ReportWire

Tag: Juries

  • London jury seated in Kevin Spacey sex assault trial on allegations over a decade old

    London jury seated in Kevin Spacey sex assault trial on allegations over a decade old

    [ad_1]

    LONDON — Two-time Oscar winner Kevin Spacey walked into a London courtroom Wednesday to face trial on charges of sexually assaulting four men as long as two decades ago.

    The actor was dressed in a dark blue suit, light blue shirt and pink tie as he was called by his full name and asked if he was Kevin Spacey Fowler.

    “I am,” he said as he stood behind a window in the dock.

    Spacey, 63, has pleaded not guilty to a dozen charges including sexual assault, indecent assault and causing a person to engage in sex activity without consent. He could face a prison sentence if convicted.

    Spacey nodded and smiled at potential jurors as Justice Mark Wall told them that they may know Spacey by name or have seen his films.

    More than two dozen entered the courtroom and the first 14 were seated without objection from the prosecution or defense. Thirteen people were then excuse.

    Spacey stood with his hands clasped behind his back as nine men and five women, including two alternates, were sworn in as jurors to hear evidence in the case expected to last four weeks in Southwark Crown Court.

    “I do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm that I will faithfully try the defendant and give true verdicts according to the evidence,” jurors asserted.

    Opening statements are scheduled Friday.

    The actor, who is free on bail, arrived at court about two hours before the trial was due to start.

    Spacey has said an acquittal in the case could revive a career that has largely been on ice since sexual misconduct allegations surfaced against the star who won his first Academy Award for supporting actor in “The Usual Suspects” in 1995.

    “There are people right now who are ready to hire me the moment I am cleared of these charges in London,” Spacey said in a rare interview published this month in Germany’s Zeit magazine. He said the media had turned him into a “monster.”

    The charges involving men now in their 30s or 40s date from 2001 to 2013 — covering most of the decade when he lived in Britain and served as artistic director of the Old Vic Theatre until 2015.

    Spacey’s downfall came amid the #MeToo movement in the United States when allegations led to him being written off the Netflix political thriller “House of Cards,” where he played lead character Frank Underwood, a ruthless and corrupt congressman who becomes president. He was cut from the completed film “All the Money in the World,” and the scenes reshot with Christopher Plummer.

    Spacey became one of the most celebrated actors of his generation in 1990s, starring in films including “Glengarry Glen Ross” and “LA Confidential.” He won his second Oscar, for best actor, in the 1999 movie “American Beauty.”

    Spacey recently had his first film roles in several years, appearing in 2022 in Italian director Franco Nero’s “The Man Who Drew God,” and playing the late Croatian President Franjo Tudjman in the biopic “Once Upon a Time in Croatia.” He also stars in the unreleased U.S. film “Peter Five Eight.”

    Italy’s National Cinema Museum in Turin gave him its lifetime achievement award in January. He also taught a masterclass and introduced a sold-out screening of “American Beauty” in what were billed as Spacey’s first speaking engagements in five years.

    Spacey saluted organizers for “making a strong defense of artistic achievement” and for having “le palle” — the Italian word for male body parts synonymous with courage — to invite him.

    ___

    Associated Press writer Jill Lawless contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ohio father accused of killing his 3 young sons indicted on murder charges

    Ohio father accused of killing his 3 young sons indicted on murder charges

    [ad_1]

    A grand jury has indicted an Ohio man accused of fatally shooting his three young sons on murder charges

    BATAVIA, Ohio — A grand jury has indicted an Ohio man accused of fatally shooting his three young sons on murder charges.

    Chad Doerman, 32, was indicted Thursday on charges of aggravated murder, kidnapping and felonious assault for the June 15 deaths of his sons, according to Clermont County court records.

    Clermont County’s chief prosecutor of Municipal Court, David Gast, said during Doerman’s arraignment June 16 that Doerman lined his sons up and executed them with a rifle. At one point, one of the boys tried to flee into a nearby field but Doerman “hunted” his son down and brought him back to their home before killing him.

    Clayton Doerman, 7, Hunter Doerman, 4, and Chase Doerman, 3 all died at the scene despite the efforts of Clermont County Sheriff’s Office deputies to revive them.

    “This was the man that everyday they woke up looking to for protection, love and guidance in all things, …” Gast said at the arraignment. “He was their world, he was their guardian and he executed them in cold blood.”

    The sheriff’s office said the 34-year-old mother, who was not identified, was outside the home and had suffered a gunshot to the hand while trying to shield her sons from their father.

    Officials have not released a motive for the shootings. Doerman’s bail has been set at $20 million and he is currently being held at Clermont County Jail.

    Court records did not indicate whether he was represented by a lawyer at his arraignment and Clermont County’s public defender’s office declined to comment on if they represent him.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Virginia jury acquits school spokesman of perjury in probe that was a focus of governor’s campaign

    Virginia jury acquits school spokesman of perjury in probe that was a focus of governor’s campaign

    [ad_1]

    LEESBURG, Va. — A jury on Thursday acquitted the longtime spokesman for a northern Virginia school system of perjuring himself during a high-profile investigation of two school-based sexual assaults.

    The jury took only about two hours to deliberate before acquitting Loudoun County Public Schools Public Information Office Wayde Byard on the sole perjury count lodged against him by a special grand jury.

    The perjury case was the first prosecution to go to trial from the special grand jury’s probe, commissioned by Republican Attorney General Jason Miyares at the request of Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin.

    The grand jury examined the school system’s handling of two sexual assaults at two different high schools in 2021. Youngkin made the assaults a major part of his successful gubernatorial bid that year, and he issued an executive order requesting the investigation on his first day in office.

    Youngkin’s critics accused him of exploiting the situation for political gain. The assaults garnered widespread attention not only because the boy who committed the assaults was allowed to transfer to another school after the first attack but also because he was wearing a skirt when he committed the first attack in a school bathroom. At the time the county was considering a policy change to allow transgender students to use the restroom of their choice.

    Prosecutors said Byard lied to the special grand jury when he testified he was unaware of the first sexual assault allegation when it occurred at Stone Bridge High School in May 2021. Byard told the grand jury that he only became aware that the allegations involved unwanted sexual contact after the second assault occurred at Broad Run High School in October 2021.

    During the three-day trial, prosecutors acknowledged they had no documentary evidence showing that any school official had informed Byard of the first sexual assault investigation. The Stone Bridge principal testified that he told Byard about it in a phone conversation, but on cross-examination the principal struggled to accurately recall some of the details from that day.

    In addition, testimony showed that school officials on that day were more focused on the angry response that the victim’s father displayed when he showed up at the school than they were about the alleged assault itself.

    Byard’ lawyer, Jennifer Leffler, told jurors that Byard — a well-known figure in the county who holds a cult status of sorts among students because his voice delivers news of snow-related school closures — was made a “fall guy” for the school system in what she said was a politically charged grand jury probe.

    Byard, speaking after his acquittal, declined to describe himself as a fall guy but allowed that he was perhaps a “surrogate” for other other administrators.

    “I feel like maybe I was a stand-in for other LCPS employees,” said Byard, who has been on unpaid leave since the indictment against him was unsealed in December.

    Byard said he always felt he’d be acquitted, and he thanked his wife and lawyer for their support. He reflected on the animosity that has descended on the county as the school system became ground zero at times nationally for debates over hot-button cultural issues like critical race theory and treatment of transgender children.

    “I’m not going to put any more quarters in the outrage machine,” he said. “I’m not going to make any incendiary statements. … Because that’s what’s got our community here and our nation here.”

    Victoria LaCivita, a spokeswoman for Miyares, issued a statement Thursday after the verdict noting that the judge allowed the case to go to a jury despite multiple motions seeking its dismissal.

    “While we are disappointed with the jury’s decision, we’re proud of our team for uncovering the truth and providing answers to concerned Virginia parents,” she said.

    Byard said he is uncertain if he will return to his job.

