ReportWire

Tag: Juries

  • Jury: Filmmaker Paul Haggis liable for $7.5M in rape suit

    Jury: Filmmaker Paul Haggis liable for $7.5M in rape suit

    NEW YORK — A jury ordered Academy Award-winning filmmaker Paul Haggis Thursday to pay at least $7.5 million to a woman who accused him of rape in one of several #MeToo-era cases that have put Hollywood notables’ behavior on trial this fall. The jury also decided that additional punitive damages should be awarded, but the amount is to be decided later.

    Veering from sex to red-carpet socializing to Scientology, the civil court trial pitted Haggis, known for writing best picture Oscar winners “Million Dollar Baby” and “Crash,” against Haleigh Breest, a publicist who met him while working at movie premieres in the early 2010s. After a screening afterparty in January 2013, he offered her a lift home and invited her to his New York apartment for a drink.

    Breest, 36, said Haggis then subjected her to unwanted advances and ultimately compelled her to perform oral sex and raped her despite her entreaties to stop. Haggis, 69, said the publicist was flirtatious and, while sometimes seeming “conflicted,” initiated kisses and oral sex in an entirely consensual interaction. He said he couldn’t recall whether they had intercourse.

    Jurors sided with Breest, who said she suffered psychological and professional consequences from her encounter with Haggis. She sued in late 2017.

    “I thought I was getting a ride home. I agreed to have a drink. What happened never should have happened. And it had nothing to do with me, and everything to do with him and his actions,” she told jurors.

    The verdict came weeks after another civil jury, in the federal courthouse next door, decided that Kevin Spacey didn’t sexually abuse fellow actor and then-teenager Anthony Rapp in 1986. Meanwhile, “That ’70s Show” actor Danny Masterson and former movie magnate Harvey Weinstein are on trial, separately, on criminal rape charges in Los Angeles. Both deny the allegations, and Weinstein is appealing a conviction in New York.

    All four cases followed the #MeToo upwelling of denunciations, disclosures and demands for accountability about sexual misconduct, triggered by October 2017 news reports on decades of allegations about Weinstein.

    Breest, in particular, said she decided to sue Haggis because his public condemnations of Weinstein infuriated her: “This man raped me, and he is presenting himself as a champion of women to the world,” she recalled thinking.

    Four other women also testified that they experienced forceful, unwelcome passes — and in one case, rape — by Haggis in separate encounters going back to 1996. None of the four took legal action.

    “The behavior showed me that he was somebody who was never going to stop,” one woman testified, saying that Haggis repeatedly tried to kiss her against her will and even followed her into and out of a taxi to her apartment in Toronto in 2015. His lawyers sought to assail the accusers’ credibility.

    The Associated Press generally does not identify people who say they have been sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly, as Breest has done.

    Haggis denied all of the allegations. He told jurors the accusations left him shaken.

    “I’m scared because I don’t know why women, why anyone, would lie about things like this,” he said. His defense, meanwhile, introduced jurors to several women — including ex-wife and former longtime “Dallas” cast member Deborah Rennard — who said the screenwriter-director took it in stride when they rebuffed his romantic or sexual overtures.

    During three weeks of testimony, the trial scrutinized text messages that Breest sent to friends about what happened with Haggis, emails between them before and after the night in question, and some differences between their testimony and what they said in early court papers.

    The two sides debated whether Haggis was physically capable of carrying out the alleged attack eight weeks after a spinal surgery. Psychology experts offered dueling perspectives about what one called widespread misconceptions about rape victims’ behavior, such as assumptions that victims would have no subsequent contact with their attackers.

    And jurors heard extensive testimony about the Church of Scientology, the religion founded by science fiction and fantasy author L. Ron Hubbard in the 1950s. Haggis was an adherent for decades before publicly renouncing, and denouncing, Scientology in 2009.

    Through testimony from Haggis and other ex-members, his defense argued that the church set out to discredit him and might have had something to do with the lawsuit.

    No witnesses said they knew that Haggis’ accusers or Breest’s lawyers had Scientology ties, and his lawyers acknowledged that Breest herself does not. Still, Haggis lawyer Priya Chaudhry sought to persuade jurors that there were “the footprints, though maybe not the fingerprints, of Scientology’s involvement here.”

    The church said in a statement that it has no involvement in the matter, arguing that Haggis is trying to shame his accusers with an “absurd and patently false” claim. Breest’s lawyers have called it “a shameful and unsupported conspiracy theory.”

    The Canadian-born Haggis got his start as a TV writer, eventually penning episodes of such well-known 1980s series as “Diff’rent Strokes” and “Thirtysomething.” He broke into movies with a splash with “Million Dollar Baby” and “Crash,” which he also directed and co-produced. Each film won the Academy Award for best picture, for 2004 and 2005 respectively, and Haggis also won a screenwriting Oscar for “Crash.”

    His other credits include the Oscar-nominated screenplay for “Letters From Iwo Jima” and the screenplays for the James Bond movies “Casino Royale” and “Quantum of Solace.”

    Source link

  • Philadelphia councilman, wife acquitted of fraud charges

    Philadelphia councilman, wife acquitted of fraud charges

    PHILADELPHIA — A Philadelphia City Council member and his wife have been acquitted of corruption charges in federal court.

    Jurors deliberated for five days before finding Councilman Kenyatta Johnson and his wife, Dawn Chavous, not guilty Wednesday in their second trial on honest services wire fraud charges.

    The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that as the jury’s decision was announced, Johnson cradled his face in relief and Chavous embraced her attorney, then collapsed on the defense table in sobs. Outside the courtroom, Johnson thanked supporters “for their prayers and their emails and their showing up to court and believing in us.”

    “I’m looking forward to getting back to addressing the issue of gun violence here in the city of Philadelphia, and most importantly representing my constituents,” he told reporters.

    Earlier this year, a mistrial was declared in their first trial when jurors were unable to reach agreement after about 25 hours of deliberations over four days.

    Johnson, a Democrat who has served on the council since 2012, was accused of engaging in official actions in exchange for payments. Chavous was accused of having entered into a “sham” consulting agreement with a nonprofit that was used to funnel payments to her husband.

    Defense attorneys said prosecutors lacked evidence to support their case, defending the work of Chavous as legitimate and saying it had nothing to do with Johnson’s actions on the council.

    Source link

  • Alabama jury convicts parolee in 2018 triple killing

    Alabama jury convicts parolee in 2018 triple killing

    GUNTERSVILLE, Ala. — A man who was charged with killing two north Alabama women and a boy months after being paroled from prison was convicted of capital murder in the triple slaying and could be sentenced to death.

    Jurors deliberated about a half-hour Wednesday before convicting Jimmy O’Neal Spencer, 57, in the 2018 killings of Martha Reliford, 65; Marie Martin, 74; and 7-year-old Colton Lee, who was Martin’s great-grandson, news outlets reported.

    The women were killed in separate robberies that netted about $600, evidence showed, and the boy was killed because he was a witness.

    A Marshall County jury on Friday will consider either a sentence of life without parole or death for Spencer, who was paroled about eight months before the slayings after serving 28 years of two life sentences for a variety of convictions including burglary and assault.

    Politicians cited Spencer’s case in pushing to make the state’s parole process tougher and the rate of paroles has dropped sharply since then. The Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles refused to grant Spencer an early release in August while he was awaiting trial in the killings.

    Evidence over four days of trial showed Spencer did well initially after being released from prison but returned to crime after losing a job.

    The man went to the home of Reliford, whom he had met through a relative, and hit her in the head with a hatchet, authorities said. Worried the woman wasn’t dead, he cut her throat with a kitchen knife before fleeing with about $600.

    Days later, after the money ran out, he went to the home of Martin, who was Reliford’s neighbor, and strangled her with a dog leash before cutting her throat, news outlets reported. He bashed the child’s head with a hammer to prevent the boy from identifying him and left with $13, evidence showed.

