ReportWire

Tag: Juries

  • 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

  • Jury picked in trial related to Gov. Whitmer kidnapping plot

    Jury picked in trial related to Gov. Whitmer kidnapping plot

    JACKSON, Mich. — A jury was seated Tuesday in the trial of three men charged in connection with a 2020 anti-government plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

    The selection process lasted two days as a judge and lawyers in Jackson, Michigan, tried to weed out people who had personal conflicts — vacation, child care, work — or showed a potential for bias.

    Opening statements were scheduled for Wednesday.

    Joe Morrison, Pete Musico and Paul Bellar are charged with three crimes, including providing material support for a terrorist act. All were members of the Wolverine Watchmen, a paramilitary group that trained in Jackson County, about 80 miles (130 kilometers) west of Detroit.

    The trio is not charged with directly participating in the kidnapping scheme, which was broken up by the FBI in October 2020. That prosecution, which was handled in federal court, produced four convictions and two acquittals.

    Morrison, Musico and Bellar are accused of assisting others. The charges were filed in state court by the Michigan attorney general.

    The jury will see and hear hate-filled conversations about police and public officials who were denounced as tyrants, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic when businesses were shut down, people were ordered to stay home and schools were closed.

    Prospective jurors were repeatedly urged by defense lawyers to be fair and open-minded, despite what they hear. Bellar was deeply critical of police but is not charged with threatening law enforcement.

    Defense attorneys insist Morrison, Musico and Bellar cut ties with Adam Fox, a leader of the kidnapping plot, before it picked up steam in summer 2020.

    ———

    Find the AP’s full coverage of the kidnapping plot cases: https://apnews.com/hub/whitmer-kidnap-plot-trial.

    Source link

  • Suspect in killings of 22 elderly Texans goes on trial again

    Suspect in killings of 22 elderly Texans goes on trial again

    DALLAS — A man accused of killing 22 elderly women in the Dallas area and stealing jewelry and valuables has been linked by DNA evidence to one of the deaths, a prosecutor said Monday.

    Billy Chemirmir, 49, is on trial for capital murder in the death of 87-year-old Mary Brooks.

    It’s Chemirmir’s third trial. His first trial, in the smothering death of 81-year-old Lu Thi Harris, ended in a mistrial last November when the jury deadlocked. He was retried and found guilty in April and sentenced to life without parole. If convicted in Brooks’ death, he’ll receive a second sentence of life without parole.

    Prosecutor Glen Fitzmartin said in opening statements that while presenting evidence in the deaths of Brooks and Harris, he would also show that DNA links Chemirmir to the death of 80-year-old Martha Williams.

    Chemirmir has maintained his innocence. His attorney entered a not guilty plea on his behalf Monday, but declined to make an opening statement.

    His arrest was set in motion in March 2018 when Mary Annis Bartel — 91 at the time — told police that a man had forced his way into her apartment at an independent living community for seniors, tried to smother her with a pillow and took her jewelry.

    Before Bartel died in 2020, she described the attack in a taped interview that was played to jurors Monday, as it was in the earlier trials. She said the minute she opened her door and saw a man wearing green rubber gloves, she knew she was in “grave danger.”

    “He said: ‘Don’t fight me, lie on the bed,’” Bartel said.

    Police said when they found Chemirmir the next day in the parking lot of his apartment complex, he was holding jewelry and cash, and had just thrown away a large red jewelry box. Documents in the box led them to the home of Harris, who was found dead in her bedroom, lipstick smeared on her pillow.

    Following Chemirmir’s arrest, police across the Dallas area reexamined the deaths of other older people that had been considered natural, even as their families discovered missing jewelry.

    He has been charged with 22 counts of capital murder in deaths spanning May 2016 to March 2018. Four of those indictments were added this summer.

    Evidence presented at previous trials showed Harris and Chemirmir were checking out at the same time at a Walmart just hours before she was found dead.

    According to evidence, Brooks had gone shopping at the same Walmart just weeks earlier. When Brooks was at the Walmart, Chemirmir was sitting in his car in the parking lot, watching people, Fitzmartin said.

    “She leaves, he leaves. His phone, you will hear, follows from the Walmart to her house,” Fitzmartin said. “She arrives at her house and she’s not heard from again, ever.”

    The day after that trip to Walmart, Brooks’ grandson found her dead in her condo, groceries still in bags on the counter.

    Most of the people Chemirmir is accused of killing lived in apartments at independent living communities for older people. He’s also accused of killing women in private homes, including the widow of a man he had cared for in his job as an at-home caregiver.

    In a video interview with police, Chemirmir told a detective that he made money buying and selling jewelry and had also worked as a caregiver and a security guard.

    Fitzmartin said Monday that Williams and Bartel lived in the same community, and that Williams had been found dead in her apartment about two weeks before the attack on Bartel.

    As Williams’ family cleaned out her home, they discovered “there was something not right,” including missing items and a pillow with an odd stain, he said.

