ReportWire

Tag: Indictments

  • Kim Dotcom loses 12-year fight to halt deportation from New Zealand to face US copyright case

    Kim Dotcom loses 12-year fight to halt deportation from New Zealand to face US copyright case

    [ad_1]

    WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — Kim Dotcom, founder of the once wildly popular file-sharing website Megaupload, lost a 12-year fight this week to halt his deportation from New Zealand to the U.S. on charges of copyright infringement, money laundering and racketeering.

    New Zealand’s Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith divulged Friday that he had decided Dotcom should be surrendered to the U.S. to face trial, capping — for now — a drawn-out legal fight. A date for the extradition was not set, and Goldsmith said Dotcom would be allowed “a short period of time to consider and take advice” on the decision.

    “Don’t worry I have a plan,” Dotcom posted on X this week. He did not elaborate, although a member of his legal team, Ira Rothken, wrote on the site that a bid for a judicial review — in which a New Zealand judge would be asked to evaluate Goldsmith’s decision — was being prepared.

    The saga stretches to the 2012 arrest of Dotcom in a dramatic raid on his Auckland mansion, along with other company officers. Prosecutors said Megaupload raked in at least $175 million — mainly from people who used the site to illegally download songs, television shows and movies — before the FBI shut it down earlier that year.

    Lawyers for the Finnish-German millionaire and the others arrested had argued that it was the users of the site, founded in 2005, who chose to pirate material, not its founders. But prosecutors argued the men were the architects of a vast criminal enterprise, with the Department of Justice describing it as the largest criminal copyright case in U.S. history.

    The men fought the order for years — lambasting the investigation and arrests — but in 2021 New Zealand’s Supreme Court ruled that Dotcom and two other men could be extradited. It remained up to the country’s Justice Minister to decide if the extradition should proceed.

    Three of Goldsmith’s predecessors did not announce a decision. Goldsmith was appointed justice minister in November after New Zealand’s government changed in an election.

    “I have received extensive advice from the Ministry of Justice on this matter” and considered all information carefully, Goldsmith said in his statement.

    “I love New Zealand. I’m not leaving,” German-born Dotcom wrote on X Thursday. He did not respond to an Associated Press request for comment.

    Two of his former business partners, Mathias Ortmann and Bram van der Kolk, pleaded guilty to charges against them in a New Zealand court in June 2023 and were sentenced to two and a half years in jail. In exchange, U.S. efforts to extradite them were dropped.

    Prosecutors had earlier abandoned their extradition bid against a fourth officer of the company, Finn Batato, who was arrested in New Zealand. Batato returned to Germany where he died from cancer in 2022.

    In 2015, Megaupload computer programmer Andrus Nomm, of Estonia, pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit felony copyright infringement and was sentenced to one year and one day in U.S. federal prison.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kim Dotcom loses 12-year fight to halt deportation from New Zealand to face US case

    Kim Dotcom loses 12-year fight to halt deportation from New Zealand to face US case

    [ad_1]

    WELLINGTON, New Zealand — Kim Dotcom, founder of the once wildly popular file-sharing website Megaupload, lost a 12-year fight this week to halt his deportation from New Zealand to the U.S. on charges of copyright infringement, money laundering and racketeering.

    New Zealand’s Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith divulged Friday that he had decided Dotcom should be surrendered to the U.S. to face trial, capping — for now — a drawn-out legal fight. A date for the extradition was not set, and Goldsmith said Dotcom would be allowed “a short period of time to consider and take advice” on the decision.

    “Don’t worry I have a plan,” Dotcom posted on X this week. He did not elaborate, although a member of his legal team, Ira Rothken, wrote on the site that a bid for a judicial review — in which a New Zealand judge would be asked to evaluate Goldsmith’s decision — was being prepared.

    The saga stretches to the 2012 arrest of Dotcom in a dramatic raid on his Auckland mansion, along with other company officers. Prosecutors said Megaupload raked in at least $175 million — mainly from people who used the site to illegally download songs, television shows and movies — before the FBI shut it down earlier that year.

    Lawyers for the Finnish-German millionaire and the others arrested had argued that it was the users of the site, founded in 2005, who chose to pirate material, not its founders. But prosecutors argued the men were the architects of a vast criminal enterprise, with the Department of Justice describing it as the largest criminal copyright case in U.S. history.

    The men fought the order for years — lambasting the investigation and arrests — but in 2021 New Zealand’s Supreme Court ruled that Dotcom and two other men could be extradited. It remained up to the country’s Justice Minister to decide if the extradition should proceed.

    Three of Goldsmith’s predecessors did not announce a decision. Goldsmith was appointed justice minister in November after New Zealand’s government changed in an election.

    “I have received extensive advice from the Ministry of Justice on this matter” and considered all information carefully, Goldsmith said in his statement.

    “I love New Zealand. I’m not leaving,” German-born Dotcom wrote on X Thursday. He did not respond to an Associated Press request for comment.

    Two of his former business partners, Mathias Ortmann and Bram van der Kolk, pleaded guilty to charges against them in a New Zealand court in June 2023 and were sentenced to two and a half years in jail. In exchange, U.S. efforts to extradite them were dropped.

    Prosecutors had earlier abandoned their extradition bid against a fourth officer of the company, Finn Batato, who was arrested in New Zealand. Batato returned to Germany where he died from cancer in 2022.

    In 2015, Megaupload computer programmer Andrus Nomm, of Estonia, pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit felony copyright infringement and was sentenced to one year and one day in U.S. federal prison.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kim Dotcom loses 12-year fight to halt deportation from New Zealand to face US copyright case

    Kim Dotcom loses 12-year fight to halt deportation from New Zealand to face US copyright case

    [ad_1]

    WELLINGTON, New Zealand — Kim Dotcom, founder of the once wildly popular file-sharing website Megaupload, lost a 12-year fight this week to halt his deportation from New Zealand to the U.S. on charges of copyright infringement, money laundering and racketeering.

    New Zealand’s Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith divulged Friday that he had decided Dotcom should be surrendered to the U.S. to face trial, capping — for now — a drawn-out legal fight. A date for the extradition was not set, and Goldsmith said Dotcom would be allowed “a short period of time to consider and take advice” on the decision.

    “Don’t worry I have a plan,” Dotcom posted on X this week. He did not elaborate, although a member of his legal team, Ira Rothken, wrote on the site that a bid for a judicial review — in which a New Zealand judge would be asked to evaluate Goldsmith’s decision — was being prepared.

    The saga stretches to the 2012 arrest of Dotcom in a dramatic raid on his Auckland mansion, along with other company officers. Prosecutors said Megaupload raked in at least $175 million — mainly from people who used the site to illegally download songs, television shows and movies — before the FBI shut it down earlier that year.

    Lawyers for the Finnish-German millionaire and the others arrested had argued that it was the users of the site, founded in 2005, who chose to pirate material, not its founders. But prosecutors argued the men were the architects of a vast criminal enterprise, with the Department of Justice describing it as the largest criminal copyright case in U.S. history.

    The men fought the order for years — lambasting the investigation and arrests — but in 2021 New Zealand’s Supreme Court ruled that Dotcom and two other men could be extradited. It remained up to the country’s Justice Minister to decide if the extradition should proceed.

    Three of Goldsmith’s predecessors did not announce a decision. Goldsmith was appointed justice minister in November after New Zealand’s government changed in an election.

    “I have received extensive advice from the Ministry of Justice on this matter” and considered all information carefully, Goldsmith said in his statement.

    “I love New Zealand. I’m not leaving,” German-born Dotcom wrote on X Thursday. He did not respond to an Associated Press request for comment.

    Two of his former business partners, Mathias Ortmann and Bram van der Kolk, pleaded guilty to charges against them in a New Zealand court in June 2023 and were sentenced to two and a half years in jail. In exchange, U.S. efforts to extradite them were dropped.

    Prosecutors had earlier abandoned their extradition bid against a fourth officer of the company, Finn Batato, who was arrested in New Zealand. Batato returned to Germany where he died from cancer in 2022.

    In 2015, Megaupload computer programmer Andrus Nomm, of Estonia, pleaded guilty to conspiring to commit felony copyright infringement and was sentenced to one year and one day in U.S. federal prison.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Matthew Perry’s death leads to sweeping indictment of 5, including doctors and reputed dealers

    Matthew Perry’s death leads to sweeping indictment of 5, including doctors and reputed dealers

    [ad_1]

    LOS ANGELES — Nearly 10 months after the death of Matthew Perry, the long-simmering investigation into the ketamine that killed him came dramatically into public view with the announcement that five people had been charged with having roles in the overdose of the beloved “Friends” star.