    Former LCPS Superintendent Scott Ziegler, the only other individual indicted by the grand jury, goes on trial later this year on misdemeanor charges.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ex-Goldman Sachs investment banker convicted of insider trading charges

    Ex-Goldman Sachs investment banker convicted of insider trading charges

    [ad_1]

    A former Goldman Sachs investment banker has been convicted of insider trading and obstruction of justice charges

    NEW YORK — A former Goldman Sachs investment banker was convicted of insider trading charges Wednesday after a weeklong trial.

    Brijesh Goel, 38, of Manhattan, was convicted in Manhattan federal court of securities fraud, conspiracy and obstruction of justice by a jury that deliberated less than a day before concluding he had shared secrets about likely merger-and-acquisition transactions that Goldman Sachs was considering financing.

    Sentencing was set for Oct. 19.

    Prosecutors said Goel worked in Manhattan at the investment bank when he shared information about potential merger and acquisition deals with a friend who worked at another investment bank in Manhattan.

    Goel and the friend agreed to split profits from their illegal trading, which amounted to about $280,000, prosecutors said.

    Prosecutors said Goel obstructed justice by deleting electronic communications regarding the insider trading scheme as a grand jury and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigated.

    Adam Ford, an attorney for Goel, declined comment.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Expert finds California serial stabbing suspect mentally unfit, jury to decide competency

    Expert finds California serial stabbing suspect mentally unfit, jury to decide competency

    [ad_1]

    A California jury will determine the mental competency of a former university student charged in the stabbing deaths of two people and attempted murder of a third

    Carlos Dominguez appears in Yolo Superior Court in Woodland, Calif. on Tuesday, June 20, 2023, with court-appointed public defender Dan Hutchinson. Dominguez, a 21-year-old former college student at the University of California, Davis, is charged with murder in connection with a series of stabbings that rocked the Northern California university town. Dominguez said he was guilty and apologized to a judge during a court hearing on Tuesday. (Hector Amezcua/The Sacramento Bee via AP, Pool)

    The Associated Press

    WOODLAND, Calif. — A California jury will determine the mental competency of a former university student charged in the stabbing deaths of two people and attempted murder of a third, all violent attacks that rocked the usually placid college town of Davis.

    A medical expert ordered by the court to review the mental state of Carlos Dominguez, 21, found that he is not competent to stand trial, a Yolo County Superior Court judge said Tuesday. A jury will decide July 24, he said.

    Dominguez interrupted the hearing to say that he wanted to apologize. “I want to say I’m guilty,” he said, sitting besides his court-appointed deputy public defender, Dan Hutchinson.

    At a previous hearing in May, Dominguez said he did not want a lawyer.

    The stabbings shook the University of California, Davis campus and broader community. Businesses closed early and students feared to step outside their homes, even for daytime classes.

    Dominguez had been a third-year student majoring in biological sciences until April 25, when the university let him go for academic reasons. He was arrested near the location of his second alleged attack, wearing the clothes from the alleged third attack, making it easy for bystanders to identify him.

    Police did not disclose a motive for the stabbings and it was unclear if Dominguez knew the victims. Those killed were a 50-year-old homeless man well loved in the community and a 20-year-old UC Davis student. A homeless woman attacked in her tent Monday night is alive.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Verdict in Oregon wildfires case highlights risks utilities face amid climate change

    Verdict in Oregon wildfires case highlights risks utilities face amid climate change

    [ad_1]

    PORTLAND, Ore. — A jury verdict that found an Oregon power company liable for devastating wildfires — and potentially billions of dollars in damages — is highlighting the legal and financial risks utilities take if they fail to take proper precautions in a hotter, drier climate.

    Utilities, especially in the U.S. West, are increasingly finding themselves in a financial bind that’s partly of their own making, experts say. While updating, replacing and even burying thousands of miles of power lines is a time-consuming and costly undertaking, the failure to start that work in earnest years ago has put them on the back foot as wildfires have grown more destructive — and lawsuits over electrical equipment sparking blazes have ballooned.

    “How do they pay for that and at the same time try to do grid hardening at a pace that could prevent the need for constant shutting down of the power?” Josh Hacker, chief science officer at Jupiter Intelligence, a company that provides advice on managing climate change risks, said of lawsuit damages. “This is an enormous challenge. Now it’s biting them. And in the end it’s going to bite all of us, because they have to recover that expense.”

    Last week, a jury in Oregon found PacifiCorp liable for damages for negligently failing to cut power to its 600,000 customers during a windstorm over Labor Day weekend, despite warnings from top fire officials, and for its power lines being responsible for multiple blazes.

    PacifiCorp said it was disappointed with the jury’s decision and that it plans to appeal.

    The fires were among the worst natural disasters in Oregon’s history. They killed nine people, burned more than 1,875 square miles (4,856 square kilometers) and destroyed upward of 5,000 homes and other structures. While total damages remain to be determined, they are expected to reach into the billions.

    Because utilities make money from customers, they often raise revenue for infrastructure upgrades by hiking rates. In California, for example, Pacific Gas and Electric has requested to increase its rates for residential customers this year by roughly 18%, partly to bury more than 3,000 miles (4,828 kilometers) of overhead power lines underground, according to a fact sheet from the state’s public utilities commission. The commission, which regulates utility rates, said it expects to make a final decision on the request between July and September.

    PG&E’s planned upgrades come amid heightened scrutiny of the utility, which serves more than 16 million people over 70,000 square miles (181,300 square kilometers) in central and northern California. Facing billions of dollars in damages stemming from multiple blazes, it filed for bankruptcy in 2019, shortly after its neglected equipment caused a fire that virtually razed the town of Paradise in the Sierra Nevada foothills in 2018. The Camp Fire was the deadliest and most destructive fire in California’s history.

    PG&E’s bankruptcy settlement with wildfire victims was an eye-popping $13.5 billion. Only half of the money was paid to victims in cash, while the other half was paid out in PG&E stock, which has since declined in value.

    PacifiCorp, meanwhile, says it has invested hundreds of millions of dollars since the Labor Day 2020 fires in Oregon in upgrading its equipment and expanding its weather stations and weather modeling. But customers are also helping fund those investments. Oregon’s public utility commission approved rate increases for PacifiCorp in 2023 in part so that the utility could cover “non-energy costs,” including wildfire mitigation and vegetation management.

    After the verdicts were handed down, PacifiCorp filed a request with Oregon’s public utility commission asking to potentially defer the costs linked to the lawsuit. The jury awarded around $90 million to 17 homeowners named as plaintiffs in the case, with damages to be determined later for a broader class that could include the owners of about 2,500 properties, as estimated by plaintiffs’ attorneys.

    In its filing, PacifiCorp said the application would enable it “to preserve its ability to seek recovery in the future” in case potential future class-action damages “impact the financial stability of the company.” Such a move “would result in higher costs to customers,” the filing said.

    However, the company requested that the commission delay its consideration of the application until the costs of its wildfire-related claims are more fully known. Oregon’s public utility commission would have to approve the request.

    “The PUC recognizes the controversy that surrounds this filing,” Kandi Young, the commission’s spokesperson, said in an email. “When the time comes to take action, the PUC will establish an open and transparent public process in which all interested persons have the opportunity to present information and argument to the Commission, including PUC Staff, ratepayer advocates, PacifiCorp, other participants, and members of the public.”

    The revenue model of utilities — and the way some have settled previous wildfire claims — have raised questions about the extent to which such companies are truly being held accountable for their role in sparking wildfires.

    “Where is public safety and the durability of the entire system in the priorities of what are basically profit-making enterprises? That is the big question that is being addressed here,” said Scott McNutt, a part-time lecturer in bankruptcy law at the University of California, Davis, who also worked as counsel to the fee examiner in the PG&E bankruptcy case.

    Utilities, meanwhile, say the growing risk of wildfires to public safety is being driven by forces beyond their control, such as climate change and population growth in the wildland-urban interface — the boundary where development encroaches on natural areas.

