allegations.

    “The lawsuit, I don’t know where it’s and I don’t know anything about it. No one’s talked to me. No one’s deposed me.”

    Critics argue that the LAPD continues to violate rules that prohibit targeting journalists during demonstrations.

    After a peaceful daytime “No Kings Day” protest downtown Oct. 18, about 100 to 200 people lingered outside downtown’s Metropolitan Detention Center after nightfall. Police declared an unlawful assembly and officers began firing 40mm projectiles.

    Lexis-Olivier Ray, a reporter for the news site L.A. Taco who regularly covers demonstrations, was among those hit by the rounds.

    Hundreds participate in the No Kings Day protest

    Hundreds participate in the No Kings Day of Peaceful Action in downtown Los Angeles on Oct. 18.

    (Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

    In a video shared widely online, an LAPD officer can be heard justifying the incident by saying they were firing at “fake” journalists.

    An LAPD spokesperson said the incident with Ray is under internal investigation and could offer no further comment.

    Ray said it wasn’t the first time he’d been struck by less-lethal rounds at protests despite years of legislation and court orders.

    “It’s pretty discouraging that stuff like this keeps happening,” he said.

    Jim McDonnell speaks after being introduced by Mayor Karen Bass to serve as the new Chief LAPD

    Jim McDonnell was introduced by Mayor Karen Bass to serve as LAPD chief during a news conference at City Hall on Oct. 4, 2024.

    (Ringo Chiu / For The Times)

    LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell defended the department at the Police Commission’s weekly meeting Tuesday, saying the “No Kings” protesters who remained downtown after dark were shining lasers at officers, and throwing rocks, bottles and fireworks.

    Asked about the incident involving Ray, the chief said he didn’t want to comment about it publicly, but would do so “offline” — drawing jeers from some in the audience who demanded an explanation.

    McDonnell told the commission that he supported the city’s efforts to lift the court’s injunction. Easing the restrictions, he said, would “allow our officers to have access to less-lethal force options so that we don’t have to escalate beyond that.”

    Times staff writer Noah Goldberg contributed to this report.

    Libor Jany

    Source link

  • NASA Northrop Grumman resupply mission faces delay in reaching space station

    A delivery headed for astronauts on the space station has been delayed.

    Launched at 6:11 p.m. Sunday, Sept. 14, fromLaunch Complex 40 in Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, the Northrop Grumman Cygnus XL cargo spacecraft was set to dock to the International Space Station Wednesday morning with more than 11,000 pounds of supplies and science.

    But the docking did not happen on time.

    NASA announced Sept. 16 that the spacecraft had experienced engine trouble on its way to the space station, with the main engine cutting off earlier than planned.

    NASA and Northrop Grumman are delaying the arrival of the Cygnus XL to the International Space Station as flight controllers evaluate an alternate burn plan for the resupply spacecraft. The Cygnus XL will not arrive to the space station on Wednesday, Sept. 17, as originally planned, with a new arrival date and time under review,” a statement by NASA read.

    NASA said that everything else is performing as expected with the spacecraft.

    Once the Cygnus spacecraft does arrive at the International Space Station, astronauts Jonny Kim and Zena Cardman will use the space station’s robotic Canadarm2 to grab and dock it.

    This mission — refrred to as NG-23 — is the first flight of the company’s new Cygnus XL spacecraft. It is described as solar-powered, larger and a more capable cargo spacecraft compared to previous Cygnus models, which have flown multiple NASA resupply missions in the past.

    It is not the first time a Cygnus spacecraft experienced an issue in flight. In 2022, a Cygnus spacecraft flying as part of the NG-18 mission failed to deploy a solar array, putting the spacecraft’s power levels at risk. Northrop Grumman and NASA were able to work around the issue, and the spacecraft was successfully captured by astronauts onboard the station.

    As of the morning of Sept. 17, NASA had not released an update on the current issue.

    Brooke Edwards is a Space Reporter for Florida Today. Contact her at bedwards@floridatoday.com or on X: @brookeofstars.