    Here are key things to know about the case, including the two key figures who could be headed for trial and the possibility of the steepest of prison sentences.

    One or more arrests had been expected since investigators from three different agencies revealed in May they had been conducting a joint probe into how the 54-year-old Perry got such large amounts of ketamine.

    The actor had been among the growing number of patients using legal but off-label medical means to treat depression, or in other cases chronic pain, with the powerful surgical anesthetic.

    Recent reports suggested indictments might be imminent, but few outside observers, if any, knew how wide-ranging the prosecution would be, reaching much further than previous cases stemming from celebrity overdoses.

    When Michael Jackson died in 2009 from a lethal dose of the anesthetic propofol, his doctor was charged with providing it. After rapper Mac Miller died in 2017, two men who prosecutors described as a dealer and a middleman were convicted of providing fentanyl-laced oxycodone that helped kill him.

    But Perry’s case pulled in both, with indictments against doctors and illegal distributors who prosecutors say preyed on his long and public struggles with addiction. The investigation even went after the live-in personal assistant who prosecutors say helped him get ketamine and injected it directly into him before Perry was found dead in his hot tub on Oct. 28, 2023.

    “They knew what they were doing was risking great danger to Mr. Perry. But they did it anyway,” U.S. Attorney Martin Estrada said in announcing the charges.

    The prosecution was well under way even before the announcement. Two people including the assistant, Kenneth Iwamasa, and a Perry acquaintance, Eric Fleming, have pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute the drug. A San Diego physician, Dr. Mark Chavez, has agreed to enter a guilty plea.

    That leaves prosecutors free to pursue their two biggest targets.

    An indictment unsealed Thursday alleges Perry turned to Los Angeles doctor Salvador Plasencia when his regular doctors refused to give him more ketamine. Prosecutors allege Plasencia cashed in on Perry’s desperation and addiction, getting him to pay $55,000 in cash for large amounts of the drug in the two months before his death.

    “I wonder how much this moron will pay,” Plasencia texted a co-defendant, according to his indictment.

    He pleaded not guilty to seven counts of distribution of ketamine in an appearance in federal court on Thursday afternoon.

    Plasencia’s attorney, Stefan Sacks, said outside court that he “was operating with what he what he thought were the best of medical intentions,” and his actions “certainly didn’t rise to the level of criminal misconduct.”

    Prosecutors allege Jasveen Sangha, whom they describe as a drug dealer known to customers as the “Ketamine Queen,” provided the doses of the drug that actually killed Perry, injected into the actor by Iwamasa with syringes supplied by Plasencia.

    Sangha also pleaded not guilty. Her attorney Alexandra Kazarian derided the “queen” moniker as made-for-media consumption during the hearing. The lawyer declined comment on the case outside court.

    Prosecutors say the other doctor in the case, Chavez, helped Plasencia obtain the ketamine he gave to Perry, while Perry’s acquaintance, Fleming, helped get ketamine from Sangha to Perry.

    Chavez could get up to 10 years in prison, Iwamasa up to 15 years and Fleming up to 25 years.

    Multiple messages seeking comment from attorneys for the three men were not returned.

    Sangha could get life in prison if convicted as charged, while Plasencia could get up to 120 years. Each has a trial date in October, but it is highly unlikely any would be facing a jury by then, and the two may be tried together. They also could face testimony from the co-defendants who reached plea agreements.

    Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar ruled Sangha should be held without bond while awaiting trial, citing prosecutors’ contentions that she had destroyed evidence and funded a lavish lifestyle with drug sales even after Perry’s death.

    The judge agreed to release Plasencia after he posted a $100,000 bond.

    His attorney argued the Perry case was “isolated” and the doctor should be allowed to treat patients who depended on him at his one-man practice while awaiting trial.

    “I’m not buying that argument,” Sagar said, but agreed Plasencia could see patients so long as they signed a document in which he acknowledged the charges.

    “People have probably already heard about it from the amount of press,” Sacks told the judge, noting if they hadn’t, they would soon.

    Records show Plasencia’s medical license has been in good standing with no records of complaints, though it is set to expire in October and he could face action. He already has surrendered his federal license to prescribe more dangerous drugs.

    Prosecutors and police presented the Perry case as part of a major pushback against a rise in the illegal use of ketamine that has shadowed the broadening of its legal use.

    Los Angeles police said in May they were working with the U.S. Drug Enforcment Administration and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service with a probe into how Perry got the drug. His autopsy, released in December, found the amount of ketamine in his blood was in the range used for general anesthesia during surgery.

    “As Matthew Perry’s ketamine addiction grew, he wanted more and he wanted it faster and cheaper. That is how he ended up buying from street dealers and stole the ketamine that ultimately led to his death,” U.S. Drug Enforcement Administrator Anne Milgram said Thursday. “In doing so, he followed the arc that we have tragically seen with many others. The substance use disorder begins in a doctor’s office and ends in the street.”

    Perry had years of struggles with addiction dating back to his time on NBC’s megahit sitcom, “Friends,” for 10 seasons from 1994 to 2004. Playing Chandler Bing, he became one of the biggest television stars of his generation alongside Jennifer Aniston, Courteney Cox, Lisa Kudrow, Matt LeBlanc and David Schwimmer.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • An ex-Kansas police chief who led a raid on a newspaper is charged with obstruction of justice

    An ex-Kansas police chief who led a raid on a newspaper is charged with obstruction of justice

    [ad_1]

    TOPEKA, Kan. — A former central Kansas police chief who led a raid last year on a weekly newspaper has been charged with felony obstruction of justice and is accused of persuading a potential witness for an investigation into his conduct of withholding information from authorities.

    The single charge against former Marion Police Chief Gideon Cody alleges that he knowingly or intentionally influenced the witness to withhold information on the day of the raid of the Marion County Record and the home of its publisher or sometime within the following six days. The charge was filed Monday in state district court in Marion County and is not more specific about Cody’s alleged conduct.

    However, a report from two special prosecutors last week referenced text messages between Cody and the business owner after the raid. The business owner has said that Cody asked her to delete text messages between them, fearing people could get the wrong idea about their relationship, which she said was professional and platonic.

    Cody justified the raid by saying he had evidence the newspaper, Publisher Eric Meyer and one of its reporters, Phyllis Zorn, had committed identity theft or other computer crimes in verifying the authenticity of a copy of the business owner’s state driving record provided to the newspaper by an acquaintance. The business owner was seeking Marion City Council approval for a liquor license and the record showed that she potentially had driven without a valid license for years. However, she later had her license reinstated.

    The prosecutors’ report concluded that no crime was committed by Meyer, Zorn or the newspaper and that Cody reached an erroneous conclusion about their conduct because of a poor investigation. The charge was filed by one of the special prosecutors, Barry Wilkerson, the top prosecutor in Riley County in northeastern Kansas.

    The Associated Press left a message seeking comment at a possible cellphone number for Cody, and it was not immediately returned Tuesday. Attorneys representing Cody in a federal lawsuit over the raid are not representing him in the criminal case and did not immediately know who was representing him.

    Police body-camera footage of the August 2023 raid on the publisher’s home shows his 98-year-old mother, Joan Meyer, visibly upset and telling officers, “Get out of my house!” She co-owned the paper, lived with her son and died of a heart attack the next afternoon.

    The prosecutors said they could not charge Cody or other officers involved in the raid over her death because there was no evidence they believed the raid posed a risk to her life. Eric Meyer has blamed the stress of the raid for her death.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Hunter Biden was hired by Romanian businessman trying to ‘influence’ US agencies, prosecutors say

    Hunter Biden was hired by Romanian businessman trying to ‘influence’ US agencies, prosecutors say

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Hunter Biden was hired by a Romanian businessman accused of corruption who was trying to “influence U.S. government policy” during Joe Biden’s term as vice president, prosecutors said in court papers Wednesday.

    Special counsel David Weiss’ team said Hunter Biden’s business associate will testify at the upcoming federal tax trial of the president’s son about the arrangement with the executive, Gabriel Popoviciu, who was facing criminal investigation at the time in Romania.

    The allegations are likely to bring a fresh wave of criticism of Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings, which have been the center of Republicans’ investigations into the president’s family. Hunter Biden has blasted Republican inquiries into his family’s business affairs as politically motivated, and has insisted he never involved his father in his business.

    An attorney for Hunter Biden didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Wednesday.