    “These systemic issues affect all Oregonians and are larger than any single utility,” PacifiCorp said in a statement earlier this week after the jury handed down one of its verdicts.

    Some experts agree to a certain extent, saying that hardening the electrical grid is just one of many critical steps that must be taken to protect people and their homes from wildfires.

    “Power companies … should always be working to reduce any potential ignition risk,” said Michael Gollner, associate professor of engineering at the University of California, Berkeley. “But you also want to make it so that if there are those fires, those fires aren’t going to cause death and destruction.”

    Changing the materials that homes are built with, Gollner said, is one way communities can protect themselves from wildfires. Having fire-retardant roofs made of asphalt or tile instead of wood, covering vents with fine mesh to keep embers out, and having nonflammable siding can help prevent homes from burning down. Creating what’s known as a “defensible space” around one’s home — a buffer area where there is less vegetation, helping to slow down a fire’s progress — is also key. Prescribed burns and thinning out fuels in forests are important as well, he said.

    “We haven’t taken a more holistic step to harden our communities so they don’t invite in fires,” he said. “We haven’t done the hard, other work.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Oregon jury: PacifiCorp must pay punitive damages for fires, plus award that could reach billions

    Oregon jury: PacifiCorp must pay punitive damages for fires, plus award that could reach billions

    [ad_1]

    PORTLAND, Ore. — A jury in Oregon says the electric utility PacifiCorp must pay punitive damages for causing devastating wildfires in 2020 — on top of an earlier verdict already expected to amount to billions of dollars.

    The decision Wednesday came two days after the jurors found PacifiCorp liable for the fires and said it must pay for damage to property as well as emotional distress. The jury on Monday awarded $73 million to 17 homeowners named as plaintiffs in the case, with damages for a broader class involving the owners of nearly 2,500 other properties to be determined later.

    The property owners alleged that PacifiCorp negligently failed to shut off power to its 600,000 customers during a windstorm, despite warnings from then-Gov. Kate Brown’s chief of staff and top fire officials, and that its power lines were responsible for multiple blazes.

    The fires over Labor Day weekend in 2020 were among the worst natural disasters in Oregon’s history. They killed nine people, burned more than 1,875 square miles (4,856 square kilometers) and destroyed upward of 5,000 homes and other structures.

    PacifiCorp, owned by billionaire Warren Buffett’s Omaha, Nebraska-based investment conglomerate Berkshire Hathaway, said it plans to appeal.

    The Multnomah County Circuit Court jury in Portland found Wednesday that the additional damages were warranted to punish the utility’s alleged indifference to the safety of others and to deter such conduct in the future.

    The jury determined the amount should be one-quarter of whatever is eventually awarded for property damage and emotional distress — meaning the punitive damages could reach hundreds of millions of dollars or more.

    “The jury’s verdict is extremely gratifying after PacifiCorp refused to accept responsibility for any of the damages caused by its incompetence and utter disregard for people and property on Labor Day 2020,” Cody Berne, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said in a news release Wednesday.

    Doug Dixon, an attorney for the power company, told the jury Tuesday that punitive damages were unwarranted, saying that PacifiCorp “was not indifferent to the threat of wildfire risk, let alone outrageously or consciously so.”

    The company has invested hundreds of millions of dollars since the fires to upgrade equipment and expand its weather stations and weather modeling, he said.

    Further, Dixon said, the utility could face bankruptcy if punitive damages exceed its net worth of $10.7 billion.

    The plaintiffs’ attorney told the jury such damages would be the only way to hold the company accountable.

    “This should’ve never happened,” Berne said. “The way to make sure it never happens again is to speak to them in the language that they know. And it’s the language of money.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • PacifiCorp could be on the hook for billions after jury verdict in devastating Oregon wildfires

    PacifiCorp could be on the hook for billions after jury verdict in devastating Oregon wildfires

    [ad_1]

    PORTLAND, Ore. — A jury in Oregon on Monday found the electric utility PacifiCorp responsible for causing devastating fires during Labor Day weekend in 2020, ordering the company to pay tens of millions of dollars to 17 homeowners who sued and finding it liable for broader damages that could push the total award into the billions.

    The Portland utility is one of several owned by billionaire Warren Buffett’s Omaha, Nebraska-based investment conglomerate Berkshire Hathaway. The property owners, suing on behalf of a class of thousands of others, alleged that PacifiCorp negligently failed to shut off power to its 600,000 customers during a windstorm, despite warnings from then-Gov. Kate Brown’s chief-of-staff and top fire officials, and that its power lines were responsible for multiple blazes.

    There has been no official cause determined for the Labor Day fires, which killed nine people, burned more than 1,875 square miles (4,856 square kilometers) in Oregon, and destroyed upward of 5,000 homes and structures. The blazes together were one of the worst natural disasters in Oregon history.

    In a written statement, lawyers for the plaintiffs called the decision historic and said it “paves the way for potentially billions of dollars in further damages for the class members.”

    PacifiCorp immediately said it would appeal.

    “Escalating climate change, challenging state and federal forest management, and population growth in the wildland-urban interface are substantial factors contributing to growing wildfire risk,” PacifiCorp said in an emailed statement after the verdict. “These systemic issues affect all Oregonians and are larger than any single utility.”

    The Multnomah County Circuit Court jury awarded more than $73 million to 17 homeowners who sued PacifiCorp a month after the fires, with each receiving between $3 million and $5.5 million for physical damage to their property and emotional distress.

    The jury also applied its liability finding to a larger class including the owners of nearly 2,500 properties damaged in the fires, which could push the price tag for damages well into the billions of dollars. Those damages will be determined later.

    The jury heard testimony Monday afternoon over whether to make PacifiCorp pay punitive damages. Nick Rosinia, an attorney for plaintiffs, told the jurors they should award punitive damages totaling five times what they have already been awarded for the harm PacifiCorp caused.

    “For its reckless and outrageous action on Labor Day, it’s the only way they will truly get your message,” Rosinia said.

    Doug Dixon, an attorney for the power company, insisted no punitive damages were warranted. The company keeps working on safety and was not recklessly negligent, he said. And while lawyers for the property owners described PacifiCorp as deep-pocketed, the company is $9 billion in debt.

    Among those in court for the verdict was Rachelle McMaster, whose home in the town of Otis near the Oregon coast was destroyed in the fires. Wearing a tie-dye T-shirt that read “keep Earth awesome,” she wiped her eyes and clasped her spouse’s hand after it was read.

    The seven-week trial wrapped with closing arguments last Wednesday, Oregon Public Radio reported.

    The plaintiffs alleged PacifiCorp was negligent when it didn’t shut off its power lines despite extreme wind warnings over the holiday weekend.

    “They have no real response to any of this,” plaintiffs’ attorney Cody Berne said during closing arguments. “(PacifiCorp) started the fires. They destroyed the evidence. And now they have come before you and are asking not to be held accountable.”

    Jurors were to determine PacifiCorp’s responsibility in four of those blazes: the Santiam Canyon fires east of Salem; the Echo Mountain Complex near Lincoln City; the South Obenchain fire near Eagle Point; and the Two Four Two fire near the southwest Oregon town of Chiloquin.

    Attorneys for the plaintiffs said utility executives kept the power on even as the company’s line workers took calls about damaged electrical equipment. The same executives, attorneys said, took no responsibility at the trial, saying it was front-line workers who make de-energization decisions, the news outlet reported.

    In his closing arguments, Dixon said “alleged power line fires” in Santiam Canyon, where more than half the class members live, could not have spread to plaintiff’s homes. Plus, PacifiCorp does not have equipment in some areas where they were accused of causing damage, he said.

    The risk of wildfires is increasingly fraught for power companies in the West. Pacific Gas & Electric declared bankruptcy and pleaded guilty to 84 counts of manslaughter after its neglected equipment caused a fire in the Sierra Nevada foothills in 2018 that destroyed nearly 19,000 homes, businesses and other buildings and virtually razed the town of Paradise, California.