    Source link

  • Some Guard units in Washington are now carrying firearms, Pentagon says

    Some National Guard units patrolling the nation’s capital at the direction of President Donald Trump have started carrying firearms, an escalation of his military deployment that makes good on a directive issued late last week by his defense secretary.A Defense Department official who was not authorized to speak publicly said some units on certain missions would be armed — some with handguns and others with rifles. The spokesperson said that all units with firearms have been trained and are operating under strict rules for use of force.Video above: President Trump greets, thanks National Guard and federal agents during trip into D.C.An Associated Press photographer on Sunday saw members of the South Carolina National Guard outside Union Station with holstered handguns.A statement from the joint task force that has taken over policing in the nation’s capital said units began carrying their service weapons on Sunday and that the military’s rules say force should be used “only as a last resort and solely in response to an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm.” It said the force is committed to protecting “the safety and wellbeing” of Washington’s residents.The defense official who spoke to The Associated Press said only troops on certain missions would carry guns, and that would include those patrolling to establish a law enforcement presence throughout the capital. Those working in transportation or administration would likely remain unarmed.The development in Trump’s extraordinary effort to override the law enforcement authority of state and local governments comes as he is considering expanding the deployments to other Democratic-led cities, including Baltimore, Chicago and New York.Earlier Sunday, the president threatened to expand his military deployments to more Democratic-led cities, responding to an offer by Maryland’s governor to join him in a tour of Baltimore by saying he might instead “send in the ‘troops.’” He earlier said he was considering deploying troops to Chicago and New York.Thousands of National Guard and federal law enforcement officers are now patrolling the district’s streets, drawing sporadic protests from local residents.Trump made the threat to Baltimore in a spat with Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat who has criticized Trump’s unprecedented flex of federal power aimed at combatting crime and homelessness in Washington. Moore last week invited Trump to visit his state to discuss public safety and walk the streets. In a Truth Social post on Sunday, Trump said Moore asked “in a rather nasty and provocative tone,” and then raised the specter of repeating the National Guard deployment he made in Los Angeles over the objections of California’s Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom. Video below: National Guard deployment increases in Washington, D.C.”Wes Moore’s record on Crime is a very bad one, unless he fudges his figures on crime like many of the other ‘Blue States’ are doing,” Trump wrote, as he cited a pejorative nickname he uses frequently for the California governor. “But if Wes Moore needs help, like Gavin Newscum did in L.A., I will send in the ‘troops,’ which is being done in nearby DC, and quickly clean up the Crime.”Moore said he invited Trump to Maryland “because he seems to enjoy living in this blissful ignorance” about improving crime rates in Baltimore. After a spike during the pandemic that matched nationwide trends, Baltimore’s violent crime rate has fallen. The 200 homicides reported last year were down 24% from the prior year and 42% since 2021, according to city data. Between 2023 and 2024, overall violent crime was down nearly 8% and property crimes down 20%.”The president is spending all of his time talking about me,” Moore said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Sunday. “I’m spending my time talking about the people I serve.”Trump is “spouting off a bunch of lies about public safety in Maryland,” Moore said in a fundraising email. In Washington, where Trump is surging National Guard troops and federal law enforcement officers, a patchwork of protests popped up throughout the city over the weekend, while some normally bustling corners were noticeably quiet. In some of the most populated areas, residents walked by small groups of national guardsmen, often talking among themselves. Videos of arrests and detainments circulated on social media.Trump has said Chicago and New York are most likely his next targets, eliciting strong pushback from Democratic leaders in both states. The Washington Post reported Saturday that the Pentagon has spent weeks preparing for an operation in Chicago that would include National Guard troops and potentially active-duty forces.Asked about the Post report, the White House pointed to Trump’s earlier comments discussing his desire to expand his use of military forces to target local crime.”I think Chicago will be our next,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Friday, adding, “And then we’ll help with New York.”Trump has repeatedly described some of the nation’s largest cities — run by Democrats, with Black mayors and majority-minority populations — as dangerous and filthy. Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott is Black, as is Moore. The District of Columbia and New York also have Black mayors.The Rev. Al Sharpton, speaking during a religious event Sunday at Howard University in Washington, said the Guard’s presence in the nation’s capital was not about crime: “This is about profiling us.””This is laced with bigotry and racism,” he later elaborated to reporters. “Not one white mayor has been designated. And I think this is a civil rights issue, a race issue, and an issue of D.C. statehood.”Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat, said there is no emergency warranting the deployment of National Guard troops in Chicago.”Donald Trump is attempting to manufacture a crisis, politicize Americans who serve in uniform, and continue abusing his power to distract from the pain he’s causing families,” Pritzker wrote on X. “We’ll continue to follow the law, stand up for the sovereignty of our state, and protect Illinoisans.”Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson said the city doesn’t need “a military occupation” and would sue to block one. He said there has been no communication from the White House about a possible military deployment.”We’re not going to surrender our humanity to this tyrant,” Johnson said Sunday on MSNBC. “I can tell you this, the city of Chicago has a long history of standing up against tyranny, resisting those who wish to undermine the interests of working people.” Cooper reported from Phoenix.

    Some National Guard units patrolling the nation’s capital at the direction of President Donald Trump have started carrying firearms, an escalation of his military deployment that makes good on a directive issued late last week by his defense secretary.

    A Defense Department official who was not authorized to speak publicly said some units on certain missions would be armed — some with handguns and others with rifles. The spokesperson said that all units with firearms have been trained and are operating under strict rules for use of force.

    Video above: President Trump greets, thanks National Guard and federal agents during trip into D.C.

    An Associated Press photographer on Sunday saw members of the South Carolina National Guard outside Union Station with holstered handguns.

    A statement from the joint task force that has taken over policing in the nation’s capital said units began carrying their service weapons on Sunday and that the military’s rules say force should be used “only as a last resort and solely in response to an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm.” It said the force is committed to protecting “the safety and wellbeing” of Washington’s residents.

    The defense official who spoke to The Associated Press said only troops on certain missions would carry guns, and that would include those patrolling to establish a law enforcement presence throughout the capital. Those working in transportation or administration would likely remain unarmed.

    The development in Trump’s extraordinary effort to override the law enforcement authority of state and local governments comes as he is considering expanding the deployments to other Democratic-led cities, including Baltimore, Chicago and New York.

    Earlier Sunday, the president threatened to expand his military deployments to more Democratic-led cities, responding to an offer by Maryland’s governor to join him in a tour of Baltimore by saying he might instead “send in the ‘troops.’” He earlier said he was considering deploying troops to Chicago and New York.

    Thousands of National Guard and federal law enforcement officers are now patrolling the district’s streets, drawing sporadic protests from local residents.

    Trump made the threat to Baltimore in a spat with Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat who has criticized Trump’s unprecedented flex of federal power aimed at combatting crime and homelessness in Washington. Moore last week invited Trump to visit his state to discuss public safety and walk the streets.

    In a Truth Social post on Sunday, Trump said Moore asked “in a rather nasty and provocative tone,” and then raised the specter of repeating the National Guard deployment he made in Los Angeles over the objections of California’s Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom.