    Prosecutors plan to introduce evidence that Hunter Biden and his business associate “received compensation from a foreign principal who was attempting to influence U.S. policy and public opinion,” according to the filing. Popoviciu wanted U.S. government agencies to probe the Romanian bribery investigation he was facing in the hopes that would end his legal trouble, according to prosecutors.

    Popoviciu is identified only in court papers as G.P., but the details line up with information released in the congressional investigation and media reporting about Hunter Biden’s legal work in Romania.

    Popoviciu was sentenced to seven years in prison in 2017 after being convicted of real estate fraud. He denied any wrongdoing. An attorney who previously represented Popoviciu didn’t immediately respond to a phone message Wednesday.

    Prosecutors say Hunter Biden agreed with his business associate to help Popoviciu fight the criminal charges against him. But prosecutors say they were concerned that “lobbying work might cause political ramifications” for Joe Biden, so the arrangement was structured in a way that “concealed the true nature of the work” for Popoviciu, prosecutors allege.

    Hunter Biden’s business associate and Popoviciu signed an agreement to make it look like Popoviciu’s payments were for “management services to real estate prosperities in Romania.” However, prosecutors said, “That was not actually what G.P. was paying for.”

    In fact, Popoviciu and Hunter’s business associate agreed that they would be paid for their work to “attempt to influence U.S. government agencies to investigate the Romanian investigation,” prosecutors said. Hunter Biden’s business associate was paid more than $3 million, which was split with Hunter and another business partner, prosecutors say.

    The claims were made in court papers as prosecutors responded to a request by Hunter Biden’s legal team to bar from his upcoming trial any reference to allegations of improper political influence that have dogged the president’s son for years. While Republicans’ investigation has raised ethical questions, no evidence has emerged that the president acted corruptly or accepted bribes in his current role or his previous office as vice president.

    Hunter Biden’s lawyers have said in court papers that he has been “the target of politically motivated attacks and conspiracy theories” about his foreign business dealings. But they noted he “has never been charged with any crime relating to these unfounded allegations, and the Special Counsel should thus be precluded from even raising such issues at trial.”

    Hunter Biden’s trial set to begin next month in Los Angeles centers on charges that he failed to pay at least $1.4 million in taxes over four years during a period in which he has acknowledged struggling with a drug addiction.

    Prosecutors say they won’t introduce any evidence that Hunter Biden was directly paid by a foreign government “or evidence that the defendant received compensation for actions taken by his father that impacted national or international politics.”

    Still, prosecutors say what Hunter Biden agreed to do for Popoviciu is relevant at trial because it “demonstrates his state and mind and intent” during the years he’s accused of failing to pay his taxes.

    “It is also evidence that the defendant’s actions do not reflect someone with a diminished capacity, given that he agreed to attempt to influence U.S. public policy and receive millions of dollars” in the agreement with his business associate, prosecutors wrote.

    The tax trial comes months after Hunter Biden was convicted of three felony charges over the purchase of a gun in 2018. Prosecutors argued that the president’s son lied on a mandatory gun-purchase form by saying he was not illegally using or addicted to drugs.

    He could face up to 25 years in prison at sentencing set for Nov. 13 in Wilmington, Delaware, but as a first-time offender he is likely to get far less time or avoid prison entirely.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Man known as pro-democracy activist convicted in US of giving China intel on dissidents

    Man known as pro-democracy activist convicted in US of giving China intel on dissidents

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — A Chinese American scholar was convicted Tuesday of U.S. charges of using his reputation as a pro-democracy activist to gather information on dissidents and feed it to his homeland’s government.

    A federal jury in New York delivered the verdict in the case of Shujun Wang, who helped found a pro-democracy group in the city.

    Prosecutors said that at the behest of China’s main intelligence agency, the Ministry of State Security, Wang lived a double life for over a decade. He held himself out as a critic of the Chinese government so that he could build rapport with people who actually opposed it, then betrayed their trust by telling Beijing what they said and planned, prosecutors said.

    “The indictment could have been the plot of a spy novel, but the evidence is shockingly real that the defendant was a secret agent for the Chinese government,” Brooklyn-based U.S. attorney Breon Peace said in a statement after the verdict.

    Wang had pleaded not guilty. His lawyers cast him as someone who was forthcoming with U.S. authorities about activities he saw as innocuous, and they disputed that his communications were truly under Chinese officials’ direction or control.

    “The jury felt they were and that was enough to convict him, even though there was no evidence that what he did caused any harm, was of any benefit to the Chinese government or that Professor Wang is anything other than a patriotic American who has devoted his life to fighting the authoritarian regime in China,” Zachary Margulis-Ohnuma said after the verdict.

    Wang, 75, was convicted of charges including conspiring to act as a foreign agent without notifying the attorney general. The charges carry the potential for up to 25 years in prison, though sentencing guidelines for any given case can vary depending on a defendant’s history and other factors.

    Wang’s sentencing is set for Jan. 9. Meanwhile, four Chinese officials who were charged alongside him remain at large.

    They are among dozens of people whom U.S. prosecutors have pursued to fight what Washington views as “transnational repression,” or deploying government operatives to harass, threaten and silence critics living abroad. The Chinese embassy in Washington disputes that the country engages in the practice, saying that it doesn’t interfere in other countries’ internal affairs, abides by international law and respects foreign nations’ judicial sovereignty.

    Liu Pengyu, a spokesperson for the Chinese embassy, said in a statement Tuesday that he was unaware of the specifics of the Wang case but that China opposes the United States’ “slander,” “political manipulation” and “malicious fabrication of the so-called ‘transnational suppression’ narrative and its blatant prosecution of officials from relevant Chinese departments.”

    Wang came to New York in 1994 to teach after doing so at a Chinese university. He later became a U.S. citizen.

    He helped found the Queens-based Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang Memorial Foundation, named for two Chinese Communist Party leaders who were sympathetic to calls for reform in the 1980s. A message was sent to the foundation seeking comment on Wang’s case.

    Prosecutors say that underneath a veneer of advocating for change in China, Wang acted as a covert pipeline for information that Beijing wanted on Hong Kong democracy protestors, advocates for Taiwanese independence, Uyghur and Tibetan activists and others in the U.S. and elsewhere.

    Wang composed emails — styled as “diaries” — that recounted conversations, meetings and plans of various critics of the Chinese government.

    One message was about events commemorating the 1989 protests and bloody crackdown in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, prosecutors said. Other emails talked about people planning demonstrations during various visits that Chinese President Xi Jinping made to the U.S.

    Instead of sending the emails and creating a digital trail, Wang saved them as drafts that Chinese intelligence officers could read by logging in with a shared password, prosecutors said.

    In other, encrypted messages, Wang relayed details of upcoming pro-democracy events and plans to meet with a prominent Hong Kong dissident while the latter was in the U.S., according to an indictment.

    During a series of FBI interviews between 2017 and 2021, Wang initially said he had no contacts with the Ministry of State Security, but he later acknowledged on videotape that the intelligence agency asked him to gather information on democracy advocates and that he sometimes did, FBI agents testified.

    But, they said, he claimed he didn’t provide anything really valuable, just information already in the public domain.

    Wang’s lawyers portrayed him as a gregarious academic with nothing to hide.

    “In general, fair to say he was very open and talkative with you, right?” defense attorney Zachary Margulis-Ohnuma asked an undercover agent who approached Wang in 2021 under the guise of being affiliated with the Chinese security ministry.

    “He was,” said the agent, who testified under a pseudonym. He recorded his conversation with Wang at the latter’s house in Connecticut.

    “Did he seem a little lonely?” Margulis-Ohnuma asked a bit later. The agent said he didn’t recall.

    Wang told agents his “diaries” were advertisements for the foundation’s meetings or write-ups that he was publishing in newspapers, according to testimony. He also suggested to the undercover agent that publishing them would be a way to deflect any suspicion from U.S. authorities.

    Another agent, Garrett Igo, told jurors that when Wang found out in 2019 that investigators would search his phone for any contacts in the Chinese government, he paused for a minute.

    “And then he said, ‘Do anything. I don’t care,’” Igo recalled.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trial starts for a Polish man accused of punching Danish prime minister in Copenhagen

    Trial starts for a Polish man accused of punching Danish prime minister in Copenhagen

    [ad_1]

    COPENHAGEN, Denmark (AP) — The trial of a Polish man accused of punching Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen in the shoulder in June began Tuesday, with Frederiksen not expected to appear in court.