    DNA found on that pillow can’t exclude Chemirmir, Fitzmartin said, and a search of Chemirmir’s vehicle turned up gloves with DNA that was a match for Williams.

    Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot, a Democrat, sought life sentences rather than the death penalty when he tried Chemirmir on two of his 13 capital murder cases.

    In an interview with The Dallas Morning News, Creuzot said he’s not against the death penalty, but among things he considers when deciding whether to pursue it are the time it takes before someone is executed, the costs of appeals and whether the person would still be a danger to society behind bars. Chemirmir, he added, is “going to die in the penitentiary.”

    Chemirmir’s attorneys said in his previous trials that prosecutors didn’t prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Prosecutors in neighboring Collin County haven’t said if they will try any of their nine capital murder cases against Chemirmir.

    Source link

  • Jury selection starts in 3rd trial tied to Gov. Whitmer plot

    Jury selection starts in 3rd trial tied to Gov. Whitmer plot

    JACKSON, Mich. — Jury selection began Monday in a third trial connected to a 2020 anti-government plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

    Dozens of people who were called as potential jurors packed the courtroom, even sitting on heating vents. This time the venue is not federal court but a nearly century-old courthouse in Jackson, Michigan.

    Joe Morrison, Pete Musico, and Paul Bellar are charged with three crimes, including providing material support for terrorist acts. All were members of the Wolverine Watchmen, a paramilitary group that trained in the Jackson area, about 80 miles (130 kilometers) west of Detroit.

    They’re accused of assisting others who have been convicted of conspiring to kidnap Whitmer from her vacation home in northern Michigan.

    Lawyers and the judge asked questions to try to weed out biases in the jury pool, including about news consumption, gun ownership and the personal impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The selection process could take a day or more.

    “Let’s talk about Jan. 6 at the United States Capitol. … A rather uncivilized event,” Assistant Attorney General Bill Rollstin said.

    “Hurtful,” a woman replied.

    Rollstin mentioned the riot because there will be evidence that Morrison, Musico and Bellar attended an armed legal protest inside the Michigan Capitol in 2020.

    At one point, Rollstin asked a group of 15 people if they had heard about federal convictions in the Whitmer plot. No one raised a hand.

    Ty Garbin and Kaleb Franks pleaded guilty in federal court in Grand Rapids, Michigan. The alleged leaders, Barry Croft and Adam Fox, were convicted at trial in August, while two more men were acquitted last spring.

    Lawyers for Morrison, Musico and Bellar say the men cut ties with Fox before the kidnapping plot accelerated in summer 2020; Bellar had moved to South Carolina.

    The men also claim they were entrapped by an undercover informant and his FBI handlers.

    Investigators secretly recorded hate-filled conversations about Whitmer and other public officials who were denounced as tyrants, especially during the pandemic when businesses were shut down, people were ordered to stay home and schools were closed.

    ———

    Find the AP’s full coverage of the kidnapping plot cases: https://apnews.com/hub/whitmer-kidnap-plot-trial. Follow Ed White at http://twitter.com/edwritez .

    Source link

  • Chinese tycoon Richard Liu faces civil trial in alleged rape

    Chinese tycoon Richard Liu faces civil trial in alleged rape

    MINNEAPOLIS — A Chinese billionaire, one of the richest people in the world, is heading to trial in Minneapolis to defend himself against allegations that he raped a former University of Minnesota student after a night of dinner and drinks in 2018.

    Richard Liu, the founder and former CEO of e-commerce giant JD.com, has denied raping the woman, and prosecutors did not file criminal charges. The woman, Jingyao Liu, sued in civil court, alleging she was coerced to drink before Richard Liu groped her in a limousine and raped her in her apartment.

    Both are expected to testify, and it will be up to a jury to decide who is telling the truth. Jury selection starts Thursday, with opening statements Monday.

    “I think our client’s credibility is one of the strongest parts of what the jury is going to hear,” said Wil Florin, an attorney for Jingyao Liu. “The incredible courage and fortitude that this young lady has shown is truly admirable.”

    Diane Doolittle, an attorney for Richard Liu, said that the woman has changed her story and that the evidence will clear her client’s name.

    “We are looking forward to presenting the evidence, presenting the truth, so that the world will know that Mr. Liu is fully and completely innocent of these allegations against him,” she said.

    The woman alleges the attack happened in 2018 while Richard Liu was in Minneapolis for a weeklong residency in the University of Minnesota’s doctor of business administration China program, geared toward high-level executives in China.

    Jingyao Liu, a Chinese citizen, was at the university on a student visa and was a volunteer in the program at the time. The Associated Press does not generally name people alleging sexual assault, but Jingyao Liu has agreed to be identified publicly.

    Richard Liu and Jingyao Liu are not related. Jingyao Liu was 21 at the time; Richard Liu was 46.