    Video below: National Guard deployment increases in Washington, D.C.

    “Wes Moore’s record on Crime is a very bad one, unless he fudges his figures on crime like many of the other ‘Blue States’ are doing,” Trump wrote, as he cited a pejorative nickname he uses frequently for the California governor. “But if Wes Moore needs help, like Gavin Newscum did in L.A., I will send in the ‘troops,’ which is being done in nearby DC, and quickly clean up the Crime.”

    Moore said he invited Trump to Maryland “because he seems to enjoy living in this blissful ignorance” about improving crime rates in Baltimore. After a spike during the pandemic that matched nationwide trends, Baltimore’s violent crime rate has fallen. The 200 homicides reported last year were down 24% from the prior year and 42% since 2021, according to city data. Between 2023 and 2024, overall violent crime was down nearly 8% and property crimes down 20%.

    “The president is spending all of his time talking about me,” Moore said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Sunday. “I’m spending my time talking about the people I serve.”

    Trump is “spouting off a bunch of lies about public safety in Maryland,” Moore said in a fundraising email.

    In Washington, where Trump is surging National Guard troops and federal law enforcement officers, a patchwork of protests popped up throughout the city over the weekend, while some normally bustling corners were noticeably quiet. In some of the most populated areas, residents walked by small groups of national guardsmen, often talking among themselves. Videos of arrests and detainments circulated on social media.

    Trump has said Chicago and New York are most likely his next targets, eliciting strong pushback from Democratic leaders in both states. The Washington Post reported Saturday that the Pentagon has spent weeks preparing for an operation in Chicago that would include National Guard troops and potentially active-duty forces.

    Asked about the Post report, the White House pointed to Trump’s earlier comments discussing his desire to expand his use of military forces to target local crime.

    “I think Chicago will be our next,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Friday, adding, “And then we’ll help with New York.”

    Trump has repeatedly described some of the nation’s largest cities — run by Democrats, with Black mayors and majority-minority populations — as dangerous and filthy. Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott is Black, as is Moore. The District of Columbia and New York also have Black mayors.

    The Rev. Al Sharpton, speaking during a religious event Sunday at Howard University in Washington, said the Guard’s presence in the nation’s capital was not about crime: “This is about profiling us.”

    “This is laced with bigotry and racism,” he later elaborated to reporters. “Not one white mayor has been designated. And I think this is a civil rights issue, a race issue, and an issue of D.C. statehood.”

    Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat, said there is no emergency warranting the deployment of National Guard troops in Chicago.

    “Donald Trump is attempting to manufacture a crisis, politicize Americans who serve in uniform, and continue abusing his power to distract from the pain he’s causing families,” Pritzker wrote on X. “We’ll continue to follow the law, stand up for the sovereignty of our state, and protect Illinoisans.”

    Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson said the city doesn’t need “a military occupation” and would sue to block one. He said there has been no communication from the White House about a possible military deployment.

    “We’re not going to surrender our humanity to this tyrant,” Johnson said Sunday on MSNBC. “I can tell you this, the city of Chicago has a long history of standing up against tyranny, resisting those who wish to undermine the interests of working people.”

    Cooper reported from Phoenix.

    Source link

  • Trump’s unprecedented show of force in L.A., Washington is pushing norms, sparking fears

    In downtown Los Angeles, Gov. Gavin Newsom was holding a news conference with Democratic leaders when the Border Patrol showed up nearby to conduct a showy immigration raid.

    In Washington D.C., hundreds of National Guard troops patrolled the streets, some in armored vehicles, as city officials battled with the White House over whether the federal government can take control of the local police department.

    President Trump has long demonized “blue” cities like Los Angeles, Washington and New York, frequently claiming — often contrary to the evidence — that their Democratic leaders have allowed crime and blight to worsen. Trump, for example, cited out-of-control crime as the reason for his Washington D.C. guard deployment, even though data shows crime in the city is down.

    But over the last few months, Trump’s rhetoric has given way to searing images of federal power on urban streets that are generating both headlines and increasing alarm in some circles.

    While past presidents have occasionally used the Insurrection Act to deploy the military in response to clear, acute crises, the way Trump has deployed troops in Democratic-run cities is unprecedented in American politics. Trump has claimed broader inherent powers and an authority to deploy troops to cities when and where he decides there is an emergency, said Matthew Beckmann, a political science professor at UC Irvine.

    “President Trump is testing how far he can push his authority, in no small part to find out who or what can challenge him,” he said.

    State and local officials reacted with shock when they learned Border Patrol agents had massed outside Newsom’s news conference Thursday. The governor was preparing to announce the launch of a campaign for a ballot measure, which if approved by voters, would redraw the state’s congressional maps to favor Democrats before the 2026 midterms.

    Border Patrol Sector Chief Gregory Bovino told a Fox 11 reporter: “We’re here making Los Angeles a safer place since we won’t have politicians that’ll do that, we do that ourselves.” When the reporter noted that Newsom was nearby, Bovino responded, “I don’t know where he’s at.”

    However, local law enforcement sources told The Times that the raid was not random and that they had received word from the federal authorities that Little Tokyo was targeted due to its proximity to the governor’s event. The raid, the sources told The Times, was less about making arrests and more of a show of force intended to disrupt Democrats.

    Whatever the reason, the raid generated news coverage and at least in the conservative media, overshadowed the announcement of the redistricting plan.

    Trump’s second term has been marked by increased use of troops in cities. He authorized the deployment of thousands of Marines and National Guard troops to L.A. in June after immigration raids sparked scattered protests. The troops saw little action, and local leaders said the deployment was unnecessary and only served to inflame tensions.