    Jurors listened to a police recording in which Spencer admitted to the slayings.

    While the defense challenge Spencer’s mental competency, a judge ruled he was able to stand trial.

    Source link

  • Colorado businessman set for retrial over border wall fund

    Colorado businessman set for retrial over border wall fund

    NEW YORK — A Colorado businessman returns to New York Monday for a retrial on charges that he cheated thousands of donors to a $25 million online crowdfunding “We Build The Wall” campaign to construct a wall along the southern U.S. border.

    Timothy Shea’s first trial ended in early June without a verdict when jurors informed the judge that continuing to deliberate would leave them “further entrenched in our opposing views.”

    The case once included as a defendant Steve Bannon, a onetime top adviser to former President Donald Trump. Trump pardoned Bannon just before leaving office last year. Two others charged in the case pleaded guilty.

    The deadlocked jury came days after 11 jurors sent a note to the judge claiming one juror was politically biased against the government and in favor of Shea after labeling the rest of them as liberals and complaining the trial should have been held in a southern state.

    Jury selection in the second trial begins Monday morning in a Manhattan federal court.

    Last month, Judge Analisa Torres rejected Shea’s request to move the trial to Colorado on the grounds that “political polarization” in New York and publicity about his first trial made it impossible for him to get a fair result in Manhattan.

    She wrote that a jury note in his first trial might have indicated that differences in political opinions affected the jury’s deliberations, but he had not shown that those differences reflected a prejudice against him. And she said he had not explained why “political polarization” would be less pronounced in Colorado or anywhere else.

    Shea, of Castle Rock, Colorado, has pleaded not guilty to conspiracy and falsification of records charges lodged against him after questions arose over how donations were spent from a campaign that raised about $25 million for a wall. Only a few miles of wall were built.

    Prosecutors said Shea and other fund organizers promised investors that all donations would fund a wall, but Shea and the others eventually pocketed hundreds of thousands of dollars for themselves.

    Shea’s lawyers said he acted honorably in the fundraising campaign and did not commit a crime.

    Shea owns an energy drink company, Winning Energy, whose cans have featured a cartoon superhero image of Trump and claim to contain “12 oz. of liberal tears.”

    Source link

  • 2 cops head to trial for aiding George Floyd’s killing

    2 cops head to trial for aiding George Floyd’s killing

    MINNEAPOLIS — Two former Minneapolis police officers charged in George Floyd’s death are heading to trial on state aiding and abetting counts, the third and likely final criminal proceeding in a killing that mobilized protesters worldwide against racial injustice in policing.

    J. Alexander Kueng and Tou Thao have already been convicted of federal counts for violating Floyd’s civil rights and begun serving those sentences. Many witnesses expected to testify at their state trial have already done so at both their federal trial and at the state trial against their former colleague, Derek Chauvin.

    While much of the evidence in this proceeding will look similar, there will be some key differences.

    Here are a few things to know as jury selection gets underway Monday:

    WHAT IS THIS TRIAL ABOUT?

    Kueng, Thao and Thomas Lane were working with Chauvin on May 25, 2020, when Chauvin, who is white, used his knee to pin Floyd’s neck to the pavement for more than nine minutes as the 46-year-old Black man said he couldn’t breathe and eventually grew still. Kueng knelt on Floyd’s back, Lane held his legs and Thao kept bystanders back.

    Kueng, who is Black, and Thao, who is Hmong American, are each charged with aiding and abetting second-degree unintentional murder and aiding and abetting second-degree manslaughter. Prosecutors will have to prove they intentionally helped Chauvin. They don’t have to prove that they intended to kill Floyd or cause him great bodily harm.

    THE THIRD TRIAL

    Chauvin was the first officer to face trial in a livestreamed, weekslong proceeding filled with emotional testimony from bystanders, graphic video of Floyd’s dying moments and expert testimony about use of force as well as the mechanics of breathing. He was ultimately convicted of murder and manslaughter.

    The second trial in Floyd’s death came in federal court, where Lane, Kueng and Thao were all convicted of federal civil rights violations.

    “It’s going to be, I think, exhaustingly repetitive for the witnesses who have already testified multiple times and don’t want to relive this,” said Rachel Moran, a professor at the University of St. Thomas School of Law.

    But there will be some nuances. Moran said this case could be more difficult for prosecutors: While Chauvin’s offense was more direct because he had his knee on Floyd’s neck, prosecutors in this case have to show what Kueng and Thao intentionally did to help him commit a crime.

    Judge Peter Cahill has limited expert witnesses to try to avoid repetition. He’s also ordered attorneys not to ask questions designed to elicit emotion.

    SOME NOTABLE DIFFERENCES

    Witnesses won’t be allowed to ask the jury to take actions and follow along with demonstrations – as lung and critical care specialist Dr. Martin Tobin did during Chauvin’s trial. In that case, Tobin placed his hands on his own neck and encouraged jurors to do the same as he explained how he believed Floyd died. Jurors said later that Tobin provided some of the trial’s most compelling evidence.

    It’s also unknown if a girl who was just 9 at the time of Floyd’s killing will testify. Prosecutors want to call her to argue that even a young girl knew something was wrong – so the officers should have known as well. The defense has countered that her testimony isn’t that different from that of other bystanders and will only play upon jurors’ emotions. She previously testified at Chauvin’s trial.

    Cahill encouraged prosecutors not to call the girl because testifying in a murder trial can be traumatic, especially for children, but he didn’t bar them from doing so.

    WERE PLEA DEALS OFFERED?

    Yes. Both Kueng and Thao rejected offers for three-year sentences that would have been served at the same time as their federal sentences. Thao told Cahill: “It would be lying for me to accept any plea offer.”

    That set them apart from Lane, who pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting manslaughter and got three years. Kueng and Thao are risking significantly longer sentences; the murder charge has a recommended sentence of 12 1/2 years, and prosecutors say they intend to seek more.

    “The reality is, it’s their right (to go to trial) and Tou Thao in particular seems to just believe that he has done nothing wrong and therefore he can’t admit to doing anything wrong,” Moran said.

    JURY SELECTION

    Hundreds of prospective jurors were sent a 17-page questionnaire that explored how much they know about the case, their views on police and whether they’ve participated in civil rights marches, among other things.

    Sixteen people will be chosen; 12 will deliberate.

    Jurors will be questioned individually about their views and whether they can be fair. An unlimited number of potential jurors can be dismissed “for cause,” such as when a juror has shown that he or she can’t be impartial.

    Each side may also dismiss jurors with a limited number of peremptory strikes, which don’t require a reason but can be challenged if the other side believes it’s due solely to a potential juror’s race or gender.

    The defense gets 10 such strikes — five for each defendant — and the state gets six.

    The key will be finding jurors who can be impartial. Moran said that while diversity on a jury is important, the idea that a jury’s racial composition will affect the outcome has been called into question. She noted that the jury that convicted Kueng and Thao of federal charges was mostly white, as was the state jury that convicted Kim Potter, then an officer in the Minneapolis suburb of Brooklyn Center, in the 2021 fatal shooting of Black motorist Daunte Wright.

    TRIAL LOGISTICS

    Opening statements begin Nov. 7. The trial won’t be livestreamed. Cameras in courts are rare in Minnesota, and Chauvin’s was livestreamed due to the high public interest and courtroom space limitations because of COVID-19 restrictions.

    WHERE ARE THEY NOW?

    Kueng and Thao reported to federal prison earlier this month to begin serving their sentences for violating Floyd’s rights. Kueng is serving three years at federal prison in Ohio and Thao is serving 3½ years at a facility in Kentucky.

    They will be in custody in Minnesota during the trial.

    Lane, who is white, is serving his 2 ½-year federal sentence at a facility in Colorado. He’s serving a 3-year state sentence at the same time.

    Chauvin was sentenced to 22 ½ years on the state murder charge and 21 years on a federal count of violating Floyd’s rights. He’s serving those sentences simultaneously at a federal prison in Arizona.