    She suffered a minor whiplash injury when a man assaulted her in central Copenhagen on June 7 and canceled her schedule for the next few days.

    The Ekstra Bladet newspaper said the unidentified 39-year-old Polish man is charged with punching Frederiksen’s right shoulder with a clenched fist, causing her to lose her balance, but not fall.

    Defense lawyer Henrik Karl Nielsen told Copenhagen District Court that his client pleaded not guilty, it said.

    The Polish man, who has been living in Denmark for five years, told the court that he was “intoxicated by alcohol but not drunk” and was just wandering around when he saw Frederiksen, Danish public broadcaster DR reported.

    A police officer assigned to Frederiksen’s protection told the court that she had stopped to talk on the phone when the man walked up to her and hit her after saying something incomprehensible.

    “In the situation, it seemed he was angry,” the bodyguard, identified only by his police number KF081, told the court, according to DR.

    The Polish man was immediately arrested.

    Frederiksen was taking a break from campaigning for her Social Democratic Party in European Parliament elections when the assault occurred at a busy downtown Copenhagen plaza. The attack was not linked to the campaign event.

    The man, who has been held in pretrial custody since the assault, also faces other charges including sexual harassment by exposing himself to passing people and groping a woman at a commuter train station, and fraud involving deposit-marked bottles and cans at two supermarkets. He has confessed to those charges.

    Prosecutors said the suspect has 22 previous convictions for petty crimes, mainly shoplifting, DR reported.

    He told the court that his parents live in Denmark and his wife and daughter are in Poland.

    Frederiksen, 46, is the leader of the Social Democratic Party and has been Denmark’s prime minister since 2019. She led the country through the global COVID-19 pandemic and a controversial 2020 decision to wipe out Denmark’s entire captive mink population to minimize the risk of the mammals spreading the virus.

    The trial is scheduled to end Wednesday, when a verdict is expected.

    The assault came as violence against politicians spread in the runup to the EU elections. In May, a candidate from Germany’s center-left Social Democrats was beaten and seriously injured while campaigning.

    In Slovakia, the campaign was overshadowed by an attempt to assassinate populist Prime Minister Robert Fico on May 15, sending shockwaves through the nation and reverberating throughout Europe. Fico was shot in the abdomen and seriously wounded. The suspect was immediately arrested and faces terror charges.

    Assaults on politicians in Denmark are rare.

    On March 23, 2003, two activists threw red paint at then-Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen inside parliament and were immediately arrested.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Did a father tell his teenage son to kill rapper PnB Rock? Jurors to hear closing arguments at trial

    Did a father tell his teenage son to kill rapper PnB Rock? Jurors to hear closing arguments at trial

    [ad_1]

    COMPTON, Calif. — The two sides at the murder trial in the killing of Philadelphia hip-hop star PnB Rock agree that a 17-year-old boy walked into Roscoe’s Chicken and Waffles restaurant in South Los Angeles, shot the rapper twice in the back and once in the chest.

    Both agree that the boy’s father, Freddie Trone, the defendant in the trial, helped his son after the shooting and tried to cover up the killing.

    But in the two-week trial’s closing arguments set for a Compton, California, courtroom on Monday, prosecutors will argue that Trone sent the boy into the restaurant with a gun and with orders to rob PnB Rock. The rapper, 30, was eating with his fiancee, the mother of his 4-year-old daughter.

    Trone’s lawyer says he is in no way guilty of murder, and has emphasized that he was not in the restaurant and did not pull the trigger. He said the evidence points to his son acting alone.

    Trone’s son is in custody of the county’s juvenile justice system, and a judge has found that he is not currently competent to stand trial.

    The Associated Press does not generally name minors accused of crimes.

    PnB Rock, whose legal name is Rakim Allen, was best known for his 2016 hit “Selfish” and for making guest appearances on other artists’ songs such as YFN Lucci’s “Everyday We Lit” and Ed Sheeran’s “Cross Me” with Chance the Rapper.

    The trial in his killing, not held in the downtown courthouse that is home to most high-profile proceedings, has attracted little attention. The gallery has remained nearly empty, with Rolling Stone the only media outlet giving it regular coverage.

    FBI agents arrested Trone in Las Vegas more than two weeks after the Sept. 12, 2022, shooting in Las Vegas. He has pleaded not guilty to one count of murder, two counts of second-degree robbery and one count of conspiracy to commit robbery.

    A co-defendant who is not charged with murder, 46-year-old Tremont Jones, has pleaded guilty to two counts of robbery, one count of conspiracy, and one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm.

    Prosecutors allege Jones tipped off Trone to the rapper’s location, and showed jurors surveillance video of the two men talking outside the restaurant minutes before the killing.

    Allen’s fiancee, Stephanie Sibounheuang, was the trial’s most dramatic witness. She said she had a “bad feeling” about the situation before they walked into the restaurant. The couple was set to fly home to Atlanta later in the day.

    She tearfully testified that the two had just gotten their food at Roscoe’s when the ski-masked shooter appeared, put his gun in Allen’s face, and demanded all the couple’s jewelry, which she said was worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

    Sibounheuang said he seemed like a kid “who didn’t know what he was doing.”

    She said the shooter then fired on Allen, who pushed her out of the way and shielded her to protect her as he was shot. She called him a “hero” who saved her life.

    The masked shooter then collected a watch and other jewelry off Allen.

    Surveillance footage showed that he fled about a minute after entering.

    Sibounheuang put pressure on Allen’s wounds to try to stop the bleeding, as did the first police officer who arrived at the scene, but the rapper was later declared dead.

    An autopsy report states that Allen was shot once in the chest and twice in the back.

    Investigators found that Allen had a gun on him at the time, but said he did not pull it out before he was shot.

    Sibounheuang posted a picture of the couple’s food on Instagram shortly before the shooting, but she testified that she removed the tag on it that would have shown which of the six Southern California Roscoe’s restaurants where they were eating.

    Authorities initially said that post might have led to the robbery and shooting, but later backed off and instead blamed Jones for leading Trone and his son to the restaurant.

    Surveillance footage from later in the day showed Trone and his son entering an apartment, and leaving soon after with the son wearing different clothes and holding a trash bag.

    Prosecutors allege Trone set the getaway car on fire a few blocks from their home as part of a cover-up.

    Trone’s wife and the teen’s stepmother, Shauntel Trone, was also arrested shortly after the shooting. Shortly before the trial she pleaded no contest to being an accessory after the fact.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former lead BBC news presenter pleads guilty to 3 counts of making indecent images of children

    Former lead BBC news presenter pleads guilty to 3 counts of making indecent images of children

    [ad_1]

    LONDON — Huw Edwards, the BBC’s former top news presenter, pleaded guilty Wednesday to three counts of making indecent images of children.

    The offenses he pleaded guilty to at Westminster Magistrates’ Court in central London during a 26-minute hearing involved images shared on WhatsApp between December 2020 and August 2021.

    Edwards has been remanded on bail until a sentencing hearing on Sept. 16. He could face up to 10 years in prison.

    The court heard that Edwards, 62, was involved in an online chat with an adult man on the messaging service who sent him 377 sexual images, of which 41 were indecent images of children.

    The images that were sent included seven of what are known as “category A,” which are the most indecent. Of those, the estimated age of most of the children was between 13 and 15, but one was aged between 7 and 9, the court was told.

    The court also heard that the unnamed male asked Edwards on Feb. 2, 2021 whether what he was sending was too young. Edwards told him not to send any underage images. Five more, though, were sent, and the exchange of pornographic images continued until April 2022.

    Speaking in Edwards’ defense, his lawyer Philip Evans said there is “no suggestion” that his client had “in the traditional sense of the word, created any image of any sort.”

    Edwards, he added, “did not keep any images, did not send any to anyone else and did not and has not sought similar images from anywhere else.”

    Edwards was one of the BBC’s most prominent figures, as well as one of its highest-paid before he was suspended in July 2023 for separate claims made last year. He later resigned for health reasons.

    His lawyer Evans told the court that Edwards had “both mental and physical” health issues, and that he is “not just of good character, but of exceptional character.”

    In a four-decade career at the BBC, Edwards had become one of its trusted voices. He was the lead anchor on the BBC’s nighttime news and led BBC coverage of the funeral of Queen Elizabeth II in 2022.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FACT FOCUS: Trump wasn’t exonerated by the presidential immunity ruling, even though he says he was

    FACT FOCUS: Trump wasn’t exonerated by the presidential immunity ruling, even though he says he was

    [ad_1]

    Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday misrepresented in a social media post what the U.S. Supreme Court’s Monday ruling on presidential immunity means for his civil and criminal cases.