    ___

    Johnson reported from Seattle. Mark Thiessen in Anchorage contributed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Danny Masterson convicted of 2 counts of rape; ‘That ’70s Show’ actor faces 30 years to life

    Danny Masterson convicted of 2 counts of rape; ‘That ’70s Show’ actor faces 30 years to life

    [ad_1]

    LOS ANGELES — LOS ANGELES (AP) — “That ’70s Show” star Danny Masterson was led out in handcuffs from a Los Angeles courtroom Wednesday and could get 30 years to life in prison after a jury found him guilty on two of three counts of rape at his second trial, in which the Church of Scientology played a central role.

    Masterson’s wife, actor and model Bijou Phillips, gasped when the verdict was read and wept as he was taken into custody, while a group of family and friends who sat stone-faced behind him throughout both trials.

    The jury of seven women and five men reached the verdict after deliberating for seven days spread over two weeks. They could not reach a verdict on the third count, that alleged Masterson raped a longtime girlfriend. They had voted 8-4 in favor of conviction.

    Masterson, 47, will be held without bail until he is sentenced. No sentencing date was set.

    “I am experiencing a complex array of emotions — relief, exhaustion, strength, sadness — knowing that my abuser, Danny Masterson, will face accountability for his criminal behavior,” one of the women, whom Masterson knew as a fellow member of the church and was convicted of raping at his home in 2003, said in a statement.

    A second woman, a former girlfriend, whose count left the jury deadlocked, said in the statement: “While I’m encouraged that Danny Masterson will face some criminal punishment, I am devastated that he has dodged criminal accountability for his heinous conduct against me.”

    A spokesperson for Masterson declined to comment, but his attorneys will almost certainly appeal.

    After a deadlocked jury led to a mistrial in December, prosecutors retried Masterson, saying he drugged and forcibly raped three women in his Hollywood Hills home between 2001 and 2003. They said he used his prominence in the church — where all three women were also members at the time — to avoid consequences for decades.

    “We want to express our gratitude to the three women who came forward and bravely shared their experiences,” Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón said in a statement after the verdict Wednesday.

    Masterson did not testify, and his lawyers called no witnesses. The defense argued that the acts were consensual, and attempted to discredit the women’s stories by highlighting changes and inconsistencies over time, which they said showed signs of coordination between them.

    “If you decide that a witness deliberately lied about something in this case,” defense attorney Philip Cohen told jurors, going through their instructions in his closing argument, “You should consider not believing anything that witness says.”

    The Church of Scientology played a significant role in the first trial but arguably an even larger one in the second. Judge Charlaine F. Olmedo allowed expert testimony on church policy from a former official in Scientology leadership who has become a prominent opponent.

    The church said in a statement after the verdict that the “introduction of religion into this trial was an unprecedented violation of the First Amendment and affects the due process rights of every American. The Church was not a party to this case and religion did not belong in this proceeding as Supreme Court precedent has maintained for centuries.”

    Tensions ran high in the courtroom between current and former Scientologists, and even leaked into testimony, with the accusers saying on the stand that they felt intimidated by some members in the room.

    Actor Leah Remini, a former member who has become the church’s highest-profile critic, sat in on the trial at times, putting her arm around one of the accusers to comfort her during closing arguments.

    Remini said on Twitter that the two guilty verdicts in the retrial are “a relief. The women who survived Danny Masterson’s predation are heroes. For years, they and their families have faced vicious attacks and harassment from Scientology and Danny’s well-funded legal team,” she posted. “Nevertheless, they soldiered on, determined to seek justice.”

    The alleged harassment is the subject of a civil lawsuit filed by two of the accusers.

    The Scientology statement said “there is not a scintilla of evidence supporting the scandalous allegations that the Church harassed the accusers.”

    Founded in 1953 by L. Ron Hubbard, the Church of Scientology has many members who work in Hollywood. The judge kept limits on how much prosecutors could talk about the church, and primarily allowed it to explain why the women took so long to go to authorities.

    The women testified that when they reported Masterson to church officials, they were told they were not raped, were put through ethics programs themselves, and were warned against going to law enforcement to report a member of such high standing.

    “They were raped, they were punished for it, and they were retaliated against,” Deputy District Attorney Reinhold Mueller told jurors in his closing argument. “Scientology told them there’s no justice for them.”

    The church called the “testimony and descriptions of Scientology beliefs” during the trial “uniformly false.”

    “The Church has no policy prohibiting or discouraging members from reporting criminal conduct of anyone — Scientologists or not — to law enforcement,” the statement said.

    Next week Olmedo will hold a hearing to determine how a lawyer who represents the Church of Scientology had evidence that the prosecution had shared with the defense. The evidence involved links that the lawyer accidentally included in an email to Mueller.

    The Associated Press does not typically name people who say they’ve been sexually abused.

    Testimony in this case was graphic and emotional.

    The two women whose testimony led to Masterson’s conviction said that in 2003, he gave them drinks and that they then became woozy or passed out before he violently raped them.

    The third, Masterson’s then-girlfriend of five years whose count left the jury deadlocked, said she awoke to find him raping her, and had to pull his hair to stop him.

    Olmedo allowed prosecutors and accusers to say directly in the second trial that Masterson drugged the women, while only allowing the women to describe their condition in the first trial.

    Masterson was not charged with any counts of drugging, and there was no toxicology evidence to back up the assertion.

    The charges dated to a period when Masterson was at the height of his fame, starring from 1998 until 2006 as Steven Hyde on Fox’s “That ’70s Show” — the show that made stars of Ashton Kutcher, Mila Kunis and Topher Grace.

    Masterson had reunited with Kutcher on the 2016 Netflix comedy “The Ranch,” but was written off the show when an LAPD investigation was revealed in December 2017.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trial for accused gunman in Pittsburgh synagogue massacre slated to start

    Trial for accused gunman in Pittsburgh synagogue massacre slated to start

    [ad_1]

    PITTSBURGH — The federal jury trial of the suspect in the nation’s deadliest antisemitic attack is scheduled to get underway Tuesday morning, four and a half years after the shooting deaths of 11 worshipers at a Pittsburgh synagogue.

    Twelve jurors and six alternates — chosen Thursday after a month of questioning of more than 200 jury candidates — will hear the case against Robert Bowers. The jurors include 11 women and seven men.

    Bowers, 50, could face the death penalty if convicted of some of the 63 counts he faces in the Oct. 27, 2018, attack at the Tree of Life synagogue building. The attack claimed the lives of 11 worshipers from three congregations sharing the building, Dor Hadash, New Light and Tree of Life. Charges include 11 counts each of obstruction of free exercise of religion resulting in death and hate crimes resulting in death.

    Prosecutors have said Bowers made antisemitic comments at the scene of the attack and online.

    In proceedings before and during juror questioning, the defense has done little to cast doubt on whether Bowers was the gunman, instead focusing on preventing his execution.

    Bowers, a truck driver from the Pittsburgh suburb of Baldwin, had offered to plead guilty in return for a life sentence, but federal prosecutors turned him down. Bowers’ defense attorneys also recently said he has schizophrenia and brain impairments.

    As an indication that the guilt-or-innocence phase of the trial seems almost a foregone conclusion, Bowers’ defense team spent little time in the jury selection process asking how potential jurors would come to a verdict.

    Instead the team focused on the penalty phase and how jurors would decide whether to impose the death penalty in a case of a man charged with hate-motivated killings in a house of worship. The defense probed whether potential jurors could consider factors such as mental illness or a difficult childhood.

    The families of those killed are divided over whether the government should pursue the death penalty, but most have voiced support for it.

    The trial is taking place in the downtown Pittsburgh courthouse of the U.S. District Court for Western Pennsylvania, presided over by Judge Robert Colville, an appointee of former President Donald Trump.