    ———

    Find AP’s full coverage of the killing of George Floyd at: https://apnews.com/hub/death-of-george-floyd

    Source link

  • Concussion lawsuit against NCAA could be first to reach jury

    Concussion lawsuit against NCAA could be first to reach jury

    LOS ANGELES — A lawsuit alleging the NCAA failed to protect a former University of South California player from repeated concussions is nearing trial in a Los Angeles court, with a jury seated Thursday in what could become a landmark case.

    The suit filed by Matthew Gee’s widow says the former USC linebacker died in 2018 from permanent brain damage caused by countless blows to the head he took while playing for the 1990 Rose Bowl winning team, whose roster also included future NFL star Junior Seau.

    Of the hundreds of wrongful death and personal injury lawsuits brought by college players against the NCAA in the past decade, Gee’s is only the second to head toward trial and could be the first to reach a jury.

    The issue of concussions in sports, and in particular, has been front and center in recent years as research has discovered more about long-term effects of repeated head trauma in problems ranging from headaches to depression and, sometimes, early onset Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s disease.

    “For years (the NCAA) has kept players like Matthew Gee and the public in the dark about an epidemic that was slowly killing college athletes,” Alana Gee’s lawsuit said. “Long after they played their last game, they are left with a series of neurological conditions that could slowly strangle their brains.”

    The NCAA, the governing body of college athletics, said it wasn’t responsible for Gee’s tragic death, which it blamed on heavy drinking, drugs and other ailments.

    “Mr. Gee used alcohol and drugs to cope with a traumatic childhood, to fill in the loss of identity he felt after his playing days ended, and to numb the chronic and increasing pain caused by numerous health issues,” NCAA lawyers wrote in a court filing.

    A 2018 trial in Texas led to a swift settlement after several days of testimony by witnesses for the plaintiff, the widow of Greg Ploetz, who played defense for Texas in the late 1960s.

    In 2016, the NCAA agreed to settle a class-action concussion lawsuit, paying $70 million to monitor the medical conditions of former college athletes, another $5 million toward medical research and payments up to $5,000 toward individual players claiming injuries.

    The NFL has been hit with similar suits and eventually agreed to a settlement covering 20,000 retired players providing up to $4 million for a death involving chronic traumatic encephalopathy, also known as CTE, a degenerative brain disease found in athletes and military veterans who suffered repetitive brain injuries.

    Lawyers said they expected NFL payouts to top $1.4 billion over 65 years for six qualifying conditions, including Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and dementia.

    Gee, 49, was one of five linebackers on the 1989 Trojans squad who died before turning 50. As with Seau, who killed himself in 2012, Gee’s brain was examined posthumously and found to have CTE.

    The defense has sought to exclude any testimony about Gee’s teammates, and the NCAA said there was no medical evidence Gee suffered from concussions at USC.

    Two ex-teammates, however, testified at depositions about blows they routinely took in an era when they were told to hit with their heads.

    Mike Salmon, who played defense at USC and went on to the NFL’s San Francisco 49ers and Buffalo Bills, said he distinctly recalled Gee and other linebackers being “out of it” during hard-hitting practices.

    “Matt hit like a truck,” Salmon said. “I saw him quite a bit coming back to the huddle. You could tell … he wasn’t all there.”

    “It was our job to make helmet-to-helmet contact in the ’80s,” Gene Fruge, a former nose-tackle testified. “There was no question about it. That was your job, to explode the man in front of you.”

    The NCAA, which required schools in 2010 to have a concussion protocol, said it gave them “state-of-the-art” information about head injury risks known at the time Gee played. It said long-term effects of head injuries weren’t well understood then.

    Gee’s lawsuit said the debilitating effects of concussions and other traumatic brain impacts have been known for about a century, first from studies of “punch drunk” boxers and later from findings in football and other contact sports.

    “The NCAA knew of the harmful effects … on athletes for decades, they ignored these facts and failed to institute any meaningful methods of warning and/or protecting the athletes,” the lawsuit said. “For the NCAA, the continued expansion and operation of college football was simply too profitable to put at risk.”

    After graduating in 1992, Gee was cut by the Los Angeles Raiders in training camp. He married Alana, his college sweetheart, and they had three children as he ran his own insurance company in Southern California. For 20 years, he lived a “relatively normal” life, the suit said.

    But that began to change around 2013 when he began to lose control of his emotions, the lawsuit said. He became angry, confused and depressed. He drank heavily. He told a doctor days would go by without him being able to recall what happened.

    When he died on New Year’s Eve 2018, the preliminary cause of death was listed as the combined toxic effects of alcohol and cocaine with other significant conditions of cardiovascular disease, cirrhosis and obesity.

    Joseph Low, a Los Angeles lawyer for clients with traumatic brain injury who is not involved in the case, said drug and alcohol abuse can become a symptom of brain injuries as those suffering try to self-medicate, particularly as they deteriorate.

    Blaming Gee’s death on substance abuse will not shield the NCAA from evidence showing he had CTE, which is not caused by drugs and alcohol, Low said.

    “The whole discussion about drugs and alcohol isn’t going to get it done for them. That’s a distraction,” Low said. “It’s really a disgusting way to do character assassination. It’s what you call defense strategy 101.”

    Source link

  • Suit over rape claim against filmmaker Haggis heads to trial

    Suit over rape claim against filmmaker Haggis heads to trial

    NEW YORK — Opening statements are expected Wednesday in a civil case brought by a publicist who accused Oscar-winning filmmaker Paul Haggis of raping her almost a decade ago.

    Jury selection began Monday in a Manhattan courtroom.

    The lawsuit was filed in 2017 as a wave of sexual misconduct accusations against prominent men was propelling the #MeToo movement to new visibility. At least four other women subsequently alleged that Haggis, a screenwriter known for “Crash” and “Million Dollar Baby,” sexually assaulted them or tried to do so.

    The New York lawsuit centers on publicist Haleigh Breest’s allegation that Haggis offered her a ride home from a movie premiere, invited her to his Manhattan apartment for a drink, rebuffed her suggestion that they go to a public bar instead, and then raped her at the apartment.

    The filmmaker, who declined to comment as he left court Monday, maintains that the encounter was consensual.

    His defense may also feature an allegation of sinister intrigue: His lawyers have suggested that the Church of Scientology engineered false accusations of sexual misdeeds to ruin Haggis, a former longtime member who became an outspoken critic.

    The church has said it had no involvement in the allegations against Haggis, and his accuser’s lawyers have called it “a shameful and unsupported conspiracy theory unworthy of any trial proceeding.”

    But Judge Sabrina Kraus ruled last month that Haggis’ lawyers can bring up Scientology, saying that “the jury is entitled to be informed of any possible motive (the) plaintiff may have and about the church’s efforts to discredit Haggis.”

    No criminal charges were filed in connection with Breest’s accusation. Her lawsuit could mean a financial penalty, but not prison or probation for Haggis if she prevails. She is seeking unspecified damages.

    After the suit was filed in late 2017, three other women told her attorneys and The Associated Press that Haggis had sexually assaulted them or attempted to do so. One said he had raped her. In response, his lawyer said Haggis “didn’t rape anybody.”

    Kraus ruled last month that those three women can also testify as part of Breest’s effort to demonstrate Haggis’ “intent and lack of consent.”

    Jurors won’t be allowed to hear that Haggis was detained for about two weeks at an Italian hotel in June while authorities investigated allegations that he sexually assaulted a woman there. Haggis was in Italy for an arts festival.

    Haggis’ Italian attorney said the filmmaker was innocent, and in early July, a judge released him while prosecutors considered whether to pursue their inquiry. The judge concluded that Haggis hadn’t engaged in “constrictive violent behavior,” according to the newspaper Corriere della Sera.

    The Associated Press does not usually name people alleging sexual assault unless they come forward publicly, as Breest has done.