    “TOTAL EXONERATION!” he wrote in the post on his Truth Social platform. “It is clear that the Supreme Court’s Brilliantly Written and Historic Decision ENDS all of Crooked Joe Biden’s Witch Hunts against me, including the WHITE HOUSE AND DOJ INSPIRED CIVIL HOAXES in New York.”

    But none of Trump’s pending cases have been dismissed as a result of the ruling, nor have the verdicts already reached against him been overturned. The ruling does amount to a major victory for the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, whose legal strategy has focused on delaying court proceedings until after the 2024 election.

    Here’s a closer look at the facts.

    CLAIM: The Supreme Court’s ruling that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution means “total exoneration” for former President Donald Trump.

    THE FACTS: Although the historic 6-3 ruling is a win for Trump, he has not been exonerated and his legal troubles are far from over. A delay of his Washington trial on charges of election interference has been indefinitely extended as a result. Also, he still faces charges in two other criminal cases, and the verdicts already reached against him in a criminal and a civil case have not been overturned.

    Barbara McQuade, a law professor at the University of Michigan and former U.S. attorney for the state’s Eastern District, told The Associated Press that Trump’s claim is “inaccurate for a number of reasons.”

    “The court found immunity from prosecution, not exoneration,” she wrote in an email. “The court did not say that Trump’s conduct did not amount to criminal behavior. Just that prosecutors are not allowed to prosecute him for it because of the special role of a president and the need to permit him to make ‘bold’ and ‘fearless’ decisions without concern for criminal consequences.”

    McQuade wrote that Trump’s case over classified documents found at his Mar-a-Lago estate won’t be affected, as it arose from conduct committed after he left the White House. She added that any impact on his New York hush money trial “seems unlikely” since the crimes were committed in a personal capacity.

    “In addition, the Court’s opinion is solely focused on immunity for criminal conduct,” McQuade continued, explaining that it will not protect him from civil liability in his cases regarding defamatory statements about advice columnist E. Jean Carroll or fraudulent business practices conducted at the Trump Organization.

    Trump’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    The Supreme Court’s conservative majority said former presidents have absolute immunity from prosecution for official acts that fall within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” and are presumptively entitled to immunity for all official acts. Unofficial, or private, actions are exempt from such immunity.

    This means that special counsel Jack Smith cannot proceed with significant allegations in his indictment accusing Trump of plotting to overturn his 2020 presidential election loss, or he must at least defend their use in future proceedings before the trial judge.

    The case has not been dismissed. It was instead sent back to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who must now “carefully analyze” whether other allegations involve official conduct for which the president would be immune from prosecution. The trial was supposed to have begun in March, but has been on hold since December to allow Trump to pursue his Supreme Court appeal.

    However, the justices did knock out one aspect of the indictment, finding that Trump is “absolutely immune” from prosecution for alleged conduct involving discussions with the Justice Department.

    The opinion also stated that Trump is “at least presumptively immune” from allegations that he tried to pressure Vice President Mike Pence on Jan. 6, 2021, to reject certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s electoral vote win. But prosecutors can try to make the case that Trump’s pressure on Pence can still be part of the case against him, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.

    It is all but certain that the ruling means Trump will not face trial in Washington ahead of the 2024 election, as the need for further analysis is expected to tie up the case for months with legal wrangling over whether actions in the indictment were official or unofficial, the AP has reported.

    Trump is facing charges in two other criminal cases, one over his alleged interference in Georgia’s 2020 election and the other over classified documents found at his Mar-a-Lago estate after he left the White House. Trump’s lawyers have asserted presidential immunity in both cases, but a ruling on the matter has not been made in either.

    The former president was convicted in May of 34 felony counts in his hush money trial in New York. After Monday’s ruling, the New York judge who presided over that trial postponed Trump’s sentencing until at least September and agreed to weigh the impact of the presidential immunity decision.

    Trump was ordered in February to pay a $454 million penalty as part of a civil fraud lawsuit, for lying about his wealth for years as he built the real estate empire that vaulted him to stardom and the White House. It is still under appeal.

    In May 2023, a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll in 1996 and for defaming her over the allegations, awarding her $5 million. Carroll was awarded an additional $83.3 million in January by a separate jury for Trump’s continued social media attacks against her. An appeal of the former decision was rejected in April. The latter case is still being appealed.

    ___

    Find AP Fact Checks here: https://apnews.com/APFactCheck.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Kevin Spacey’s waterfront Baltimore condo sold at auction after foreclosure

    Kevin Spacey’s waterfront Baltimore condo sold at auction after foreclosure

    [ad_1]

    BALTIMORE (AP) — Kevin Spacey’s $5.6 million waterfront condominium in Baltimore has been sold at auction amid the disgraced actor’s financial struggles following a slew of sexual misconduct allegations.

    Last summer, a London jury acquitted Spacey on sexual assault charges stemming from allegations by four men dating back 20 years. That was his second court victory since he saw off a $40 million lawsuit in 2022 in New York brought by “Star Trek: Discovery” actor Anthony Rapp.

    But Spacey said in an emotional interview with British broadcast host Piers Morgan last month that he was millions of dollars in debt, largely because of unpaid legal bills, and facing foreclosure on the Baltimore property.

    Spacey moved to the Baltimore area when he started shooting the hugely popular political thriller “House of Cards” there in 2012. Speaking through tears during the interview, Spacey said he would have to go back to Baltimore and put all his things in storage. He said he nearly had to file for bankruptcy a couple times but managed to dodge it.

    His luxury condo on Baltimore’s Inner Harbor sold at auction Thursday morning for $3.24 million, according to the auctioneer’s website. It sits on a floating pier and boasts six bedrooms, seven full baths, an elevator, sauna, home theater, rooftop terrace, multiple verandas and a four-car garage.

    A small group of potential buyers gathered on the steps of the downtown Baltimore Circuit Court building and made their bids, according to local media reports. The suggested opening bid was $1.5 million.

    The winning bidder was acting as proxy for a real estate developer and local businessman whose identity hasn’t been disclosed, The Baltimore Sun reported.

    During tearful testimony in a London courtroom last summer, Spacey denied the allegations against him and told the jury how they had destroyed his acting career as the #MeToo movement gained momentum in the U.S.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Justin Timberlake’s lawyer says pop singer wasn’t intoxicated, argues DUI charges should be dropped

    Justin Timberlake’s lawyer says pop singer wasn’t intoxicated, argues DUI charges should be dropped

    [ad_1]

    Justin Timberlake ’s lawyer said Friday that the pop singer wasn’t intoxicated during a traffic stop last month, as he seeks to get his drunken driving charge in New York’s Hamptons dismissed, citing errors in documents submitted by police.

    But Sag Harbor Village Justice Justice Carl Irace ordered Timberlake to be re-arraigned Aug. 2 with the corrected paperwork.

    He also agreed the former NSYNC member, who is currently on tour in Europe, could appear virtually for the proceeding. Timberlake didn’t attend Friday’s hearing as his appearance was waived in advance.

    Timberlake’s lawyer, Edward Burke, said after the hearing that police made “very significant errors” and expects the charge to be dismissed. He also maintained that Timberlake didn’t drive drunk.

    “He was not intoxicated,” Burke told reporters outside court. “I’ll say it again. Justin Timberlake was not intoxicated.”

    Suffolk County District Attorney Ray Tierney’s office, which is prosecuting the case, described the paperwork issue as a “ministerial error” and that an amended charging document was filed July 2.

    “The facts and circumstance of the case have not been changed or amended,” spokesperson Emily O’Neil said in an email.

    Burke, in a follow-up statement, suggested there were other problems with the arrest documents but didn’t elaborate.

    “The police made a number of very significant errors in this case,” he said. “In court today, you heard the district attorney try to fix one of those errors. But that’s just one and there are many others. Sometimes the police make mistakes and this is just one of those instances.”

    Timberlake respects law enforcement and the judicial process and cooperated with officers and treated them with respect throughout his arrest last month, Burke added.

    Tierney’s office declined to respond to Burke’s comments.

    “We stand ready to litigate the underlying facts of this case in court, rather than in the press,” O’Neil said.

    Timberlake was charged with the misdemeanor on June 18 after police said he ran a stop sign and veered out of his lane in Sag Harbor, a onetime whaling village mentioned in Herman Melville’s classic novel “Moby-Dick” that’s nestled amid the Hamptons, around 100 miles (160 kilometers) east of New York City.