    The operation reached a controversial zenith in July when scores of troops on horseback wearing tactical gear and driving armored vehicles, rolled through MacArthur Park. The incident generated much attention, but local police were surprised that the raid was brief and resulted in few arrests.

    After the MacArthur Park raid, Mayor Karen Bass complained “there’s no plan other than fear, chaos and politics.”

    Beckmann said the situation is a “particularly perilous historical moment because we have a president willing to flout constitutional limits while Congress and the court have been willing to accept pretext as principle.”

    UC Berkeley Political Science Professor Eric Schickler, co-director of the university’s Institute of Governmental Studies, said the recent military displays are part of a larger mission to increase the power of the president and weaken other countervailing forces, such as the dismantling of federal agencies and the weakening of universities.

    “It all adds up to a picture of really trying to turn the president into the one dominant force in American politics — he is the boss of everything, he controls everything,” Schickler said. “And that’s just not how the American political system has worked for 240 years.”

    In some way, Trump’s tactics are an extension of long-held rhetoric. In the 1980s, he regularly railed against crime in New York City, including the rape of a woman in Central Park that captured national headlines. The suspects, known as the Central Park Five, were exonerated after spending years in prison and have filed a defamation suit against Trump.

    Trump and his backers say he is simply keeping campaign promises to reduce crime and deport people in the country illegally.

    “Our law enforcement operations are about enforcing the law — not about Gavin Newsom,” said Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin.

    Federal agents “patrol all areas of Los Angeles every day with over 40 teams on the ground to make L.A. safe,” she said.

    In Washington D.C., where the federal government has began assuming law enforcement responsibilities, the business of policing the streets of the nation’s capital had radically transformed by Friday. Federal agencies typically tasked with investigating drug kingpins, gunrunners and cybercriminals were conducting traffic stops and helping with other routine policing.

    Twenty federal law enforcement teams fanned out across the city Thursday night with more than 1,750 people joining the operation, a White House official told the Associated Press. They made 33 arrests, including 15 people who did not have permanent legal status. Others were arrested on warrants for murder, rape and driving under the influence, the official said.

    Thaddeus Johnson, a senior fellow with the Council on Criminal Justice, said the administration’s actions not only threaten democracy, but they also have real consequences for local leaders and residents. Citizens often can’t distinguish between federal or local officers and don’t know when the two groups are or aren’t working together.

    “That breeds a lot of confusion and also breeds a lot of fear,” Johnson said.

    Thomas Abt, founding director of University of Maryland’s Center for the Study and Practice of Violence Reduction, emphasized that pulling federal agents from their jobs can hurt overall public safety.

    “There’s a real threat to politicizing federal law enforcement, and sending them wherever elected officials think there’s a photo opportunity instead of doing the hard work of federal law enforcement,” Abt said.

    Already, D.C. residents and public officials have pushed back on federal law enforcement’s presence. When federal officers set up a vehicle checkpoint along the 14th Street Northwest corridor this week, hecklers shouted, “Go home, fascists” and “Get off our streets.”

    On Friday, the District of Columbia filed an emergency motion seeking to block the Trump administration’s takeover of the city’s police department.

    “This is the gravest threat to Home Rule DC has ever faced, and we are fighting to stop it,” D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb said in a statement on Friday. “The Administration’s actions are brazenly unlawful. They go well beyond the bounds of the President’s limited authority and instead seek a hostile takeover of MPD.”

    The show of force in L.A. has also left local officials outraged at what they see as deliberate efforts to sow fear and exert power. Hours before agents arrived in Little Tokyo, Bass and other officials held a news conference calling for an end to the continued immigration raids.

    Bass said she believes the recent actions violated the temporary restraining order upheld this month by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals prohibiting agents from targeting people solely based on their race, vocation, language or location.

    The number of arrests in Southern California declined in July after a judge issued the order. But in the past two weeks, some higher profile raids have begun to ramp up again.

    In one instance, an 18-year-old Los Angeles high school senior was picked up by federal immigration officers while walking his dog in Van Nuys. On Thursday, a man apparently running from agents who showed up at a Home Depot parking lot in Monrovia was hit by a car and killed on the 210 Freeway.

    Bass appeared to be seething as she spoke to reporters after Newsom’s press conference on Thursday, calling the raid in Little Tokyo a “provocative act” and “unbelievably disrespectful.”

    “They’re talking about disorder in Los Angeles, and they are the source of the disorder in Los Angeles right now,” she said.

    Hannah Fry, Grace Toohey, Richard Winton

    Source link

  • Former British police officer chosen to lead LAPD watchdog

    Former British police officer chosen to lead LAPD watchdog

    As the Los Angeles Police Department holds its breath over the selection of its next chief, officials this week announced the selection of the agency’s new top watchdog.

    Django Sibley, a former police officer in the United Kingdom, was named executive director of the Los Angeles Police Commission. Sibley held the job on an interim basis for nearly six months after the retirement of Richard Tefank, who served in the role for nearly two decades.

    His selection was ratified in a 4-0 vote by the commission on Tuesday.

    Before taking over for Tefank, Sibley spent about two decades in the LAPD inspector general’s office, rising to the rank of assistant inspector general in charge of all investigations of serious police uses of force. He joined the office in 2004 and built a reputation as an effective behind-the-scenes operator with a sophisticated understanding of police affairs.

    In a prepared statement, commission president Erroll G. Southers said that the pick comes at “a critical time in this Department’s history.”

    Django Sibley, 51, held the executive director job on an interim basis for about six months.