    The Canadian-born Haggis wrote “Million Dollar Baby” and “Crash,” which won back-to-back Academy Awards for best picture in the mid-2000s. He also directed and was a producer of “Crash,” which garnered him and Bobby Moresco the best original screenplay Oscar in 2006. The next year, Haggis was nominated in the same category for “Letters from Iwo Jima.”

    Source link

  • Parkland shooter’s life sentence could bring changes to law

    Parkland shooter’s life sentence could bring changes to law

    FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — It wasn’t long ago that Florida school shooter Nikolas Cruz would have been looking at a near-certain death sentence for murdering 17 people in Parkland, even if his jury could not unanimously agree on his fate.

    Until 2016, Florida law allowed trial judges to impose a death sentence if a majority of the jurors agreed. With a 9-3 vote Thursday supporting Cruz’s execution, Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer would have likely sent him to Death Row for the 2018 massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High.

    Now, however, a vote of anything less than 12-0 means an automatic sentence of life without parole — a standard the Stoneman Douglas families and the head of the state’s prosecutors association want changed. That would again put Florida in a distinct minority among the 27 states that still have the death penalty where almost all require juror unanimity.

    Ed Brodsky, president of the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association, believes the Legislature will next year consider changing the law it passed after a pair of court decisions rejected the old law.

    “When there is an overwhelmingly majority and sentiment about what the ultimate penalty should be, should one minority voice be able to dominate and hijack justice?” said Brodsky, the elected state attorney for Sarasota County and its neighbors.

    Gov. Ron DeSantis at a Friday press conference criticized the sentence, but wouldn’t specify what changes he would support.

    “We need to do some reforms to be better serving victims of crimes and the families of victims of crimes and not always bend over backwards to do everything we need to for the perpetrators of crimes,” DeSantis said.

    Cruz, 24, pleaded guilty a year ago to the murder of 14 Stoneman Douglas students and three staff members on Feb. 14, 2018. That left it up to the seven-man, five-woman jury to only decide whether he would be sentenced to death or life without parole.

    The three-month trial included horrific prosecution videos, photos and testimony about Cruz’s murders. That was followed by defense testimony about his birth mother’s heavy drinking during pregnancy that witnesses said created a brain-damaged person who began displaying erratic, bizarre and violent behavior at age 2.

    After seven hours of deliberations, the jurors announced Thursday they unanimously agreed the prosecution’s argument for aggravating factors such as the multiple deaths and Cruz’s planning did exist, but not on whether those outweighed the mitigating circumstances. Scherer will impose Cruz’s life sentence Nov. 1.

    “If this was not the most perfect death penalty case, then why do we have the death penalty at all?” said Linda Beigel Schulman, the mother of slain teacher Scott Beigel.

    But some defense attorneys and capital punishment experts said it wasn’t surprising the jurors couldn’t unanimously agree. Only 18 death sentences were handed down nationwide last year, two of them in Florida.

    The latest Gallup Poll showed 54% of Americans favor the death penalty, down from 80% in the mid-1990s. And while the Cruz jurors all said they could vote for the death penalty if chosen, they didn’t say they support it.

    “At first glance, you think to yourself, ‘My God, how can you not vote for the death penalty?’” said Richard Escobar, a Tampa defense attorney and former prosecutor. He has tried capital cases in both roles. “But you’ve got to reflect and think to yourself, ‘If this person was truly mentally ill, you shouldn’t impose the death penalty because they got that mental illness through no fault of their own.’”

    Robert Dunham, the Death Penalty Information Center’s executive director, said the Cruz case has a lot in common with the 2012 shooting at an Aurora, Colorado, movie theater where 12 people died. In that case, 11 jurors voted for death while one disagreed based on testimony about the shooter’s mental illness. That meant a life sentence.

    “It’s not a question of does the murder warrant the death penalty. (Cruz) is clearly the type of case in which a jury could reasonably impose the death penalty,” Dunham said. “The question is ‘Does the defendant deserve the death penalty?’”

    Florida’s law allowing for a majority jury vote had been in place for decades before it was overturned, but it was an outlier. Almost all death penalty states required unanimity throughout those years or adopted it. Alabama allows a death sentence after a 10-2 vote. Missouri and Indiana allow the judge to decide if jurors unanimously agree the aggravating circumstances exist but can’t agree on a sentence.

    Then in 2016, by an 8-1 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court threw out Florida’s law, saying the judge had too much weight in the decision.

    The Legislature passed a bill requiring a 10-2 jury recommendation, but the state Supreme Court overturned it. In 2017, the law was changed to require a unanimous jury.

    Three years later, however, DeSantis, a Republican, replaced three retiring Florida justices with more conservative jurists and the state court rescinded the earlier decision. It said a death recommendation no longer needed to be unanimous, but legislators through three annual sessions haven’t changed the law back from unanimity. DeSantis never pushed them.

    David S. Weinstein, a Miami criminal defense lawyer and former prosecutor, doesn’t think DeSantis and the Legislature will make any changes to unanimity next year, either — that would risk the U.S. Supreme Court throwing out the state law again.

    “That ship has sailed,” he said.

    But will the Cruz sentence make Florida prosecutors less likely to seek the death penalty?

    Craig Trocino, a University of Miami law professor who previously handled death penalty appeals, doesn’t think so.

    “It might even harden their resolve,” he said.

    Still, he said, it is difficult to make broad predictions on the impact fringe cases like Cruz will have. No U.S. mass shooter who killed as many or more than Cruz had ever gone to trial — nine were killed by themselves or police during their attack or immediately after. A 10th is awaiting trial in Texas.

    On Cruz’s side, it is rare for attorneys to have so much documentation supporting their mitigating circumstances. The Broward public defender’s office also had better-quality attorneys to assign to Cruz’s case and more money for investigations than their counterparts in smaller jurisdictions typically do, he said.

    In those counties, “Mitigation would be one witness and it would be mama saying, ‘He was always a troubled kid,’” Trocino said.

    ——

    Gresko reported from Washington, D.C. Farrington reported from Tallahassee, Florida. AP reporter Anthony Izaguirre in Tallahassee contributed to this report.

    Source link

  • Parkland shooter prosecutors call for probe of juror threat

    Parkland shooter prosecutors call for probe of juror threat

    FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — Prosecutors in the case of Florida school shooter Nikolas Cruz are calling for an investigation after a juror said she felt threatened by another member of the jury during deliberations that ended Thursday with a life sentence for Cruz’s murder of 17 people.

    The motion calls for law enforcement to interview the unnamed juror after she told the state attorney’s office about what “she perceived to be a threat from a fellow juror while in the jury room.” No further details were given. A hearing is set for Friday afternoon.

    A divided jury spared Cruz the death penalty and instead decided to send him to prison for the rest of his life in a decision that left many families of the victims angered, baffled and in tears. Cruz, 24, pleaded guilty a year ago to murdering 14 students and three staff members, and wounding 17 others, at Parkland’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on Feb. 14, 2018.

    Florida criminal defense attorneys Richard Escobar and David Weinstein, who are both former prosecutors, said that even if a threat was made, the jury’s decision will not be overturned because of double jeopardy, or trying the same defendant twice for the same crime.

    Weinstein pointed to a 1990s case involving two drug kingpins who bribed a jury and were acquitted. Even under that circumstance, prosecutors couldn’t retry the duo for drug trafficking, but did convict them on charges stemming from the bribery.

    Under Florida law, a death sentence requires a unanimous vote on at least one count. The 12-person jury unanimously agreed there were aggravating factors to warrant a possible death sentence, such as agreeing that the murders were “especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel.”

    But one or more jurors also found mitigating factors, such as untreated childhood problems. In the end, the jury could not agree that the aggravating factors outweighed the mitigating ones, so Cruz will get life without parole. Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer will formally issue the life sentences Nov. 1. Relatives, along with the students and teachers Cruz wounded, will be given the opportunity to speak.