    The boy band singer-turned-solo star and actor was driving a 2025 BMW around 12:30 a.m. when an officer stopped him and determined he was intoxicated, according to a court document.

    “His eyes were bloodshot and glassy, a strong odor of an alcoholic beverage was emanating from his breath, he was unable to divide attention, he had slowed speech, he was unsteady afoot and he performed poorly on all standardized field sobriety tests,” the court papers said.

    Timberlake, 43, told the officer at the time that he had one martini and was following some friends home, according to the documents. After being arrested and taken to a police station in nearby East Hampton, he refused a breath test.

    The 10-time Grammy winner began performing as a young Disney Mouseketeer, rose to fame as part of the boy band NSYNC and embarked on a solo recording career in the early 2000s.

    ___

    Associated Press reporter Karen Matthews in New York contributed to this story.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Justice Department defends group’s right to sue over AI robocalls sent to New Hampshire voters

    Justice Department defends group’s right to sue over AI robocalls sent to New Hampshire voters

    [ad_1]

    CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — The federal Justice Department is defending the legal right to challenge robocalls sent to New Hampshire voters that used artificial intelligence to mimic President Joe Biden’s voice.

    Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke and U.S. Attorney Jane Young filed a statement of interest Thursday in the lawsuit brought by the League of Women Voters against Steve Kramer — the political consultant behind the calls — and the three companies involved in transmitting them.

    Kramer, who is facing separate criminal charges related to the calls, has yet to respond to the lawsuit filed in March, but the companies filed a motion to dismiss last month. Among other arguments, they said robocalls don’t violate the section of the Voting Rights Act that prohibits attempting to or actually intimidating, threatening or coercing voters and that there is no private right of action under the law.

    The Justice Department countered that the law clearly allows aggrieved individuals and organizations representing them to enforce their rights under the law. And it said the companies were incorrect in arguing that the law doesn’t apply to robocalls because they are merely “deceptive” and not intimidating, threatening or coercive.

    “Robocalls in particular can violate voting rights by incentivizing voters to remain away from the polls, deceive voters into believing false information and provoke fear among the targeted individuals,” Young said in a statement. “The U.S. Attorney’s Office commends any private citizen willing to stand up against these aggressive tactics and exercise their rights to participate in the enforcement process for the Voting Rights Act.”

    At issue is a message sent to thousands of New Hampshire voters on Jan. 21 that featured a voice similar to Biden’s falsely suggesting that voting in the state’s first-in-the-nation presidential primary two days later would preclude them from casting ballots in November. Kramer, who paid a magician and self-described “digital nomad” who does technology consulting $150 to create the recording, has said he orchestrated the call to publicize the potential dangers of AI and spur action from lawmakers.

    He faces 26 criminal charges in New Hampshire, along with a proposed $6 million fine from the Federal Communications Commission, which has taken multiple steps in recent months to combat the growing use of AI tools in political communications.

    On Thursday, it advanced a proposal that would require political advertisers to disclose their use of artificial intelligence in broadcast television and radio ads, though it is unclear whether new regulations may be in place before the November presidential election.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Prosecutors file Boeing’s plea deal to resolve felony fraud charge tied to 737 Max crashes

    Prosecutors file Boeing’s plea deal to resolve felony fraud charge tied to 737 Max crashes

    [ad_1]

    The Justice Department submitted an agreement with Boeing on Wednesday in which the aerospace giant will plead guilty to a fraud charge for misleading U.S. regulators who approved the 737 Max jetliner before two of the planes crashed, killing 346 people.

    The detailed plea agreement was filed in federal district court in Texas. The American aerospace company and the Justice Department reached a deal on the guilty plea and the agreement’s broad terms earlier this month.

    The finalized version states Boeing admitted that through its employees, it made an agreement “by dishonest means” to defraud the Federal Aviation Administration group that evaluated the 737 Max. Because of Boeing’s deception, the FAA had “incomplete and inaccurate information” about the plane’s flight-control software and how much training pilots would need for it, the plea agreement says.

    U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor can accept the agreement and the sentence worked out between Boeing and prosecutors, or he could reject it, which likely would lead to new negotiations between the company and the Justice Department.

    The deal calls for the appointment of an independent compliance monitor, three years of probation and a $243.6 million fine. It also requires Boeing to invest at least $455 million “in its compliance, quality, and safety programs.”

    Boeing was accused of misleading the Federal Aviation Administration about aspects of the Max before the agency certified the plane for flight. Boeing did not tell airlines and pilots about the new software system, called MCAS, that could turn the plane’s nose down without input from pilots if a sensor detected that the plane might go into an aerodynamic stall.

    Max planes crashed in 2018 in Indonesia and 2019 in Ethiopia after a faulty reading from the sensor pushed the nose down and pilots were unable to regain control.

    Boeing avoided prosecution in 2021 by reaching a $2.5 billion settlement with the Justice Department that included a previous $243.6 million fine. It appeared that the fraud charge would be permanently dismissed until January, when a panel covering an unused exit blew off a 737 Max during an Alaska Airlines flight. That led to new scrutiny of the company’s safety.

    In May of this year, prosecutors said Boeing failed to live up to terms of the 2021 agreement by failing to make promised changes to detect and prevent violations of federal anti-fraud laws. Boeing agreed this month to plead guilty to the felony fraud charge instead of enduring a potentially lengthy public trial.

    The role and authority of the monitor is viewed as a key provision of the new plea deal, according to experts in corporate governance and white-collar crime. Paul Cassell, a lawyer for the families, has said that families of the crash victims should have the right to propose a monitor for the judge to appoint.

    In Wednesday’s filing, the Justice Department said that Boeing “took considerable steps” to improve its anti-fraud compliance program since 2021, but the changes “have not been fully implemented or tested to demonstrate that they would prevent and detect similar misconduct in the future.”

    That’s where the independent monitor will come in, “to reduce the risk of misconduct,” the plea deal states.

    Some of the passengers’ relatives plan to ask the judge to reject the plea deal. They want a full trial, a harsher penalty for Boeing, and many of them want current and former Boeing executives to be charged.

    If the judge approves the deal, it would apply to the the criminal charge stemming from the 737 Max crashes. It would not resolve other matters, potentially including litigation related to the Alaska Airlines blowout.

    O’Connor will give lawyers for the families seven days to file legal motions opposing the plea deal. Boeing and the Justice Department will have 14 days to respond, and the families will get five days to reply to the filings by the company and the government.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Prosecutors file Boeing’s plea deal to resolve felony fraud charge tied to 737 Max crashes

    Prosecutors file Boeing’s plea deal to resolve felony fraud charge tied to 737 Max crashes

    [ad_1]

    The Justice Department submitted an agreement with Boeing on Wednesday in which the aerospace giant will plead guilty to a fraud charge for misleading U.S. regulators who approved the 737 Max jetliner before two of the planes crashed, killing 346 people.

    The detailed plea agreement was filed in federal district court in Texas. The American aerospace company and the Justice Department reached a deal on the guilty plea and the agreement’s broad terms earlier this month.

    The finalized version states that Boeing admitted that through its employees, it made an agreement “by dishonest means” to defraud the Federal Aviation Administration group that evaluated the 737 Max. Because of Boeing’s deception, the FAA had “incomplete and inaccurate information” about the plane’s flight-control software and how much training pilots would need for it.

    U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor can accept the agreement and the sentence worked out between Boeing and prosecutors, or he could reject it, which likely would lead to new negotiations between the company and the Justice Department.

    The deal calls for the appointment of an independent compliance monitor, three years of probation and a $243.6 million fine. It also requires Boeing to invest at least $455 million “in its compliance, quality, and safety programs.”

    Boeing was accused of misleading the Federal Aviation Administration about aspects of the Max before the agency certified the plane for flight. Boeing did not tell airlines and pilots about the new software system, called MCAS, that could turn the plane’s nose down without input from pilots if a sensor detected that the plane might go into an aerodynamic stall.

    Max planes crashed in 2018 in Indonesia and 2019 in Ethiopia after a faulty reading from the sensor pushed the nose down and pilots were unable to regain control.

    Boeing avoided prosecution in 2021 by reaching a $2.5 billion settlement with the Justice Department that included a previous $243.6 million fine. It appeared that the fraud charge would be permanently dismissed until January, when a panel covering an unused exit blew off a 737 Max during an Alaska Airlines flight. That led to new scrutiny of the company’s safety.