    (Los Angeles Police Commission)

    “Mr. Sibley comes to us uniquely qualified with an extensive career in law enforcement and police oversight,” the statement read.

    A commission spokesperson said that Sibley was selected from among 20 applicants.

    As its executive director, Sibley, 51, will act as a liaison between the commission and police department officials. The civilian oversight panel reviews all serious uses of force by LAPD officers and helps craft policies.

    His selection fills one of three vacancies in LAPD leadership and oversight positions: chief, inspector general and executive director of the Police Commission.

    Sibley’s former boss, then-inspector general Mark Smith, left in April after being named as an independent monitor to oversee police reforms in Portland, Ore.

    L.A. Mayor Karen Bass has said she intends to make her chief pick by the end of the month.

    The three finalists for the position, winnowed down from a list of more than 30 candidates, are LAPD deputy chief Emada Tingirides; Jim McDonnell, a one-time LAPD assistant chief and former Los Angeles County sheriff; and Robert Arcos, a former LAPD assistant chief who is a senior official in the L.A. County district attorney’s office.

    The commission remains at four members, after a potential replacement for former commissioner William Briggs pulled out of consideration a day after his confirmation hearing before the City Council’s Public Safety Committee.

    Bass had nominated Karl Thurmond, a co-chair of Rep. Adam B. Schiff’s finance committee. But members of the council committee appeared to grow frustrated with Thurmond over his responses — and non-responses — to questions about his background, police hiring and other issues.

    Before enrolling at graduate school at USC, Sibley worked for Humberside Police, a roughly 4,000-member force that patrols East Riding of Yorkshire, about four hours north of London.

    Sibley’s departure was chronicled in the local newspaper, the Hull Daily Mail, in an article titled, “Bobby packs bags for spell in sunshine state.”

    The story says that Sibley joined Humberside police in 1995 and spent the bulk of his career patrolling areas around Hull, a faded North Sea port in northeast England.

    Sibley had reportedly chosen to attend USC to study geography, taking advantage of a five-year sabbatical granted to all Humberside officers to “pursue other personal activities.” Sibley told the paper that he was looking forward to living in California, but that “the plan is that I will be back in two years.”

    Times staff writer David Zahniser contributed to this report.

    Libor Jany

    Source link

  • Police arrest protesters on UC Santa Cruz campus after ordering them to leave encampment

    Police arrest protesters on UC Santa Cruz campus after ordering them to leave encampment

    Police in riot gear entered the UC Santa Cruz campus early Friday morning, arresting pro-Palestinian protesters who set up an encampment and blocked the main entrance to campus.

    Video taken after midnight showed a line of police with raised batons standing at the UC Santa Cruz encampment just a few feet from protesters who linked arms. Many protesters wore helmets and goggles and covered their faces with keffiyehs and masks.

    “Leave the area immediately,” a law enforcement officer instructed protesters. But his instructions were drowned out by the crowd.

    “Cops off campus!” the demonstrators chanted. “Glory to the martyrs!”

    A UC Santa Cruz official said in a Friday morning statement the university brought in law enforcement to disband the encampment after repeatedly instructing students — for weeks and Friday morning — to stop their “intentional and dangerous blockade of campus entrances.”

    “It is imperative that we restore full access to our campus and end other unlawful, unsafe actions as demonstrators continued to disrupt campus operations and threatened safety, even delaying access of emergency vehicles,” said Scott Hernandez-Jason, the assistant vice chancellor for communications and marketing, said. “It was impossible to do so without law enforcement intervention.”

    The standoff between protesters and law enforcement began around 1 a.m. as officers from the California Highway Patrol, Daly City, Foster City and Pacifica descended on the encampment.

    A livestream feed from Estudiantes Oaxaqueños de Ahora at UCSC showed protesters setting up wooden pallets between themselves and the officers.

    “You don’t scare us!” they chanted. “Shame!

    Police tore away the barricade and then inched closer toward the protesters.

    Livestreams from the UCSC Student Union Assembly showed law enforcement descending on the encampment in the dark, shining strobe lights on students, looking inside tents and dismantling the encampment.

    “Free, free, free Palestine,” the protesters chanted, one waving a Palestinian flag as officers approached a line of protesters.

    Police began to make arrests around 3 a.m. But two hours later, the protesters were still at the encampment, issuing calls for supporters to come to the campus and provide backup.

    “SHOW UP NOW,” Students for Justice in Palestine UC Santa Cruz said on Instagram. “5AM AND WE ARE STILL HERE. WE ARE STRONGER TOGETHER. GET HERE BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.”

    Videos from the scene showed protesters scream as police officers engaged in altercations with protesters who resisted arrest, in one case pulling a student from the crowd by the leg. Students tried to pull those being arrested back in to their circle.

    “Don’t hurt students!” the protesters chanted. “Don’t hurt students!”

    About 7:30 a.m., a white Santa Cruz sheriff’s department transportation bus carrying protesters left campus and the crowd jeered.

    “Let them go!” they chanted.

    It was not clear how manyprotesters have been arrested. Inquiries to local law enforcement agencies were not immediately returned.

    The standoff took place after university leaders switched to remote learning this week after protesters blocked the main entrance to campus. Students have joined forces with hundreds of striking academic workers at UC Santa Cruz, who allege the University of California’s response to pro-Palestinian demonstrators has violated their free speech rights.

    “We call on these protesters to immediately reopen full access to the campus and return to protesting in a manner consistent with both our community values and our student code of conduct,” university leaders wrote Thursday in a message to the campus community. “Denying instructional access is not free speech.”