    Prosecutors are expected to tell jurors about incriminatory statements Bowers allegedly made to investigators, an online trail of antisemitic statements that they say shows the attack was motivated by religious hatred, and the guns recovered from him at the crime scene where police shot Bowers three times before he surrendered.

    Prosecutors indicated in court filings that they might introduce autopsy records and 911 recordings during the trial, including recordings of two calls from victims who were subsequently shot to death. They have said their evidence includes a Colt AR-15 rifle, three Glock .357 handguns and hundreds of cartridge cases, bullets and bullet fragments.

    Bowers also injured seven people, including five police officers who responded to the scene, investigators said.

    In a filing earlier this year, prosecutors said Bowers “harbored deep, murderous animosity towards all Jewish people.” They said he also expressed hatred for HIAS, founded as the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, a nonprofit humanitarian group that helps refugees and asylum seekers.

    Prosecutors wrote in a court filing that Bowers had nearly 400 followers on his Gab social media account “to whom he promoted his antisemitic views and calls to violence against Jews.”

    The three congregations have spoken out against antisemitism and other forms of bigotry since the shootings. The Tree of Life Congregation also is working with partners on plans to overhaul its current structure, which still stands but has been closed since the shootings, by creating a complex to house a sanctuary, museum, memorial and center for fighting antisemitism.

    The death penalty trial is proceeding three years after now-President Joe Biden said during his 2020 campaign that he would work to end capital punishment at the federal level and in states that still use it. His attorney general, Merrick Garland, has temporarily paused executions to review policies and procedures, but federal prosecutors continue to vigorously work to uphold death sentences that have been issued and, in some cases, to pursue new death sentences at trial.

    ___

    Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former 49ers lobbyist testifies he received illegally leaked report on team’s political influence

    Former 49ers lobbyist testifies he received illegally leaked report on team’s political influence

    [ad_1]

    The former chief lobbyist for the San Francisco 49ers has testified that a Silicon Valley city councilman illegally leaked a confidential report criticizing the team’s political influence

    SAN FRANCISCO — The former chief lobbyist for the San Francisco 49ers has testified that a Silicon Valley city councilman illegally leaked a confidential report criticizing the team’s political influence, it was reported Friday.

    Rahul Chandhok told a criminal grand jury March 21 that Santa Clara City Councilmember Anthony Becker digitally sent him the report — which was made by a civil grand jury — last October, the San Francisco Chronicle reported after reviewing a transcript of his testimony.

    Prosecutors accuse Becker of providing the secret report to Chandhok and a local news outlet ahead of its official release and then lying to the grand jury about it.

    He has pleaded not guilty to one felony count of perjury under oath and a misdemeanor count of willful failure to perform duty. He could face up to four years in state prison if convicted.

    The 49ers play in Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, about 35 miles (55 kilometers) south of San Francisco. Santa Clara owns the stadium and leases it to the team, and the two sides have feuded for years through ethics complaints and legal disputes.

    Santa Clara County prosecutors said the team has bankrolled Becker’s political career by spending at least $3.2 million through independent expenditure committees for his 2020 winning City Council race and a failed mayoral bid last year.

    Tthe civil grand jury report, titled “Unsportsmanlike Conduct: Santa Clara City Council,” alleged that councilmembers regularly voted “in a manner that is favorable to the 49ers.”

    In his testimony, Chandhok said Becker sent him a copy of the report four days before it was to be made public and a month before the mayoral election, the Chronicle said.

    Chandhok said he then began working to blunt the impact of the report.

    Following news coverage of the report, Chandhok attacked it as “a shocking political hatchet job” in a statement that also alleged the civil grand jurors that issued it were corrupt and publicized where they lived and worshipped, the Chronicle said.

    “The 49ers are committed to being a positive and contributing member of our community,” the team said Friday in a statement. “As the transcripts are related to an ongoing legal matter, we are unable to make any further comment at this time.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Man indicted in theft of ‘Wizard of Oz’ ruby slippers worn by Judy Garland

    Man indicted in theft of ‘Wizard of Oz’ ruby slippers worn by Judy Garland

    [ad_1]

    A man has been indicted by a grand jury on charges of stealing a pair of ruby red slippers worn by Judy Garland in “The Wizard of Oz,” federal prosecutors in North Dakota say. The shoes were stolen in 2005 and recovered by a 2018 FBI sting operation, but no arrests were made at the time.

    Terry Martin was indicted Tuesday with one count of theft of a major artwork, prosecutors announced Wednesday. The indictment did not provide any further information about Martin and online records do not list an attorney for him.

    Garland wore several pairs of the ruby slippers during production of the 1939 musical, but only four authentic pairs remain. When they were stolen, the slippers were insured for $1 million but the current market value is about $3.5 million, federal prosecutors said in a news release.

    The slippers were on loan to the Judy Garland Museum in the late actor’s hometown of Grand Rapids, Minnesota, when someone climbed through a window and broke the display case, prosecutors said when they were recovered.

    Over the years, several enticing rewards were offered in hopes that the slippers would turn up. Law enforcement offered $250,000 early in the case, and an anonymous donor from Arizona put up $1 million in 2015.

    The road to the missing slippers began when a man told the shoes’ insurer in 2017 that he could help get them back. After a nearly year-long investigation, the FBI nabbed the shoes in Minneapolis in July 2018. At the time, the bureau said no one has been arrested or charged in the case.

    On Wednesday, a summons was issued for Martin. An initial court appearance was set for June 1, and it will be via video. Terry Van Horn, spokesman for the U.S. Justice Department in North Dakota, said he could not provide any information beyond what was included in the indictment.

    The shoes are famously associated with one of the iconic lines in “The Wizard of Oz,” as Garland’s character Dorothy clicks her heels and repeats the phrase, “There’s no place like home.”

    The shoes are made from about a dozen different materials, including wood pulp, silk thread, gelatin, plastic and glass. Most of the ruby color comes from sequins but the bows of the shoes contain red glass beads.

    When they were stolen, the slippers were on loan from Hollywood memorabilia collector Michael Shaw. The three remaining pairs Garland wore in the movie were held by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the Smithsonian, and a private collector.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Grand jury indicts man in 4 University of Idaho stabbing deaths, eliminating need for hearing

    Grand jury indicts man in 4 University of Idaho stabbing deaths, eliminating need for hearing

    [ad_1]

    BOISE, Idaho — A grand jury has indicted a man who was already charged in the stabbing deaths of four University of Idaho students, allowing prosecutors to skip a planned week-long preliminary hearing that was set for late June.

    Bryan Kohberger was arrested late last year and charged with burglary and four counts of first-degree murder in connection with the Nov. 13, 2022, killings of Xana Kernodle, Ethan Chapin, Madison Mogen and Kaylee Goncalves at a rental home near the University of Idaho campus. At the time, Kohberger was a graduate student studying criminology at nearby Washington State University, and the killings left the close-knit communities of Moscow, Idaho, and Pullman, Washington, reeling.

    A preliminary hearing — where prosecutors must show a judge that there is enough evidence to justify moving forward with felony charges — had been scheduled to begin June 26. But on Tuesday, a grand jury indicted Kohberger on the same criminal charges, effectively rerouting the case directly to the state’s felony court level and allowing prosecutors to skip the preliminary hearing process.

    Court documents have already detailed much of the investigation that prosecutors say ties Kohberger to the slayings. A white sedan allegedly matching one owned by Kohberger was caught on surveillance footage repeatedly cruising past the rental home on a dead-end street around the time of the killings. Police say traces of DNA found on a knife sheath inside the home where the students were killed matches that of the 28-year-old Kohberger. Investigators also contend that a cellphone belonging to Kohberger was near the victims’ home on a dozen occasions prior to the killings, though it was apparently turned off around the time of the early-morning attack.