    In May of this year, prosecutors said Boeing failed to live up to terms of the 2021 agreement by failing to make promised changes to detect and prevent violations of federal anti-fraud laws. Boeing agreed this month to plead guilty to the felony fraud charge instead of enduring a potentially lengthy public trial.

    The role and authority of the monitor is viewed as a key provision of the new plea deal, according to experts in corporate governance and white-collar crime. Paul Cassell, a lawyer for the families, has said that families of the crash victims should have the right to propose a monitor for the judge to appoint.

    Some of the passengers’ relatives plan to ask the judge to reject the plea deal. They want a full trial, a harsher penalty for Boeing, and many of them want current and former Boeing executives to be charged.

    If the judge approves the deal, it would apply to the the criminal charge stemming from the 737 Max crashes. It would not resolve other matters, potentially including litigation related to the Alaska Airlines blowout.

    O’Connor will give lawyers for the families seven days to file legal motions opposing the plea deal. Boeing and the Justice Department will have 14 days to respond, and the families will get five days to reply to the filings by the company and the government.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Russia seeks 18-year sentence for US reporter on trial for spying in highly politicized legal system

    Russia seeks 18-year sentence for US reporter on trial for spying in highly politicized legal system

    [ad_1]

    YEKATERINBURG, Russia — Russian prosecutors sought a prison sentence of 18 years on Friday for Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, who is on trial on espionage charges that his employer and the U.S. have denounced as fabricated.

    Gershkovich, 32, was arrested March 29, 2023, while on a reporting trip to the Ural Mountains city of Yekaterinburg. Authorities claimed, without offering any evidence, that he was gathering secret information for the U.S. He pleaded not guilty, according to the court, and The Wall Street Journal and the U.S. government have called the trial a sham.

    Gershkovich appeared in court for a second straight day Friday as the closed-door proceedings in Russia’s highly politicized legal system picked up speed. A verdict is expected later in the day, according to court officials.

    Unlike previous sessions in which reporters were allowed to see Gershkovich briefly before sessions began, there was no access to the courtroom this week and he was not seen, with no explanation given. Espionage and treason cases are typically shrouded in secrecy.

    Court officials said the prosecutors requested an 18-year sentence in a high-security prison during closing arguments. Russian courts convict more than 99% of defendants, and prosecutors can appeal sentences that they regard as too lenient. They even can appeal acquittals.

    “Evan’s wrongful detention has been an outrage since his unjust arrest 477 days ago, and it must end now,” the Journal said Thursday in a statement. “Even as Russia orchestrates its shameful sham trial, we continue to do everything we can to push for Evan’s immediate release and to state unequivocally: Evan was doing his job as a journalist, and journalism is not a crime. Bring him home now.”

    The U.S. State Department has declared Gershkovich “wrongfully detained,” committing the government to assertively seek his release.

    Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Wednesday at the United Nations that Moscow and Washington’s “special services” are discussing an exchange involving Gershkovich. Russia has previously signaled the possibility of a swap, but it says a verdict would have to come first. Even after a verdict, any such deal could take months or years.

    State Department deputy spokesman Vedant Patel on Thursday declined to discuss negotiations about a possible exchange, but said: “We have been clear from the get-go that Evan did nothing wrong and should not have been detained. To date, Russia has provided no evidence of a crime and has failed to justify Evan’s continued detention.”

    Gershkovich’s trial began June 26 in Yekaterinburg after he spent about 15 months in in Moscow’s notorious Lefortovo Prison.

    The Russian Prosecutor General’s office said last month the journalist is accused of “gathering secret information” on orders from the CIA about Uralvagonzavod, a plant about 150 kilometers (90 miles) north of Yekaterinburg that produces and repairs tanks and other military equipment.

    Lavrov on Wednesday reaffirmed the Kremlin claim that the government has “irrefutable evidence” against Gershkovich, although neither he nor any other Russian official has ever disclosed it.

    Gershkovich’s employer and U.S. officials have dismissed the charges as phony.

    “Evan has never been employed by the United States government. Evan is not a spy. Journalism is not a crime. And Evan should never have been detained in the first place,” White House national security spokesperson John Kirby said last month.

    Russia’s interpretation of what constitutes high crimes like espionage and treason is broad, with authorities often going after people who share publicly available information with foreigners and accusing them of divulging state secrets.

    Earlier this month, U.N. human rights experts said Russia violated international law by jailing Gershkovich and should release him “immediately.”

    Arrests of Americans are increasingly common in Russia, with nine U.S. citizens known to be detained there as tensions between the two countries have escalated over fighting in Ukraine.

    U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., Linda Thomas-Greenfield accused Moscow of treating “human beings as bargaining chips.” She singled out Gershkovich and ex-Marine Paul Whelan, 53, a corporate security director from Michigan, who is serving a 16-year sentence after being convicted on spying charges that he and the U.S. denied.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Russia seeks 18-year sentence for US reporter on trial for spying in highly politicized legal system

    Russia seeks 18-year sentence for US reporter on trial for spying in highly politicized legal system

    [ad_1]

    YEKATERINBURG, Russia — Russian prosecutors sought a prison sentence of 18 years on Friday for Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, who is on trial on espionage charges that his employer and the U.S. have denounced as fabricated.

    Gershkovich, 32, was arrested March 29, 2023, while on a reporting trip to the Ural Mountains city of Yekaterinburg. Authorities claimed, without offering any evidence, that he was gathering secret information for the U.S. He pleaded not guilty, according to the court, and The Wall Street Journal and the U.S. government have called the trial a sham.

    Gershkovich appeared in court for a second straight day Friday as the closed-door proceedings in Russia’s highly politicized legal system picked up speed. A verdict is expected later in the day, according to court officials.

    Unlike previous sessions in which reporters were allowed to see Gershkovich briefly before sessions began, there was no access to the courtroom this week and he was not seen, with no explanation given. Espionage and treason cases are typically shrouded in secrecy.

    Court officials said the prosecutors requested an 18-year sentence in a high-security prison during closing arguments. Russian courts convict more than 99% of defendants, and prosecutors can appeal sentences that they regard as too lenient. They even can appeal acquittals.

    “Evan’s wrongful detention has been an outrage since his unjust arrest 477 days ago, and it must end now,” the Journal said Thursday in a statement. “Even as Russia orchestrates its shameful sham trial, we continue to do everything we can to push for Evan’s immediate release and to state unequivocally: Evan was doing his job as a journalist, and journalism is not a crime. Bring him home now.”

    The U.S. State Department has declared Gershkovich “wrongfully detained,” committing the government to assertively seek his release.

    Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Wednesday at the United Nations that Moscow and Washington’s “special services” are discussing an exchange involving Gershkovich. Russia has previously signaled the possibility of a swap, but it says a verdict would have to come first. Even after a verdict, any such deal could take months or years.

    State Department deputy spokesman Vedant Patel on Thursday declined to discuss negotiations about a possible exchange, but said: “We have been clear from the get-go that Evan did nothing wrong and should not have been detained. To date, Russia has provided no evidence of a crime and has failed to justify Evan’s continued detention.”

    Gershkovich’s trial began June 26 in Yekaterinburg after he spent about 15 months in in Moscow’s notorious Lefortovo Prison.

    The Russian Prosecutor General’s office said last month the journalist is accused of “gathering secret information” on orders from the CIA about Uralvagonzavod, a plant about 150 kilometers (90 miles) north of Yekaterinburg that produces and repairs tanks and other military equipment.

    Lavrov on Wednesday reaffirmed the Kremlin claim that the government has “irrefutable evidence” against Gershkovich, although neither he nor any other Russian official has ever disclosed it.

    Gershkovich’s employer and U.S. officials have dismissed the charges as phony.

    “Evan has never been employed by the United States government. Evan is not a spy. Journalism is not a crime. And Evan should never have been detained in the first place,” White House national security spokesperson John Kirby said last month.

    Russia’s interpretation of what constitutes high crimes like espionage and treason is broad, with authorities often going after people who share publicly available information with foreigners and accusing them of divulging state secrets.

    Earlier this month, U.N. human rights experts said Russia violated international law by jailing Gershkovich and should release him “immediately.”

    Arrests of Americans are increasingly common in Russia, with nine U.S. citizens known to be detained there as tensions between the two countries have escalated over fighting in Ukraine.