    The jurors pledged during the selection process that they could vote for a death sentence, but some victims’ parents, some of whom attended the trial almost daily, wondered whether all of them were being honest.

    Juror Denise Cunha sent a short handwritten note to the judge Thursday defending her vote for a life sentence and denying she intended to vote that way before the trial began.

    “The deliberations were very tense and some jurors became extremely unhappy once I mentioned that I would vote for life,” Cunha wrote. She did not explain her vote and it is unknown if she is the juror who complained to the state attorney’s office.

    Jury foreman Benjamin Thomas told local reporters that three jurors voted for life on the final ballot. Two were willing to reconsider, but one was a “hard no” for the death penalty.

    “It really came down to a specific (juror) that he (Cruz) was mentally ill,” Thomas said. He did not say whether that person was Cunha.

    ———

    Izaguirre reported from Tallahassee, Florida.

    Source link

  • Nikola founder’s trial ready for jury after final arguments

    Nikola founder’s trial ready for jury after final arguments

    NEW YORK — The fate of Nikola Corp ’s founder will be in the hands of a jury after he was portrayed Thursday in closing arguments by a prosecutor as a habitual liar, and by his lawyer as an inspiring visionary being unjustly prosecuted.

    Trevor Milton, 40, has pleaded not guilty to securities and wire fraud. In 2020, he resigned from the company he founded in a Utah basement six years ago.

    Deliberations will begin Friday in the Manhattan federal criminal trial, after it was delayed for over a week after Milton’s lawyer tested positive for the coronavirus.

    In closings Thursday, defense attorney Marc Mukasey urged acquittal, saying there was “a stunning lack of evidence” that his client ever intended to cheat investors.

    “The government never proved fraud,” Mukasey said. “There were no crimes here and Trevor Milton is not guilty.”

    In 2020, Nikola’s stock price plunged and investors suffered heavy losses as reports questioned Milton’s claims that the company had already produced zero-emission 18-wheel trucks.

    The company paid $125 million last year to settle a civil case against it by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Nikola, which continues to operate from an Arizona headquarters, didn’t admit any wrongdoing.

    In his closing rebuttal argument, Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew Podolsky insisted the evidence was overwhelming that Milton lied repeatedly to make it seem Nikola had produced operable trucks fueled by hydrogen gas and that the company had billions of dollars in contracts when they didn’t exist.

    Podolsky said Milton wanted to get rich and learned that he could dupe investors into supporting Nikola through lies, like when he claimed Nikola had built its own revolutionary truck that was actually a General Motors Corp. product with Nikola’s logo stamped onto it.

    Another example was when he sped up the video of a truck rolling down a hill to make it seem like the company had developed a fully functioning truck when it had not, the prosecutor said.

    “The lies. That is what this case is about,” Podolsky said.

    He said Milton went on television news programs to tell his lies and tweeted them as well.

    Podolsky told jurors not to accept Mukasey’s explanations for his client’s behavior, including arguments that Milton had the support of the company’s board of directors and was not warned by anyone to stop conveying his enthusiasm for Nikola publicly.

    “This is the robber blaming the guard for not stopping him,” he said.

    Source link

  • Jury reaches decision on sentence of Parkland school shooter

    Jury reaches decision on sentence of Parkland school shooter

    FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — A jury said Thursday that it has reached a decision on whether to recommend that Florida school shooter Nikolas Cruz be executed for the 2018 massacre that killed 17 people at Parkland’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

    The recommendation was not immediately released and came in the second day of deliberations, 15 minutes after jurors arrived and examined the gun Cruz used.

    The decision promises an end to a three-month trial that included graphic videos, photos and testimony from the massacre and its aftermath, heart-wrenching testimony from victims’ family members and a tour of the still blood-spattered building.

    The jury’s decision must be unanimous if it intends to recommend the death penalty, and if that happens, it will be up to Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer to make a final decision. If all jurors can’t agree on recommending death, then Cruz would get life in prison.

    The jury of 12 people had asked late Wednesday to see the AR-15-style semi-automatic rifle, but the Broward County Sheriff’s Office security team objected, even though the gun has been made inoperable and Cruz’s ammunition would be removed from the jury room.

    Lead prosecutor Mike Satz, who has more the five decades of experience, pointed out that in every murder case he has tried or knows, jurors got to examine and handle the weapon in their room — and he said a knife or machete is more dangerous than a gun without a firing pin. Security has never been an issue, he said.

    Cruz’s attorneys had no objection to jurors seeing the gun.

    Cruz, 24, pleaded guilty a year ago to murdering 14 students and three staff members and wounding 17 others on Feb. 14, 2018. Cruz said he chose Valentine’s Day to make it impossible for Stoneman Douglas students to celebrate the holiday ever again. The jury will determine only if Cruz is sentenced to death or life without parole. For Cruz to get a death sentence, the jury must be unanimous.

    During the prosecution’s rebuttal case, Satz and his team argued that Cruz’s smooth movements with the gun and his ease in reloading helps show he does not have any neurological disorders, as claimed by his attorneys.

    Lead defense attorney Melisa McNeill and her team have never disputed that Cruz committed a horrible crime, but they say his birth mother’s excessive drinking during pregnancy left him with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder and put him on a path that led to the shooting.

    The massacre is the deadliest mass shooting that has ever gone to trial in the U.S. Nine other people in the U.S. who fatally shot at least 17 people died during or immediately after their attacks by suicide or police gunfire. The suspect in the 2019 massacre of 23 at an E l Paso, Texas, Walmart is awaiting trial.

    Source link

  • Weinstein lawyer decries ‘almost medieval’ cell conditions

    Weinstein lawyer decries ‘almost medieval’ cell conditions

    LOS ANGELES — Harvey Weinstein’s attorney told the judge at his sexual assault trial Tuesday that conditions in the holding cell where he’s being kept after court are “unhygienic” and “almost medieval.”

    Attorney Mark Werksman asked Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Lisa B. Lench for help with the issue at the beginning of the second day of jury selection in the former movie mogul’s trial on 11 counts of rape and sexual assault.

    He said Weinstein is being left alone in his wheelchair for three or four hours in an “unsanitary, fetid” holding cell at the courthouse before he is taken back to jail.

    “It’s almost medieval, the conditions,” Werksman said. “He’s 70 years old. I’m worried about him surviving this ordeal without a heart attack or stroke.”

    Weinstein, and the panel of 71 jurors who were brought in to fill out an initial questionnaire on Tuesday, were not yet present during Werksman’s remarks.

    Lench replied that she would talk to deputies from the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, which runs the jails and transports inmates to court, but that her power was limited over the matter.

    “I’m not minimizing it, I’m just not sure there’s a lot to be done,” she said.

    Weinstein, who is allowed to change into a suit from his jail attire for trial, was wheeled into the courtroom soon after, and slowly and carefully climbed into a seat at the defense table.

    Werksman then raised the issue again, suggesting Weinstein didn’t have a toilet to use in the cell.

    Lench replied, “He’s not deprived of a toilet, there is a toilet in the cell. I’m not going to let the record reflect that he’s deprived of a toilet.”

    Werksman said he didn’t mean to suggest there was no toilet at all, but said “It is unhygienic, it is virtually unusable, it is medieval.”

    An email seeking comment from the Sheriff’s Department was not immediately returned.

    Weinstein’s attorneys have brought up his failing health repeatedly both during his New York trial, where he was sentenced to 23 years in prison for convictions of rape and sexual assault, and in his pre-trial hearings in Los Angeles.

    He was hospitalized with chest pains and had a heart procedure immediately after he was found guilty in New York in February of 2020, and was diagnosed with COVID-19 in prison in the first weeks of the pandemic.

    His lawyers have said he has diabetes and is “technically blind.” They have asked the judge for permission to see an outside dentist because the one he sees in jail keeps pulling out his teeth.

    In court, he appears pale and frail, looking nothing like the bearish man who once lorded over the Oscars every year.