    Kohberger was arrested Dec. 30, 2022, at his parents’ home in eastern Pennsylvania, and law enforcement officials seized dark clothing, medical gloves, a flashlight and other items from the home, according to court documents. In Pullman, investigators seized stained bedding, strands of what appeared to be hair, and a single glove from his WSU campus apartment, according to another search warrant.

    Still, the unsealed court documents do not appear to suggest a motive, nor whether the killer had specifically targeted any of the victims. It’s also not clear if prosecutors believe Kohberger had met any of the victims before the night they died.

    Kernodle, Chapin, Mogen and Goncalves were friends and members of the university’s Greek system, and the three women lived together in the rental home just across the street from campus. Chapin — Kernodle’s boyfriend — was there visiting on the night of the attack. The killings left many of their classmates and residents of Moscow reeling with grief and fear.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US seeks dismissal of corruption charges against Florida 2018 Democratic governor nominee Gillum

    US seeks dismissal of corruption charges against Florida 2018 Democratic governor nominee Gillum

    [ad_1]

    Federal prosecutors have asked a judge to dismiss remaining corruption charges against Andrew Gillum, the Democratic nominee for Florida governor in 2018

    ByCURT ANDERSON Associated Press

    Federal prosecutors asked a judge Monday to dismiss the remaining corruption charges against Andrew Gillum, the Democratic nominee for Florida governor in 2018, after a jury deadlocked on all but one count following a trial earlier this month.

    Prosecutors had said they intended to retry Gillum after the trial concluded on May 4, but reversed course in a one-paragraph motion that also seeks dismissal of the case against his co-defendant, Sharon Lettman-Hicks.

    Jurors acquitted Gillum of lying to the FBI but could not reach a verdict on more than a dozen fraud and conspiracy charges contending Gillum and Lettman-Hicks diverted tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions for his personal use.

    Gillum’s defense team, led by Miami attorney David O. Markus, said in an email that he can now “resume his life and public service.”

    “Andrew Gillum had the courage to stand up and say ‘I am innocent.’ And that is finally being recognized. We want to thank the hard working jury who did their job and explained to the government why it should drop the case,” the statement said.

    U.S. District Judge Allen Winsor, who presided over the trial, did not immediately rule Monday on the motion but generally judges give deference to prosecutorial discretion. There was no comment from the U.S. attorney’s office beyond the court filing.

    Gillum, 43, is a former Tallahassee mayor who sought to become the first Black governor in Florida history when he ran in 2018. He lost to Republican Ron DeSantis by less than 34,000 votes, which triggered an automatic recount.

    Prosecutors had claimed Gillum committed fraud because he was struggling financially after quitting his $120,000-a-year job with the progressive People for the American Way group when he decided to run for governor. Lettman-Hicks, a longtime political adviser to Gillum and former executive with the group, was accused of conspiring with Gillum to divert the contributions to his personal accounts. Jurors also deadlocked on those counts.

    The jury found Gillum not guilty of charges that he lied about his interactions with undercover FBI agents posing as developers who paid for a 2016 trip he and his brother took to New York, which included a ticket to the hit Broadway show “Hamilton.” Gillum contended his brother provided the ticket.

    Gillum’s attorneys had argued that the indictment was politically motivated, but Winsor refused last year to dismiss the case, ruling that Gillum and Lettman-Hicks had to be tried together because their actions were so closely intertwined.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • McDonald’s found liable for hot Chicken McNugget that burned girl

    McDonald’s found liable for hot Chicken McNugget that burned girl

    [ad_1]

    FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — McDonald’s and a franchise holder are at fault after a hot Chicken McNugget from a Happy Meal fell on a little girl’s leg and caused second-degree burns, a jury in South Florida found in a case reminiscent of the famous hot coffee lawsuit of the 1990s.

    A second jury will determine how much McDonald’s USA and its franchise owner, Upchurch Foods, will pay the child and her mother, the South Florida SunSentinel reported.

    Thursday’s decision was split, with jurors finding the franchise holder liable for negligence and failure to warn customers about the risk of hot food, and McDonald’s USA liable for failing to provide instructions for safe handling of the food. McDonald’s USA was not found to be negligent, and the jury dismissed the argument that the product was defective.

    “Our sympathies go out to this family for what occurred in this unfortunate incident, as we hold customer safety as one of our highest priorities,” McDonald’s owner-operator Brent Upchurch said in a statement. “We are deeply disappointed with today’s verdict because the facts show that our restaurant in Tamarac, Florida did indeed follow those protocols when cooking and serving this Happy Meal.”

    Jurors heard two days of testimony and arguments about the 2019 episode that left the 4-year-old girl with a burned upper thigh.

    Philana Holmes testified that she bought Happy Meals for her son and then-4-year-old daughter at a drive-thru window at a McDonald’s in Tamarac, near Fort Lauderdale, the SunSentinel reported. She handed the food to her children, who were in the back seat.

    After she drove away, her daughter started screaming. The mother testified she didn’t know what was wrong until she pulled over to help the girl, Olivia Caraballo, who is now 7, the newspaper reported. She saw the burn on the girl’s leg and took photos on her iPhone, which included audio clips of the child’s screams.

    The sound of the girl’s screams were played in court. The child, who is autistic, did not testify, the newspaper reported.

    Lawyers for McDonald’s noted that the food had to be hot to avoid salmonella poisoning, and that the nuggets were not meant to be pressed between a seat belt and human flesh for more than two minutes.

    The girl’s parents sued, saying that McDonald’s and the franchise owner failed to adequately train employees, failed to warn customers about the “dangerous” temperature of the food, and for cooking the food to a much higher temperature than necessary.

    While both sides agreed the nugget caused the burns, the family’s lawyers argued the temperature was above 200 degrees (93 Celsius), while the defense said it was no more than 160 degrees (71 Celsius).

    The case is likely to stoke memories of the McDonald’s coffee lawsuit of the 1990s, which became an urban legend of sorts about seemingly frivolous lawsuits, even though a jury and judge had found it anything but.

    A New Mexico jury awarded Stella Liebeck, 81, $2.7 million in punitive damages after she was scalded in 1992 by hot coffee from McDonald’s that spilled onto her lap, burning her legs, groin and buttocks, as she tried to steady the cup with her legs while prying the lid off to add cream outside a drive-thru.

    She suffered third-degree burns and spent more than a week in the hospital.

    She had initially asked McDonald’s for $20,000 to cover hospital expenses, but the company went to trial. A judge later reduced the $2.7 million award to $480,000, which he said was appropriate for the “willful, wanton, reckless” and “callous” behavior by McDonald’s.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Money-hungry, or spiritually misguided? Jury weighs fate of slain kids’ mom in triple murder trial

    Money-hungry, or spiritually misguided? Jury weighs fate of slain kids’ mom in triple murder trial

    [ad_1]

    BOISE, Idaho — An Idaho jury is weighing two theories in the strange triple murder trial of Lori Vallow Daybell: Is she a power-hungry manipulator who would kill her two youngest children for money, as prosecutors allege, or a normally protective mother who fell under the romantic sway of a wannabe cult leader, as the defense team claims?

    Jurors heard both stories Thursday during final arguments in the seven-week long trial, and deliberated for about four hours before breaking for the evening. They will continue the work of deciding Vallow Daybell’s fate on Friday morning, a court bailiff said.

    Vallow Daybell and her fifth husband Chad Daybell are both charged with murder, conspiracy and grand theft in the deaths of 7-year-old Joshua “JJ” Vallow, 16-year-old Tylee Ryan, and Daybell’s previous wife Tammy Daybell. Prosecutors say the two worked with Vallow Daybell’s brother, Alex Cox, to carry out the crimes. Cox died in December 2019 and was never charged.

    Both defendants have pleaded not guilty. Vallow Daybell faces up to life in prison if she is convicted. Chad Daybell’s trial is still months away.

    Vallow Daybell wanted the victims’ money, so she used sex and power to manipulate her brother and her lover into carrying out the crimes, Madison County Prosecutor Rob Wood told jurors during closing arguments.