    Jenny Jarvie, Angie Orellana Hernandez

    Source link

  • After a year in office, L.A. County sheriff talks deputy gangs, jail deaths, overdoses

    After a year in office, L.A. County sheriff talks deputy gangs, jail deaths, overdoses

    By the time Sheriff Robert Luna ousted his predecessor and became L.A. County’s top cop in late 2022, the nation’s largest sheriff’s department was awash in controversy.

    The half-century-old problem of deputy gangs had brought the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department under increasing national scrutiny. Jail conditions were becoming increasingly dire, and the decades-old lawsuits about them seemed no closer to resolution. On top of that, the department was short on staff, mired in scandal and often at odds with county leaders.

    A year later, many of those problems remain unresolved — and critics say the new sheriff has little to show for his time in office. The department has yet to ban deputy gang tattoos, and the courts have stymied efforts to identify the gangs’ alleged members. County data show roughly 20% of sworn positions are effectively vacant, jail death rates are soaring and, in June, the county only narrowly avoided a contempt hearing over conditions inside its lockups.

    Still, the signs of change are unmistakable. After taking office, Luna quickly opened up more access to oversight officials. He created the Office of Constitutional Policing to help the county comply with four federal consent decrees, eradicate gangs and overhaul policies that could help reform the department.

    So far this year, deputy-involved shootings are down, and the jail population is falling. Deputies are using force against inmates less frequently, and the department created a timer system to make sure jailers stopped chaining mentally ill people to benches for days. And this week, in an interview at the Hall of Justice, Luna told The Times he’s formulating a plan to close the county’s oldest lockup.

    “Men’s Central Jail needs to be replaced,” he said. “We need something that resembles a care campus that can deal with what custody should look like toward the future.”

    Exactly how that would work is still fuzzy, and the sheriff would only promise more details in the future, hinting at something perhaps loosely inspired by the gentler prison systems of European countries. Making that a reality will be an uphill battle — just like some of the other lofty goals Luna has in mind.

    “For a sheriff’s department or a police department to be successful, we need to be properly led and properly partnered, staffed, equipped and trained,” he said. “I was handed a department that has been deficient. … And we have a lot of work to do. A lot of work.”

    Over a little more than an hour, Luna explained what some pieces of that work could entail. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

    *****

    One of the issues that was pretty central in your campaign was eradicating deputy gangs. A year later, there’s still not a strong anti-gang policy in place. Why is that?

    During the campaign I talked about deputy gangs. I raised my hand and said, “We have a problem.” So I’m admitting there’s an issue. That’s why we started the Office of Constitutional Policing. But remember this: any time we’re dealing with employees’ hours, working conditions or things that impact people’s daily lives, we have to go through a meet-and-confer process. When we started to draft the policy — although the Civilian Oversight Commission gave us their version of it — we still had to go through it and make sure that it was something that could work.

    So [Office of Constitutional Policing director] Eileen Decker not only had to go through the Civilian Oversight Commission and the Office of Inspector General, but also the federal monitors. Once that was done, there were unofficial conversations going on with the different labor organizations. And then, I want to say sometime in October-ish, we gave it to them in a formal manner. That’s when it becomes official.

    This problem has existed for 50 years. I’ve been in office now for a year. I want to fix this. That is my goal. Yes, it is taking a little bit longer than I would like to see, but our labor organizations have been good partners at the table. We don’t agree on everything, but I think we’re going to get to a good place.

    Do you think you’ll have a new anti-gang policy in place at some point in this next year, during your second year in office?

    That is my absolute expectation.

    There was a widely criticized incident in Palmdale, where a deputy punched a woman with an infant in her arms. Can you tell me anything about if you’re making changes to policies about when deputies can punch civilians?

    It’s still being worked out. But from my perspective, if one of my deputies is getting his butt kicked and it’s a fisticuffs, you have a right to defend yourself. And if you have to use personal weapons — punching somebody in the face — to do that, then you have to defend yourself. I would not take that very valuable tool away from our employees.

    But if you have a suspect who is not fighting you but only resisting, that’s where I draw the line and say that you don’t just start punching people. I get it, sometimes it’s very difficult to handcuff people. And historically that has been allowed here and that’s what is catching a lot of employees off guard. The miscommunication is [they think], “Oh, he just wants to take it away from us.” No, there’s a time and place for it. Because when you’re using force on an individual, it’s to gain control, not to punish. There’s a difference there.

    Was the incident in Palmdale what prompted you to evaluate the policies about punching people?

    It was one of many things. We’ve had several incidents over the last year where personal weapons were used to overcome resistance, not in a fight.

    According to a recent letter sent from the American Civil Liberties Union to the Board of Supervisors, the Sheriff’s Department has been finding uses of force against jail inmates to be within policy more than 98% of the time. But the federal court-appointed monitors agree only about two-thirds of the time. How do you explain that discrepancy?

    I was told about that ACLU report probably about three or four hours ago. We’re making inquiries about if there is actually a discrepancy. But there are definitely challenges. When we’re talking about use of force, the federal monitors have said they don’t like the fact that they believe that our front-line supervisors are not holding employees accountable. So we are currently looking at that.

    But as I’m talking to all of our supervisors, I’m talking about accountability. We have to be courageous and identify challenges that we’re having because that negatively impacts public trust and credibility. And honestly, it’s hanging our employees out to dry. Because if you’re not taking corrective actions or showing people that this is wrong, then other employees won’t believe it’s wrong.

    A lot of the employees that I talk to when I visit stations, they’re frustrated with me because there’s been instances where people have been disciplined and they believe that you’re holding us to this standard, but yet you’re not providing the required training to get us there. So I’m doing an evaluation on our training — but I don’t need an evaluation to tell me we’re deficient.