    U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., Linda Thomas-Greenfield accused Moscow of treating “human beings as bargaining chips.” She singled out Gershkovich and ex-Marine Paul Whelan, 53, a corporate security director from Michigan, who is serving a 16-year sentence after being convicted on spying charges that he and the U.S. denied.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Boeing case puts a spotlight on plea agreements involving corporate defendants

    Boeing case puts a spotlight on plea agreements involving corporate defendants

    [ad_1]

    After two jetliner crashes killed 346 people, a $2.5 billion settlement that let Boeing avoid criminal prosecution failed to resolve questions about the safety of the aerospace giant’s planes.

    Federal prosecutors now accuse the company of failing to live up to terms of the 2021 settlement. Boeing has agreed to plead guilty to a felony fraud charge in a new deal with the Justice Department. The department hopes to file the detailed plea agreement Friday, but says it may need “a few more days.”

    Experts on corporate behavior say whether the new agreement has a more lasting impact on safety than the earlier settlement could come down to how much power is placed in the hands of an independent monitor who is assigned to oversee Boeing for three years. Prosecutors made the appointment of such a monitor a condition of the plea deal, which also calls for Boeing to pay a new $243.6 million fine.

    “Your real concern is protecting against the loss of future lives in future crashes, and that is something that the monitor can have more impact on than simply the amount of the fine,” said John Coffee, a law professor at Columbia University who studies corporate governance and white-collar crime.

    The finalized plea and sentence are due to be filed in U.S. District Court in Fort Worth, Texas. The filing will give a more precise description of how the compliance monitor will be chosen and the scope of the monitor’s duties. Already, the government appears to have backed away from a plan that would given Boeing the biggest role in picking the watchdog.

    Families of some of the passengers who died in the crashes have said they plan to oppose the agreement. They want a trial, not a plea deal, and they say Boeing should pay a $24 billion fine. Paul Cassell, a lawyer for the families, said the relatives of crash victims should have the right to propose a monitor for the judge to appoint.

    The Justice Department initially planned to select a monitor from a list of three nominees submitted by Boeing, and would ask the company for more names if necessary, according to participants in a June 30 briefing that department officials gave to passengers’ families and their lawyers.

    The deal that Boeing agreed to “in principle” a week later said the Justice Department would seek candidates through a public job posting on its website and then select one “with feedback from Boeing.” The precise extent of the company’s role was left unclear.

    Once the department and Boeing settle on a choice, prosecutors will tell U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor. If he doesn’t object within 10 days, the appointment would go through. The person picked would need to meet “specific qualifications” laid out in the posting and the department’s guidelines on selecting monitors in criminal cases, according to the filing.

    The monitor will oversee Boeing’s compliance with the plea agreement during a three-year probation period, during which the official will write “a confidential annual report for the government,” and file an executive summary with the court.

    The use of monitors as part of plea agreements with companies convicted of crimes reflects prosecutors’ reluctance to issue indictments and take the cases to trial.

    Brandon Garrett, a Duke University law professor who tracks criminal cases involving corporations, said prosecutors long worried that a criminal indictment could destroy a large, publicly traded company, so they tended to favor out-of-court settlements in the most serious cases. That changed, he said, after the financial crisis of 2008, and the concern became that companies were being treated as “too big to jail,” a phrase Garrett used in the title of his 2014 book.

    The effectiveness of plea deals and deferred prosecution agreements that allow defendants – like Boeing in 2021 – to avoid criminal liability came into question.

    “Especially when you had companies repeatedly getting prosecuted, something needs to change — maybe these companies really should get a criminal record,” Garrett said. “That’s when we started to see … more large cases where companies would be convicted.”

    Nadia Milleron, whose 24-year-old daughter, Samya Stumo, died in the second of two fatal 737 Max crashes, said the Boeing plea deal is much better than the settlement reached three-and-a-half years ago. In January 2021, the Justice Department agreed not to prosecute the company for conspiring to defraud the U.S. government, a charge based on allegations that Boeing misled regulators who approved the 737 Max nearly a decade ago.

    Still, Milleron and relatives of other crash victims want a trial that might unearth more details about discussions inside Boeing leading up to, and even after, the crashes, which occurred in 2018 in Indonesia and 2019 in Ethiopia.

    It appeared likely that the Justice Department would permanently drop the 2021 charge until this January, when a panel covering an unused emergency exit blew off a Max jet during an Alaska Airlines flight. The Federal Aviation Administration increased its oversight, and the agency’s chief said manufacturing problems at Boeing “don’t seem to be getting resolved.”

    The Justice Department defends its decision to seek a plea deal by saying that it includes the most serious punishment possible under the charge facing Boeing.

    “We should be asking whether these prosecutions are working and what can be done to make them more effective,” Garrett said. He suggested that the judge could take an active role in monitoring Boeing to make sure the company complies with the new agreement after violating the old one.

    Coffee, the Columbia law professor, said the key to whether the deal deters Boeing from future violations will be a strong and independent monitor.

    “Companies fear a free agent roaming around in their files,” he said. “On the other hand, if there isn’t some ability for the monitor to directly go to the court and say ‘They are not living up to the terms of the agreement,’ you have an ineffective monitor.”

    In one notorious case, prosecutors blocked a federal judge in New York from releasing a monitor’s reports about HSBC, a London-based bank that entered a deferred prosecution agreement over allegations that it failed to prevent a Mexican drug cartel from laundering money.

    “I’m not saying we shouldn’t have deferred prosecution agreements, but they tend to be negotiated to be strongly in the interests of the defendant,” he said.

    The judge in the Boeing case has indicated that after the Justice Department submits details of the plea agreement, he will give relatives of the victims seven days to lodge objections. The government and Boeing then will have 14 days to respond.

    The January 2021 decision by the Justice Department not to prosecute Boeing came in the final days of the Trump administration. In 2022 and 2023, federal prosecutions of corporations rose modestly under the Biden administration, according to figures from the U.S. Sentencing Commission.

    “We are in an election year, so we will be looking to see how that focus by the Department of Justice plays out after the election in November and whether the focus on corporate crime remains the same,” said Kya Henley, a former public defender in Maryland who now represents companies and individuals in white-collar cases. “Everyone gets to set their agenda.”

    ___

    Koenig reported from Dallas. Cathy Bussewitz in New York contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former CIA official charged with being secret agent for South Korean intelligence

    Former CIA official charged with being secret agent for South Korean intelligence

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — A former CIA employee and senior official at the National Security Council has been charged with serving as a secret agent for South Korea’s intelligence service, the U.S. Justice Department said.

    Sue Mi Terry accepted luxury goods, including fancy handbags, and expensive dinners at sushi restaurants in exchange for advocating South Korean government positions during media appearances, sharing nonpublic information with intelligence officers and facilitating access for South Korean officials to U.S. government officials, according to an indictment filed in federal court in Manhattan.

    She also admitted to the FBI that she served as a source of information for South Korean intelligence, including by passing handwritten notes from an off-the-record June 2022 meeting that she participated in with Secretary of State Antony Blinken about U.S. government policy toward North Korea, the indictment says.

    Prosecutors say South Korean intelligence officers also covertly paid her more than $37,000 for a public policy program that Terry controlled that was focused on Korean affairs.

    South Korea’s National Intelligence Service, its main spy agency, said Wednesday that intelligence authorities in South Korea and the U.S. are closely communicating over the case. South Korea’s Foreign Ministry separately said it was not appropriate to comment on a case that is under judicial proceedings in a foreign country.

    The conduct at issue occurred in the years after Terry left the U.S. government and worked at think tanks, where she became a prominent public policy voice on foreign affairs.

    Lee Wolosky, a lawyer for Terry, said in a statement that the “allegations are unfounded and distort the work of a scholar and news analyst known for her independence and years of service to the United States.”

    He said she had not held a security clearance for more than a decade and her views have been consistent.

    “In fact, she was a harsh critic of the South Korean government during times this indictment alleges that she was acting on its behalf,” he said. “Once the facts are made clear it will be evident the government made a significant mistake.”

    Terry served in the government from 2001 to 2011, first as a CIA analyst and later as the deputy national intelligence officer for East Asia at the National Intelligence Council, before working for think tanks, including the Council on Foreign Relations.

    Prosecutors say Terry never registered with the Justice Department as a foreign agent.

    On disclosure forms filed with the House of Representatives, where she testified at least three times between 2016 and 2022, she said that she was not an “active registrant” but also never disclosed her covert work with South Korea, preventing Congress from having “the opportunity to fairly evaluate Terry’s testimony in light of her longstanding efforts” for the government, the indictment says.

    ___

    Associated Press writer Hyung-jin Kim in Seoul, South Korea, contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link