    Weinstein’s trial, which comes five years after women’s stories about him gave momentum to the #MeToo movement, is expected to last eight weeks. With the slow process of screening and selecting jurors from a pool or more than 200, opening statements aren’t expected until Oct. 24.

    ———

    Follow AP Entertainment Writer Andrew Dalton on Twitter: twitter.com/andyjamesdalton

    Source link

  • Jurors deliberate for a 2nd full day in Alex Jones’ trial

    Jurors deliberate for a 2nd full day in Alex Jones’ trial

    WATERBURY, Conn. — A Connecticut jury deliberated Tuesday but has reached no verdict so far in its effort to decide on how much conspiracy theorist Alex Jones should pay for spreading the lie that the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting was staged by “crisis actors.”

    The jurors ended their second full day of discussions by asking to revisit testimony Wednesday from William Sherlach, who lost his wife, Mary, in the massacre. He is one of the plaintiffs in the defamation lawsuit.

    Jones and his company, Free Speech Systems, were found liable for damages last year to 15 plaintiffs for broadcasting a conspiracy theory that no children died in the shooting and that the victims’ relatives were part of an elaborate hoax.

    Twenty-six people died in the attack at the school in Newtown, Connecticut. Jones repeatedly told his millions of followers on his Infowars website show that the shooting didn’t happen.

    In often-emotional and tearful testimony in a Waterbury courtroom, victims’ relatives and the FBI agent said they have been tormented and threatened — in person, by mail and on social media — by people who believed those lies.

    The plaintiffs’ lawyers have suggested to the jury that a just verdict could be in the hundred of millions of dollars. Jones’ lawyer has said any damages awarded should be minimal.

    Jurors asked Tuesday morning for help interpreting a sentence in their instructions on determining damages. In response, they were advised to consider the lengthy instructions as a whole.

    The trial began Sept. 13. On the witness stand, Jones said he was “done saying I’m sorry” for calling the shooting a hoax. Outside the courthouse, he’s called the legal proceedings a “show trial” aimed at putting him out of business.

    Source link

  • California governor’s wife among accusers at Weinstein trial

    California governor’s wife among accusers at Weinstein trial

    LOS ANGELES — Jennifer Siebel Newsom, a documentary filmmaker and actor who is married to California Gov. Gavin Newsom, is among the accusers of Harvey Weinstein who will testify at his rape and sexual assault trial that began Monday, her attorney said.

    “Like many other women, my client was sexually assaulted by Harvey Weinstein at a purported business meeting that turned out to be a trap,” Newsom’s attorney Elizabeth Fegan said in a statement. “She intends to testify at his trial in order to seek some measure of justice for survivors, and as part of her life’s work to improve the lives of women.”

    Weinstein, the 70-year-old former movie mogul who is serving a 23-year prison sentence after a conviction in New York, has pleaded not guilty to 11 counts of rape and sexual assault involving Newsom and four other women. All of them will testify as Jane Doe during the eight-week trial in a Los Angeles court, where jury selection began Monday.

    The Associated Press does not normally name people who say they’ve been sexually abused, but Newsom agreed to be named through her attorney.

    The news of her involvement was first reported by The Los Angeles Times.

    Newsom, 48, appeared in small roles in dozens of films and television shows between 2002 and 2011. Recently she has directed documentaries including “The Great American Lie” in 2020 and “Fair Play” from this year. Both deal with gender in society.

    She wrote about her experience with Weinstein in a 2017 essay in the Huffington Post after the New York Times and New Yorker stories made him a magnet of the #MeToo movement, but gave few details.

    Weinstein, who is being held in a Los Angeles County jail, was brought Monday into court in a wheelchair through a side door, and climbed from it carefully into a seat next to one of his lawyers at the defense table. He was wearing a blue suit, which he is allowed to change into from his jail attire during the trial.

    He stood with the rest of the room as the first panel of 67 prospective jurors were brought in, but sat down about halfway through the process. He waved at them from his seat when his lawyers introduced them.

    The jurors were given a lengthy questionnaire intended to screen out those who need to be dismissed. Both the questions and answers on the forms are private, but previous hearings on its contents revealed that it contains questions on how much media coverage of Weinstein they have seen, and whether they have formed opinions from it, though the judge rejected questions on specific stories and media outlets.

    The prosecution will be allowed to introduce as evidence parts of Weinstein’s conviction for rape and sexual assault, where the state’s highest court has agreed to hear his appeal.

    The questionnaire also includes a question about a California law that says the testimony alone of a sexual assault victim can be sufficient evidence to convict if a juror believes them.

    The jurors were also given a long list of names of witnesses in the coming trial, including those of the accusers to determine whether they have any connection to them. The initial witness list in the case had more than 270 names, though fewer than half that are expected. Most of the prospective witness list has not been made public.

    One witness, Barbara Schneeweiss, a producer on “Project Runway” and other television shows, was present in court early Monday and was told by a judge she was on call to come in at any time.

    Two more panels of up to 75 jurors will be brought in Tuesday and Wednesday. Questioning of individual jurors is not expected to begin until next week, and opening statements may not begin for two weeks.

    The trial comes five years after women’s stories about Weinstein made the #MeToo movement explode.

    Weinstein is charged with four counts of rape and seven other sexual assault counts.

    Most of the incidents in his indictment, like Newsom’s, happened under the guise of business meetings at luxury hotels in Beverly Hills and Los Angeles, which Weinstein used as his California headquarters and where he could be seen during awards season and throughout the year. Four of them occurred during Oscars week 2013, when Weinstein releases “Silver Linings Playbook” and “Django Unchained” would win Academy Awards.

    ———

    Follow AP Entertainment Writer Andrew Dalton on Twitter: twitter.com/andyjamesdalton

    Source link

  • Jury in 3rd trial won’t hear earlier results in Whitmer plot

    Jury in 3rd trial won’t hear earlier results in Whitmer plot

    The results of two federal trials won’t be shared with jurors hearing evidence against three men who are charged in connection with a plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a judge said Monday.

    Defense lawyers pressed a judge in Jackson, Michigan, to let the jury know what happened to the six men who were separately charged with conspiracy in federal court.

    An FBI agent has presented text messages, social media posts and recorded conversations to try to tie the three men to the others who were considered bigger players in the scheme. But two of those six were acquitted earlier this year, a result that wasn’t revealed during Hank Impola’s testimony.

    “Bring it all in,” Leonard Ballard, an attorney for Joe Morrison, urged Judge Thomas Wilson with the jury out of the courtroom.

    “It’s the truth and it’s the whole truth,” Ballard said. “I’m not comfortable with us continuing to tap dance around.”

    Morrison, Pete Musico and Paul Bellar are charged in state court with providing material assistance for a terrorist act. They were members of a paramilitary group, the Wolverine Watchmen, that held training sessions, but they’re not accused of having a direct role in the kidnapping plot.

    Wilson agreed that the results of the federal case could be relevant to the defense. But he said disclosure could be unfair to prosecutors.

    “We’re dealing with different charges,” the judge said. “As attorneys, I think that’s much easier to understand. But when it comes to a jury of 12 lay people to understand those differences, I’m concerned that it would be overly prejudicial.”

    Wilson said jurors might think: “’Well, if they got off, why shouldn’t these guys get off?’ The charges were significantly different and more serious.”

    Daniel Harris and Brandon Caserta were acquitted of conspiracy in federal court last spring. Adam Fox and Barry Croft Jr., were convicted in August. Ty Garbin and Kaleb Franks pleaded guilty.

    The six were accused of training and planning to kidnap Whitmer at her vacation home in 2020 to ignite a civil war, known to anti-government extremists as the “boogaloo.” The FBI, however, had undercover agents and informants inside the group and broke it up.

    ———

    White reported from Detroit.