    “ Money, power and sex,” Wood said, reprising the arguments his team made at the start of the trial. He claimed Vallow Daybell considered the three victims nothing more than obstacles to her goals.

    “What does justice for these victims require? It requires a conviction on each and every count,” Wood said.

    Defense attorney Jim Archibald countered that there was no evidence tying his client to the killings but plenty showing she was a loving, protective mother whose life took a sharp turn when she met her fifth husband, Chad Daybell, and fell for the “weird” apocalyptic religious claims of a cult leader. He suggested that Daybell and Cox were the ones responsible for the deaths, and that Vallow Daybell’s only crime was lying to police about where her children were.

    Daybell told her they had been married in several previous lives and she was a “sexual goddess” who was supposed to help him save the world by gathering 144,000 followers so Jesus could return, Archibald said.

    “Why can’t people escape religious cult figures, why can’t they break out, why can’t they break away from that mind control?” Archibald said. “Promises are marvelous to some people even if they sound like stupid gibberish to the rest of us.”

    At times, the testimony in the case has been heartbreaking — such as when Vallow Daybell’s only surviving child, Colby Ryan, accused her of murdering his siblings in a recorded jailhouse phone call.

    Other testimony has been strange, such as when Vallow Daybell’s former friend Melanie Gibb testified that Vallow Daybell believed people in her life had been taken over by evil spirits and turned into “zombies” — including JJ and Tylee. Four of the people the defendant described as “zombies” were later killed or shot at, according to the testimony.

    It has also been gruesome, such as when law enforcement officers testified about finding JJ and Tylee’s remains buried in Chad Daybell’s yard.

    Tylee had her whole life ahead of her, Wood told the jury, when she was killed in September 2019.

    “Tylee’s body was burned beyond recognition. Her body was dismembered in such a grotesque and extreme manner,” that the medical examiner couldn’t determine the cause of death, Wood said. Marks on her pelvis showed she was stabbed, he said.

    “JJ Vallow’s voice was silenced forever by a strip of duct tape over his mouth,” just two weeks later, Wood said. “A white plastic bag was placed over his head, and secured with duct tape around and around from his forehead to his chin.”

    Evidence shows JJ struggled, Wood said, and at one point the boy’s arms and legs were bound with duct tape.

    “He stopped breathing, his heart stopped beating and he died. It was a brutal, horrific murder of a 7-year-old boy with special needs,” he said.

    Vallow Daybell never reported the kids missing but continued to collect the survivor benefit checks each child was receiving because of the earlier deaths of their fathers, Wood said.

    Wood said Tammy Daybell was slain between Oct. 18 and Oct. 20, 2019.

    The defense attorney countered that Vallow Daybell wasn’t even in the state when Tammy Daybell was killed. She was in Hawaii, visiting with friends, he said.

    Archibald did not call any witnesses during the trial, and Vallow Daybell declined to testify. Instead, Archibald asserted that prosecutors had not proven their case, suggesting that there was not enough evidence to find beyond a reasonable doubt that she committed a crime.

    “Of the 15,000 texts you have in evidence, show me one where Lori is part of that conspiracy,” Archibald said in closing arguments.

    Under Idaho law, conspiring to commit a murder carries the same penalty as carrying out a murder. Wood reminded jurors of that law, noting that aiding and abetting a crime is akin to committing it.

    The case began in July 2019, when Vallow Daybell’s then-husband, Charles Vallow, was shot and killed by her brother, Alex Cox, at his home in a Phoenix suburb. The husband and wife were estranged, and he had filed divorce documents claiming that she believed she was a goddess sent to usher in the Biblical apocalypse.

    At the time, Cox told police he acted in self-defense, and he was never charged in connection with the death. Cox died later that year of what authorities determined were natural causes. Vallow Daybell was later charged in Arizona in connection with Charles Vallow’s death; she has not yet had the opportunity to enter a plea in that case.

    According to prosecutors, Vallow Daybell was already in a relationship with Chad Daybell, who was still married to his wife, Tammy Daybell, at the time. She moved to eastern Idaho with her brother and kids to be closer to Chad Daybell.

    The children were last seen alive in September of 2019. Police discovered they were missing a month later after an extended family member became worried. Their bodies were found the following summer.

    The case has garnered widespread interest not just in Idaho but around the world, and the judge banned cameras from the courtroom in an effort to limit pretrial publicity. The trial was also moved to the capital city of Boise, where 1,800 potential jurors were called and winnowed to a panel of 18 people.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • McDonald’s found liable for hot Chicken McNugget that burned girl

    McDonald’s found liable for hot Chicken McNugget that burned girl

    [ad_1]

    FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — McDonald’s and a franchise holder are at fault after a hot Chicken McNugget from a Happy Meal fell on a little girl’s leg and caused second-degree burns, a jury in South Florida found in a case reminiscent of the famous hot coffee lawsuit the 1990s.

    A second jury will determine how much McDonald’s USA and its franchise owner, Upchurch Foods, will pay the child and her mother, the South Florida SunSentinel reported.

    Thursday’s decision was split, with jurors finding the franchise holder liable for negligence and failure to warn customers about the risk of hot food, and McDonald’s USA liable for failing to provide instructions for safe handling of the food. McDonald’s USA was not found to be negligent, and the jury dismissed the argument that the product was defective.

    “Our sympathies go out to this family for what occurred in this unfortunate incident, as we hold customer safety as one of our highest priorities,” McDonald’s owner-operator Brent Upchurch said in a statement. “We are deeply disappointed with today’s verdict because the facts show that our restaurant in Tamarac, Florida did indeed follow those protocols when cooking and serving this Happy Meal.”

    Jurors heard two days of testimony and arguments about the 2019 episode that left the 4-year-old girl with a burned upper thigh.

    Philana Holmes testified that she bought Happy Meals for her son and then-4-year-old daughter at a drive-thru window at a McDonald’s in Tamarac, near Fort Lauderdale, the SunSentinel reported. She handed the food to her children, who were in the back seat.

    After she drove away, her daughter started screaming. The mother testified she didn’t know what was wrong until she pulled over to help the girl, Olivia Caraballo, who is now 7, the newspaper reported. She saw the burn on the girl’s leg and took photos on her iPhone, which included audio clips of the child’s screams.

    The sound of the girl’s screams were played in court. The child, who is autistic, did not testify, the newspaper reported.

    Lawyers for McDonald’s noted that the food had to be hot to avoid salmonella poisoning, and that the nuggets were not meant to be pressed between a seat belt and human flesh for more than two minutes.

    The girl’s parents sued, saying that McDonald’s and the franchise owner failed to adequately train employees, failed to warn customers about the “dangerous” temperature of the food, and for cooking the food to a much higher temperature than necessary.

    While both sides agreed the nugget caused the burns, the family’s lawyers argued the temperature was above 200 degrees (93 Celsius), while the defense said it was no more than 160 degrees (71 Celsius).

    The case is likely to stoke memories of the McDonald’s coffee lawsuit of the 1990s, which became an urban legend of sorts about seemingly frivolous lawsuits, even though a jury and judge had found it anything but.

    A New Mexico jury awarded Stella Liebeck, 81, $2.7 million in punitive damages after she was scalded in 1992 by hot coffee from McDonald’s that spilled onto her lap, burning her legs, groin and buttocks, as she tried to steady the cup with her legs while prying the lid off to add cream outside a drive-thru.

    She suffered third-degree burns and spent more than a week in the hospital.

    She had initially asked McDonald’s for $20,000 to cover hospital expenses, but the company went to trial. A judge later reduced the $2.7 million award to $480,000, which he said was appropriate for the “willful, wanton, reckless” and “callous” behavior by McDonald’s.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump appearing at CNN town hall after sex assault verdict

    Trump appearing at CNN town hall after sex assault verdict

    [ad_1]

    Former President Donald Trump will return to CNN’s airwaves on Wednesday, joining the network for a two-hour town hall event in early-voting New Hampshire a day after a civil jury found him liable for sexually assaulting an advice columnist nearly three decades ago.