    One of the other issues with the jails has been the high death toll. As of today, the jails are a couple deaths away from having the highest death rate in at least 15 years. Why do you think that is?

    Every time I see a notification that somebody dies in our custody, it’s like, “What the heck?” You don’t want to see any. I don’t want anything to go wrong while they’re in our custody.

    I think there is a perception that people who are dying in our custody are dying due to force incidents or murders. Now, once in a while you will get somebody who does get murdered in our facility. This last year we attributed nine deaths to overdoses. And there are nine other autopsies that are still pending, but a lot of these cases look like they’re from natural causes.

    A lot of the people that we take into custody, they’re probably getting the best healthcare they may have ever received in their entire life while they’re with us, which means that rarely does somebody go see a doctor. Then when they get to us, you get people who are ill, fall ill and then they end up dying in our custody. So if I have nine overdoses, how do I reduce those?

    Some facilities have tried to minimize opioid overdoses by expanding access to medication-assisted treatment that reduces the urge to get high. Historically, this is something that your department has not broadly used. Do you have any plans to expand that?

    I want to dig a little deeper. If there is resistance, is it from our department? Is it from Correctional Health Services? Is there a reason? I’d like to know. We have already gotten more canines to do drug detection. We need better body scanners. We’re working through our CFO to try and figure out how we can do that. We believe that a lot of the drugs are coming in through mail.

    I envision — and I’m already working on this — all of our custody facilities getting really good internet service so that I can get tablets in and eliminate mail. Can you imagine if I can give a family the ability to FaceTime, what that would do? There’s so many opportunities.

    Keri Blakinger

    Source link

  • Unsealed surveillance videos show violence against inmates inside L.A. County jails

    Unsealed surveillance videos show violence against inmates inside L.A. County jails

    In one video, a jailer kneels on an inmate’s neck. In another, two deputies slam a man’s head into a wall. In yet another, two jailers punch a handcuffed inmate repeatedly — even after he’s fallen to the ground.

    A new trove of surveillance videos from inside the Los Angeles County jails offers a rare view of the culture of violence that has persisted behind bars despite a decades-long federal lawsuit and years of jail oversight.

    The release of the six videos comes months after The Times and independent news site Witness LA asked a federal judge to make them public. Lawyers for the county fought to keep the footage confidential, but after a hearing this fall, U.S. District Court Judge Dean Pregerson ordered the material to be released.

    Such visual documentation of use-of-force against inmates typically remains unseen by the public, as most jail videos are protected from disclosure.

    Before turning over the videos, the county blurred the footage to conceal the identities of staff and inmates. All but one of the clips are silent. Most are short, and it is impossible to know what came before or after the incidents shown. The shortest is 14 seconds. The longest is just over 15 minutes.

    What is visible are several incidents in which deputies overpower men who are restrained. In only one instance does an inmate — in handcuffs — appear to kick at two deputies who are behind him. They punch him in the head, wrestle him to the ground and continue punching.

    Though federal court filings show that county jailers kick and punch inmates less frequently than they used to, the videos indicate the department has not fully reined in the use of force that spurred a lawsuit more than a decade ago.

    In a lengthy statement, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department said it was aware of Pregerson’s decision to unseal the videos and called their disclosure “an opportunity to build further trust within the community it serves.”

    The incidents in the videos “are not representative of interactions between deputies and inmates in the Los Angeles County Jail system,” the largest in the U.S., the statement said. “The videos that have been unsealed represent six of the millions of interactions that occurred over a more than two and one-half year period between October 24, 2019 (the date of the earliest use of force incident depicted) and July 4, 2022 (the date of the most recent use of force incident depicted).”

    Peter Eliasberg, chief counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, said the videos show “unnecessary force in a variety of different guises.” The “most brutal,” he said, was a 14-second clip in which “two deputies take an incarcerated person out of his cell and then proceed to throw him headlong into either a concrete wall or a plexiglass wall.”

    He said that video — previously obtained by The Times — depicts an “absolutely unnecessary” use of force for which “there’s clearly no justification.” The inmate “does not do anything to them. And frankly, even if he had, it’s almost impossible to justify that kind of force.”

    Dated July, 2022, it is the most recent video released. According to the Sheriff’s Department statement, in that video, “the actions of the deputies are currently being scrutinized by the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office at the request of the Department for possible criminal prosecution.”

    Another video that raised red flags for ACLU attorneys shows a deputy kneeling on an inmate’s neck. The deputy later wrote in a report that he acted “inadvertently” — a description Eliasberg disputed, asserting that an inadvertent action does not last nearly a minute.

    Videos showing staff using force against inmates in Los Angeles County were released as part of a court case. A correctional officer kneels on a jailed man’s neck.

    “This gentleman did get disciplined for putting knee to neck,” Eliasberg said. “He did not get disciplined for dishonest reporting. … Dishonest reporting is cancer to the operation of a law enforcement agency.”

    A Sheriff’s Department spokeswoman said “appropriate administrative action was taken” after the incident but would offer no further detail.

    In four of the six videos, Eliasberg said, he did not believe the deputies involved were disciplined. Sheriff’s Department officials did not offer clarification, and the department statement did not address that.

    The statement did point out that deputies in the county’s jails work under difficult circumstances and often deal with people who have been accused of violent crimes.

    “There has been a complete cultural shift away from the days when such abuses were tolerated,” the statement said. “Sheriff Luna is intent on building on that progress comprehensively, and at a more rapid pace than his predecessors.”