    Source link

  • Harvey Weinstein goes on trial in LA, where he once reigned

    Harvey Weinstein goes on trial in LA, where he once reigned

    LOS ANGELES — Five years after women’s stories about him made the #MeToo movement explode, Harvey Weinstein is going on trial in the city where he once was a colossus at the Oscars.

    Already serving a 23-year sentence for rape and sexual assault in New York, the 70-year-old former movie mogul faces different allegations including several that prosecutors say occurred during a pivotal Oscar week in Los Angeles. Jury selection for an eight-week trial begins Monday.

    Weinstein has been indicted on four counts of rape and seven other sexual assault counts involving five women, who will appear in court as Jane Does to tell their stories. He has pleaded not guilty.

    Four more women will be allowed to take the stand to give accounts of Weinstein sexual assaults that did not lead to charges, but which prosecutors hope will show jurors he had a propensity for committing such acts.

    Starting in the 1990s, Weinstein, through the company Miramax that he ran with his brother, was an innovator in running broad and aggressive campaigns promoting Academy Award nominees. He had unmatched success, pushing films like “Shakespeare in Love” and “The Artist” to best picture wins and becoming among the most thanked men ever during Oscar acceptance speeches.

    Miramax and its successor The Weinstein Co. were based in New York, where Weinstein lived and did business, but that didn’t diminish his presence in Hollywood.

    “He was a creature of New York, but he was also a creature of Los Angeles,” said Kim Masters, editor at large for The Hollywood Reporter and a longtime observer of the movie industry. “He had this huge Golden Globes party that was always well beyond capacity when he was in his heyday. He was the King of Hollywood in New York and LA.”

    It was during Oscars week in 2013, when Jennifer Lawrence would win an Academy Award for the Weinstein Co.’s “Silver Linings Playbook” and Quentin Tarantino would win for writing the company’s “Django Unchained,” that four of the 11 alleged crimes took place.

    Like most of the incidents in the indictments, they happened under the guise of business meetings at luxury hotels in Beverly Hills and Los Angeles, which Weinstein used as his California headquarters and where he could be seen during awards season and throughout the year. He was treated as more than a VIP. At a pre-trial hearing, the chauffeur who drove Weinstein around Los Angeles testified that even he was allowed to take as much as $1,000 in cash in Weinstein’s name from the front desk of the hotel where the mogul was staying.

    By the time stories about him in The New York Times and The New Yorker in October of 2017 brought about his downfall, Weinstein’s power to seemingly will films to win awards had diminished, and his company had fallen into financial trouble.

    “His stature changed, he was no longer the king of Oscar, which was really what made him vulnerable,” Masters said.

    The Los Angeles trial is likely to be far less of a spectacle than the New York proceedings, and not merely because it’s a sequel and Weinstein is already serving a long sentence.

    Foot traffic is sparse and there is no grand entrance at the downtown LA courthouse that’s hosting the trial. Weinstein will not be visible to any media horde or protesters outside as he was in Manhattan, as he’ll be ushered into the courtroom straight from jail — once he’s changed form his prison garb into a suit — across a short hallway where no cameras are allowed that could capture him.

    Only a dozen reporters, including two sketch artists, will be allowed into the small courtroom each day, compared to several dozen in New York.

    Weinstein will also be represented by different lawyers in Los Angeles, Alan Jackson and Mark Werksman. They have expressed worries that the movies may play a role in trial.

    The film “She Said,” which fictionalizes the work of two New York Times reporters and their bombshell stories on Weinstein, is set to be released midway through the trial on Nov. 18.

    Weinstein’s lawyers lost a bid to have the proceedings delayed over the film, with the judge rejecting their argument that publicity surrounding it would prejudice a potential jury against him.

    “This case is unique,” Werksman said at a pretrial hearing. “Mr. Weinstein’s notoriety and his place in our culture at the center of the firestorm which is the #MeToo movement is real, and we’re trying to do everything we can to avoid having a trial when there will be a swirl of adverse publicity toward him,” Werksman said at a pretrial hearing.

    Weinstein’s trial is one of several with #MeToo connections that have begun or are about to begin as the fifth anniversary of the movement’s biggest moment passes, including the rape trial of “That ‘70s Show” actor Danny Masterson just down the hall from Weinstein’s and the New York sexual assault civil trial of Kevin Spacey.

    ———

    Follow AP Entertainment Writer Andrew Dalton on Twitter: twitter.com/andyjamesdalton

    Source link

  • US jury convicts man in deadly Alabama kidnapping of child

    US jury convicts man in deadly Alabama kidnapping of child

    BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — An Alabama man was convicted Friday on two federal charges in a 2019 kidnapping that led to the death of a 3-year-old girl, whose disappearance from a Birmingham birthday party led to 10 days of frantic searches.

    Patrick Devone Stallworth, 42, was convicted on the two kidnapping counts and faces a sentence of life in prison in the abduction of Kamille “Cupcake” McKinney, according to a release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Birmingham.

    Birmingham news outlets say Stallworth also is facing a state capital murder charge in the case.

    The child vanished from a birthday party on Oct. 12, 2019. The searches ended with the discovery of her body in a landfill 10 days later.

    Medical experts testified that the little girl died by asphyxia and that she had methamphetamine, Trazodone and Benadryl in her system.

    Prosecutors said Stallworth and his girlfriend had planned to kidnap a child on the day the girl disappeared. The girlfriend, Derick Irisha Brown, has pleaded not guilty in the case and is awaiting a November federal trial. She faces the same state and federal charges as Stallworth. No dates have been set in the state case.

    Source link

  • Jury resumes deliberations in Alex Jones’ Sandy Hook trial

    Jury resumes deliberations in Alex Jones’ Sandy Hook trial

    WATERBURY, Conn. — Jurors resumed deliberating Friday on how much conspiracy theorist Alex Jones should pay for spreading the lie that the 2012 Sandy Hook School shooting was a hoax.

    Deliberations in the civil trial began late Thursday afternoon but soon broke up for the day. The panel began its work Friday with a request for a dry-erase easel, markers, an eraser and a copy of the jury instructions.

    Last year, Jones was found liable for damages. The jury’s task is to decide how much Jones and his company Free Speech Systems should pay to relatives of eight Sandy Hook victims and to an FBI agent who responded to the massacre.

    The plaintiffs testified they have been tormented and threatened by people who believed that one of the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history was a con staged to build support for gun restrictions. Jones repeatedly publicized that false notion his “Infowars” show.

    Twenty children and six adults were killed when a gunman stormed Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, on Dec. 14, 2012.

    Jones testified in the trial, saying he was “done saying I’m sorry” for calling the school shooting a hoax. His lawyers have argued that he’s not responsible for the deeds of anyone who tormented the victims’ families, and that they are overstating how much harm the conspiracy theory caused them.

    Outside court, Jones has bashed the trial as a “kangaroo court” that aims to stomp on his free speech rights and put him out of business.

    In a similar trial in Texas in August, a jury ordered Jones to pay nearly $50 million in damages to the parents of one of the children killed in the shooting, because of the hoax lies.

    ———

    Find AP’s full coverage of the Alex Jones trial at: https://apnews.com/hub/alex-jones

    Source link

  • EXPLAINER: Jurors weigh cost of Alex Jones’ Sandy Hook lies

    EXPLAINER: Jurors weigh cost of Alex Jones’ Sandy Hook lies

    WATERBURY, Conn. — For a decade, the parents and siblings of people killed in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting have been tormented and harassed by people who believe the mass shooting was a hoax.

    How do you put a price tag on their suffering?

    That’s part of the task faced by a Connecticut jury that has been asked to decide how much Infowars host Alex Jones and his company should pay for spreading a conspiracy theory that the massacre never happened.

    The six jurors deliberated for less than an hour Thursday before breaking for the evening. Their work was set to resume Friday.

    Jones now acknowledges his conspiracy theories about the shooting were wrong, but says he isn’t to blame for the actions of people who harassed the families. His lawyers also say the 15 plaintiffs have exaggerated stories about being subjected to threats and abuse.