    The forum, which was publicly announced last week, was expected to be notable because it would be bringing together a network and a candidate who have long sparred with each other. But the stakes raised considerably Tuesday after jurors in New York found Trump had sexually abused and defamed E. Jean Carroll, though it rejected her claim that he raped her. The jury awarded her $5 million in damages.

    While the civil trial verdict carries no criminal penalties, it nonetheless revives attention on the myriad investigations facing Trump, who was indicted in New York in March for hush money payments made to women who had accused him of sexual encounters. Trump is also facing investigations in Georgia and Washington over his alleged interference in the 2020 election and his handling of classified documents and potential obstruction of justice.

    It also returns focus to questions over Trump’s treatment of women over the years, raising the stakes for an event at which he will be forced to respond to tough questioning from host Kaitlan Collins and the audience. Carroll is one of more than a dozen women who have accused Trump of sexual assault or harassment over the years, allegations Trump has denied.

    Trump historically has not reacted well when pressed on stage about his behavior toward women, most notably during the first Republican presidential debate of 2015, when he sparred with then-Fox News host Megyn Kelly. He later said she had “blood coming out of her wherever” when she was questioning him.

    Trump has a much more contentious relationship with CNN than he had with Fox at the time. Trump has called the network “fake news” and has sparred personally with Collins. She was once barred from a Rose Garden event after Trump’s team got upset with her shouted questions at an earlier Oval Office availability.

    Nonetheless, Trump’s team saw the invitation from CNN as an opportunity to connect with a broader swath of voters than those who usually tune into the conservative outlets he favors.

    “President Trump has been battle-tested and is a proven winner. He doesn’t shy away from anything and faces them head on,” said Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung.

    The appearance will also serve as yet another contrast with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is seen as a top rival to Trump for the GOP presidential nomination and is expected to launch his campaign in the coming weeks. DeSantis has taken a sheltered media approach, largely eschewing questions from the mainstream press while embracing Fox News, which was once a loyal Trump cheerleader but which Trump now frequently denigrates.

    In response, Trump’s team has turned to new channels, including popular conservative podcasts and made-for-social-media videos that often rack up hundreds of thousands of views. His team has also been inviting reporters from a variety of outlets to ride aboard his plane and has been arranging unadvertised stops at local restaurants and other venues to show him interacting with cheering supporters, in contrast to the less charismatic DeSantis.

    It remains unclear how or whether Tuesday’s verdict will have any impact on the race. Trump’s indictment in New York only seemed to improve his standing in the GOP primary, and his top rivals largely avoided commenting Tuesday night, with a couple of exceptions.

    Former Arizona Gov. Asa Hutchinson, a vocal Trump critic, called the accusations “another example of the indefensible behavior of Donald Trump.” Tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy came to his defense and said he doubted a case would have even been brought if the defendant had been someone other than Trump.

    Even before Tuesday’s verdict, the CNN town hall — the first major television event of the 2024 presidential campaign — had raised suspicion from both sides of the political divide.

    Democrats questioned whether a man who continues to spread lies about his 2020 election loss — lies that sparked a deadly insurrection —- should be given a primetime airtime platform. Conservatives wondered why Trump would appear on — and potentially give a ratings bump to — a network that he has continually disparaged as “fake news.”

    A Trump adviser, who was not authorized to speak publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity, said CNN executives had made a compelling pitch to the former president during talks.

    The adviser also noted that Trump found success in 2016 by stepping outside Republicans’ traditional comfort zone.

    The former president plugged his appearance in a statement posted before Tuesday’s verdict, saying CNN was “rightfully desperate” to get a ratings bump from him.

    “They made me a deal I couldn’t refuse!!!” he wrote on Truth Social. “Could be the beginning of a New & Vibrant CNN, with no more Fake News, or it could turn into a disaster for all, including me. Let’s see what happens? Wednesday Night at 8:00!!!”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jury reaches verdict in suit accusing Trump of rape

    Jury reaches verdict in suit accusing Trump of rape

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Jurors reached a verdict Tuesday in the lawsuit accusing former President Donald Trump of raping advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in 1996.

    The verdict was to be announced at 3 p.m. in a federal courtroom in New York City.

    Word of the verdict emerged just a few hours after the jury began deliberating in the case, which alleges Trump raped Carroll in a luxury Manhattan department store in 1996.

    U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan read instructions on the law to the nine-person jury before the panel began discussing Carroll’s allegations of battery and defamation shortly before noon.

    If they believe Carroll, jurors can award compensatory and punitive damages. Trump, who did not attend the trial, has insisted he never sexually assaulted Carroll or even knew her.

    Kaplan told jurors that the first question on the verdict form will be to decide whether they think there is more than a 50% chance that Trump raped Carroll inside a store dressing room. If they answer yes, they will then decide whether compensatory and punitive damages should be awarded.

    If they answer no on the rape question, they can then decide if Trump subjected her to lesser forms of assault involving sexual contact without her consent or forcible touching to degrade her or gratify his sexual desire. If they answer yes on either of those questions, they will decide if damages are appropriate.

    On defamation claims stemming from a statement Trump made on social media last October, Kaplan said jurors must be guided by a higher legal standard — clear and convincing evidence. He said they would have to agree it was “highly probable” that Trump’s statement was false and was made maliciously with deliberate intent to injure or out of hatred or ill will with reckless disregard for Carroll’s rights.

    Meanwhile, Trump posted a new message on social media, complaining that he is now awaiting the jury’s decision “on a False Accusation.” He said he is “not allowed to speak or defend myself, even as hard nosed reporters scream questions about this case at me.”

    Trump said he will not speak until after the trial, “but will appeal the Unconstitutional silencing of me … no matter the outcome!”

    Trump never attended the trial, which is in its third week, and rejected an invitation to testify, which the judge extended through the weekend even after Trump’s attorney, Joe Tacopina, said Thursday that his client would not testify.

    Tacopina told the jury in closing arguments Monday that Carroll’s account is too far fetched to be believed. He said she made it up to fuel sales of a 2019 memoir in which she first publicly revealed her claims and to disparage Trump for political reasons.

    Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, cited excerpts from Trump’s October deposition and his notorious comments on a 2005 “Access Hollywood” video in which he said celebrities can grab women between the legs without asking.

    She urged jurors to believe her client.

    “He didn’t even bother to show up here in person,” Kaplan said. She said much of what he said in his deposition and in public statements “actually supports our side of the case.”

    “In a very real sense, Donald Trump is a witness against himself,” she said. “He knows what he did. He knows that he sexually assaulted E. Jean Carroll.”

    Carroll, 79, testified that she had a chance encounter with Trump at the Bergdorf Goodman store across the street from Trump Tower. She said it was a lighthearted interaction in which they teased each other about trying on a piece of lingerie before Trump became violent inside a dressing room.

    Tacopina told jurors there was no reason to call Trump as a witness when Carroll can’t even recall when her encounter with Trump happened.

    He told the jury Carroll made up her claims after hearing about a 2012 “Law and Order” episode in which a woman is raped in the dressing room of the lingerie section of a Bergdorf Goodman store.

    “They modeled their secret scheme on an episode of one of the most popular shows on television,” he said of Carroll.

    Two of Carroll’s friends testified that she told them about the encounter with Trump shortly after it happened, many years before the “Law and Order” episode aired.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jury deliberations begin in the civil trial over E. Jean Carroll’s rape claim against former President Donald Trump

    Jury deliberations begin in the civil trial over E. Jean Carroll’s rape claim against former President Donald Trump

    [ad_1]

    Jury deliberations begin in the civil trial over E. Jean Carroll’s rape claim against former President Donald Trump

    [ad_2]

    Source link