    The videos came to light as part of a long-standing lawsuit over use of force against inmates in the Los Angeles County jails. The suit, now known as Rosas vs. Luna, began in 2012 when inmates accused deputies of “degrading, cruel and sadistic” attacks. Many of the incidents, the suit alleged, were “far more severe than the infamous 1991 beating of Rodney King.”

    After three years of legal wrangling, the inmates, represented by the ACLU, and the county came to an agreement about specific changes the department would make to cut down on the number of beatings behind bars. Though records show there has been some progress toward that goal — including a 20% reduction in use-of-force from 2021 to 2022 — outside experts and ACLU lawyers say the department has yet to fulfill the requirements of the 2015 settlement.

    Deputies still punch inmates in the face at a rate of just under once a week, according to court records. And jailers have been making use of a controversial full-body restraint known as the WRAP, which encases inmates in a blanket-like device from their ankles to their shoulders. Last year, an investigation by the news outlet Capital & Main found that the device had led to several lawsuits, and that safety claims about its use were based on anecdotes.

    Given those and other ongoing concerns, earlier this year the inmates’ lawyers asked the county to make some changes to its plan to reduce use-of-force behind bars. These included the creation of a revised WRAP policy, mandatory-minimum punishments for deputies who violate certain use-of-force policies and a ban on deputies punching inmates in the head except in situations that could require deadly force.

    To show why they believed those changes were needed, ACLU lawyers submitted several videos of jail violence, along with internal department reports.

    Aside from footage of the punching and kneeling incidents, one of the videos shows a person bleeding on the ground and moaning and deputies employing the WRAP device to subdue him. ACLU attorneys raised concerns about the fact that deputies covered the man’s face in a spit mask — used to prevent people from spitting — while he was bleeding heavily. Medical exams later found that he had sustained an orbital bone fracture.

    Because most of the videos — except for one that was previously reported on by The Times — had been given to the ACLU under a protective order as part of the lawsuit, the civil rights group wasn’t allowed to share them publicly.

    When the organization’s lawyers decided to attach them to their filing as evidence, they did so under seal.

    The Times and Witness LA filed a motion to have the videos made public, arguing in a September federal court hearing that they merited different consideration than other material the Sheriff’s Department gives the ACLU because they’d been filed as evidence of troubling allegations about ongoing violence behind bars.

    The county said releasing the videos could create security problems, such as revealing where cameras are located inside the jails. But when the judge questioned whether the cameras were concealed, attorneys for the county admitted they were plainly visible.

    The attorneys went on to say that releasing the videos could endanger the privacy of deputies who work in the jails. They also raised concerns about whether the videos would be taken out of context. Ultimately the judge decided to order the videos blurred and to allow the parties to provide written context for the released footage.

    Since the ACLU submitted the videos to the court several months ago, the inmates’ lawyers have continued to negotiate with the county over changing some Sheriff’s Department policies inside its jails. During a hearing in October, the two sides said they had agreed on a new WRAP policy to curb use of the device.

    But Eliasberg told the court he was still worried about the department’s “continued pattern” of finding uses of force — including punches to the head — to be justified and within policy even when court-appointed monitors who reviewed the incidents did not.

    The county and the ACLU have still not come to agreement on an updated policy restricting how often deputies can punch inmates in the face. The ACLU has pushed for banning such “head strikes” except when deadly force is necessary. Lawyers for the county have advocated for keeping in place a policy allowing head strikes whenever a deputy faces the threat of serious injury.

    At a hearing in September, the county’s lawyers stressed that such blows only make up about 2% of all use-of- force incidents in the jails.

    “The videos and the monitors’ continued reporting make clear that there is need for a more restrictive head strike policy to make sure that head strikes are used only in the most exceptional circumstances and to make sure that staff are disciplined appropriately,” Eliasberg said. “There is still a major problem.”

    Keri Blakinger, Maria L. La Ganga

    Source link

  • Prolific Artist Hotep, a Groundbreaking and Formidable Force in Hip Hop, Drops New Record ‘Godfather of Hip Hop’ – World News Report – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    Prolific Artist Hotep, a Groundbreaking and Formidable Force in Hip Hop, Drops New Record ‘Godfather of Hip Hop’ – World News Report – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    Hotep

    An artist who strives to redefine and reshape the music world, Antonio McCloud hopes to move and captivate audiences with his stunning craft

    WINSTON-SALEM, NORTH CAROLINA, UNITED STATES, July 2, 2023/EINPresswire.com/ — A dynamic singer-songwriter who remains fueled by a passion to excite and inspire audiences, Hotep is solidifying his presence in the realm of hip-hop. Named Antonio McCloud at birth, the artist took onto the identity of Hotep and invokes a riveting, creative, and electric style which shines through each record.

    With his brilliant new record, “Godfather of Hip-Hop,” the talented artist presents a musical blend that displays his testament to staying true to his craft. With a driven mindset and a passion to present an unadulterated, honest, and raw picture of Hip Hop, the seasoned artist continues to make strides in the music world.

    Having released for listeners in June 2022, Hotep’s newest album takes listeners through a whirlwind of emotions. “Godfather of Hip Hop” is an album which encompasses listeners with a distinct nostalgia that is reminiscent of the glory days of the 90s.

    “Godfather of Hip-Hop” delivers an ethereal blend of rhythms and tunes that are representative of the breadth which Hotep brings with his talent. Encapsulating the essence of a time where art forms were a channel of flair, thought-provoking conversations, and unique soundscapes, the new album is his best work…

    Original Author Link click here to read complete story..

    MMP News Author

    Source link