    Here are some questions and answers about the deliberations.

    COULD THE JURY DECIDE THAT WHAT JONES DID IS PROTECTED BY THE FIRST AMENDMENT?

    No. A judge has already ruled that Jones is liable for defamation, infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy and violating Connecticut’s unfair trade practices law. The jury’s job is to decide how much he owes for harming the people who sued him over his lies.

    HOW MUCH COULD JONES PAY?

    Jones, who lives in Austin, Texas, could be ordered to pay as little as $1 to each plaintiff or potentially hundreds of millions of dollars to them. The decision will be based on whether the jury determines the harm to the families was minimal or extensive.

    Christopher Mattei, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said the jury should award the plaintiffs at least $550 million. Jones’ lawyer, Norm Pattis, says any damages awarded should be minimal.

    HOW DOES THE JURY COME UP WITH THE DOLLAR FIGURES?

    In her instructions to the jury, Judge Barbara Bellis said there are no mathematical formulas for determining dollar amounts. Jurors, she said, should use their life experiences and common sense to award damages that are “fair, just and reasonable.”

    The jury, however, heard evidence and testimony that Jones and his company, Free Speech Systems, made millions of dollars from selling nutritional supplements, survival gear and other items. A company representative testified it has made at least $100 million in the past decade.

    WHAT KIND OF DAMAGES ARE THE JURY CONSIDERING?

    Jurors could award both compensatory and punitive damages.

    Compensatory damages are often meant to reimburse people for actual costs such as medical bills and income loss, but they also include compensation for emotional distress than can reach into the millions of dollars.

    Punitive damages are meant to punish a person for their conduct. If the jury decides Jones should pay punitive damages, the judge would determine the amount.

    DOES CONNECTICUT CAP DAMAGES?

    No, and yes. The state does not limit compensatory damages, while punitive damages are limited in many cases to attorney’s fees and costs. So if the jury says Jones should pay punitive damages, he would potentially have to shell out hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Sandy Hook families’ lawyers’ costs.

    IS THIS THE FIRST TIME JONES HAS FACED A VERDICT LIKE THIS?

    No. At a similar trial in Texas in August, a jury ordered Jones to pay nearly $50 million to the parents of one of the children killed in the school shooting for pushing the hoax lie on his Infowars show.

    But legal experts say Jones probably won’t pay the full amount. In most civil cases, Texas law limits how much defendants have to pay in “exemplary,” or punitive, damages to twice the “economic damages” plus up to $750,000. But jurors are not told about this cap. Eye-popping verdicts are often hacked down by judges.

    A third trial in Texas involving the parents of another child slain at Sandy Hook is expected to begin near the end of the year.

    Source link

  • State, cops seek to bar evidence in trial over Floyd killing

    State, cops seek to bar evidence in trial over Floyd killing

    MINNEAPOLIS — Prosecutors and defense attorneys for two former Minneapolis police officers charged in the killing of George Floyd have filed more than 100 motions to limit testimony or evidence at trial — with many requests relying heavily on what happened at the previous two trials in Floyd’s death.

    J. Alexander Kueng and Tou Thao are charged with aiding and abetting second-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. With jury selection to begin Oct. 24, both sides are using what they learned in the prior trials to try to shape the proceeding in their favor. Hearings on the motions are scheduled for Thursday and Friday.

    Defense attorney Mike Brandt, who isn’t connected to the case, said it’s typical pretrial maneuvering for the two sides to guess what the other will introduce and try to gain an advantage. Kueng and Thao “have a better crystal ball,” he said.

    Kueng, Thao and Thomas Lane were working with Derek Chauvin on May 25, 2020, when Chauvin, who is white, used his knee to pin Floyd’s neck to the pavement for more than nine minutes as the 46-year-old Black man said he couldn’t breathe and eventually grew still. Kueng knelt on Floyd’s back, Lane held his legs and Thao kept bystanders back.

    Floyd’s killing was captured in bystander video and sparked worldwide protests as part of a reckoning over racial injustice.

    Many of the requests stem from what’s already happened in court. Tom Plunkett, Kueng’s attorney, wants the judge to bar the state’s witnesses from addressing jurors directly and from asking them to take actions as part of a demonstration, such as asking them to examine their own necks.

    That comes after one expert in Chauvin’s trial, lung and critical care specialist Dr. Martin Tobin, at one point loosened his tie, placed his hands on his own neck and encouraged jurors to do the same as he explained how he believed Floyd died. Jurors said later that Tobin provided some of the trial’s most compelling evidence.

    Tobin also narrated video of Floyd being held to the pavement and pinpointed what he said was the moment Floyd died. And paramedic Derek Smith testified that after checking for a pulse and not finding one: “In layman’s terms? I thought he was dead.” Bob Paule, an attorney for Thao, wants witnesses barred from referring to Floyd as dead until the time at which he was officially pronounced dead at a hospital. And Plunkett is asking that all non-physician testimony be limited to treatments and observations, not to Floyd’s cause of death or characterization about whether he was dead or alive.

    The state, meanwhile, wants to bar the defense from introducing evidence about the men’s characters and families. That request comes after the federal trial, in which the defendants or their family members talked about their backgrounds, their volunteerism, and how they overcame hardship – all evidence the state called irrelevant.

    The state also seeks to bar evidence about whether Chauvin was qualified to be a field training officer – after questions about that were raised during the federal trial as part of a defense strategy to blame the officers’ training for their actions that day.

    The defense wants witnesses barred from testifying in uniform unless they are testifying as part of their job. That comes after Genevieve Hansen, a firefighter who was off duty when she came upon Floyd’s arrest, testified in uniform at Chauvin’s trial. Paule said Hansen will be testifying as a bystander, and that having a person testify under oath while in uniform might lead a jury to improperly find them more trustworthy.

    The defense also wants an order barring witnesses from wearing signage, after another state witness, Donald Williams, wore a T-shirt under his dress shirt that said “Black Excellence,” according to the defense, and was visible to at least one juror. Paule also wants prosecutors to be barred from questioning Williams about his martial arts training and his understanding of a “blood choke” and how it affects breathing, saying Williams has no medical training.

    The defense wants to bar the state from questions that elicit emotional responses, as prosecutors did during Chauvin’s trial, and they want to bar prosecutors from calling juvenile bystanders as witnesses, including a girl who was 9 at the time.

    The defense says calling the child would further traumatize her, provoke emotions from the jury, and that her testimony has repeated what other bystanders said. The state has countered that the testimony of multiple bystanders is necessary, and that the varied people on the street – an older man, teenagers and a young girl – show it was not the dangerous crowd the defense tried to portray in Chauvin’s trial.

    They also said the fact that a 9-year-old girl knew Floyd was in distress demonstrates just how unreasonable the officers’ use of force was.

    Kueng, Thao and Lane were convicted in federal court earlier this year of depriving Floyd of his right to medical care. Thao and Kueng were convicted of a second count for failing to intervene and stop Chauvin.

    In July, U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson sentenced Kueng to three years in prison and Thao to 3½ years on the federal counts. They reported to federal custody on Tuesday: Thao, who is Hmong American, is being held in Lexington, Kentucky, and Kueng, who is Black, is in Lisbon, Ohio.

    Lane, who is white, avoided a state trial by pleading guilty in May to aiding and abetting second-degree manslaughter. He was sentenced to three years on the state conviction, and 2 1/2 years on the federal conviction. He is serving both sentences concurrently at a low-security federal prison camp in Littleton, Colorado.

    Chauvin was convicted of murder and manslaughter and was given a 22 1/2-year state sentence in 2021. He also pleaded guilty to a federal count of violating Floyd’s civil rights and was sentenced to 21 years on the federal charge. He is serving the sentences at the same time at the Federal Correctional Institution in Tucson, Arizona.

    ———

    Find AP’s full coverage of the killing of George Floyd at: https://apnews.com/hub/death-of-george-floyd

    Source link