    Richard Liu is a celebrity in China, part of a generation of entrepreneurs who created the country’s internet, e-commerce, mobile phone and other technology industries since the late 1990s. Forbes estimated his wealth at $11.5 billion.

    Richard Liu, who stepped down as CEO of JD.com this year amid increased government scrutiny of China’s technology industry, was arrested on suspicion of felony rape, but prosecutors never filed criminal charges, saying the case had “profound evidentiary problems.”

    Jingyao Liu sued Richard Liu and JD.com in 2019, alleging sexual assault and battery, along with false imprisonment.

    The case drew widespread attention at a time when the #MeToo movement was gaining traction in China. Richard Liu’s supporters and opponents waged aggressive public relations campaigns on Chinese social media; censors shut down some accounts that supported Jingyao Liu for “violating regulations.”

    Jingyao Liu says in her lawsuit that she had to withdraw from classes in fall 2018 and seek counseling and treatment. Her attorney says she has since graduated but has post-traumatic stress disorder. She seeks compensatory damages to cover medical bills, emotional distress and pain and suffering, and Judge Edward Wahl ruled she could also seek punitive damages from Richard Liu.

    She is seeking more than $50,000, a standard figure that must be listed in Minnesota if a plaintiff intends to seek anything above that amount. She is expected to ask a jury to award much more.

    According to the lawsuit, on the night of the alleged attack, Richard Liu and other executives went to a Japanese restaurant in Minneapolis, and one of the men invited Jingyao Liu at Richard Liu’s request. Jingyao Liu felt coerced to drink as the powerful men toasted her, and Richard Liu said she would dishonor him if she did not join in, she said in her lawsuit.

    According to text messages reviewed by The Associated Press and Jingyao Liu’s interviews with police, she said that after the dinner, Richard Liu pulled her into a limousine and groped her despite her protests. She said he raped her at her apartment. She texted a friend: “I begged him don’t. But he didn’t listen.”

    After police went to her apartment, Jingyao Liu told one officer, “I was raped but not that kind of rape,” according to police. When asked to explain, she changed the subject and said Richard Liu was famous and she was afraid. She told the officer that the sex was “spontaneous” and that she did not want police to get involved.

    Officers released Richard Liu because “it was unclear if a crime had actually taken place,” according to police. In an interview later with an investigator, Richard Liu said that the sex was consensual and that the woman “enjoyed the whole process very much.”

    According to police, Jingyao Liu told a sergeant she wanted to talk with Richard Liu’s attorney and threatened to go to the media if she did not. Richard Liu’s former attorney recorded the phone call, in which Jingyao Liu said that she didn’t want the case to be in the newspaper and that “I just need payment money and apologize and that’s all.”

    That phone call will be allowed as evidence in the trial. The jurors will also be told that they may presume any electronic messages deleted by Jingyao Liu contained information unfavorable to her. Both pretrial rulings were considered wins for the defense.

    Surveillance videos from the restaurant, its exterior and the halls of the woman’s apartment complex will be shown at trial. Richard Liu’s attorneys have said the video shows that Jingyao Liu does not appear to be intoxicated or in distress, as she initially claimed, and that she changed her story after the video surfaced.

    She says in her lawsuit that she went to her apartment building with Richard Liu to be polite, and that she believed he was simply walking her to the door. Florin, Jingyao Liu’s attorney, intends to play body camera video from police that he says shows his client feared Richard Liu because he is powerful.

    “Insanely wealthy men, they always have the card that they play: ‘Well, I’m being accused of this because I’m wealthy,’” Florin said.

    “What happened that night was an evening of consensual sex,” Doolittle, one of Richard Liu’s attorneys, said. “Mr. Liu regrets that, and he regrets being unfaithful to his wife.”

    The burden of proof is lower than in a criminal trial, and jurors need only find a preponderance of evidence in either side’s favor, said Chris Madel, a Minneapolis attorney who isn’t involved in the case.

    If jurors proceed to considering punitive damages, that portion of the case requires a different standard of proof. To award punitive damages, jurors must find “clear and convincing evidence” that Richard Liu “deliberately disregarded the rights or safety of others,” Madel said.

    After cases like this, Madel said, no matter how much evidence is presented, jurors will typically say: “We just listened to him, we listened to her, and we made our minds up.”

    Source link

  • Chinese tycoon Richard Liu faces civil trial in alleged rape

    Chinese tycoon Richard Liu faces civil trial in alleged rape

    MINNEAPOLIS — A Chinese billionaire, one of the richest people in the world, is heading to trial in Minneapolis to defend himself against allegations that he raped a former University of Minnesota student after a night of dinner and drinks in 2018.

    Richard Liu, the founder and former CEO of e-commerce giant JD.com, has denied raping the woman, and prosecutors did not file criminal charges. The woman, Jingyao Liu, sued in civil court, alleging she was coerced to drink before Richard Liu groped her in a limousine and raped her in her apartment.

    Both are expected to testify, and it will be up to a jury to decide who is telling the truth. Jury selection starts Thursday, with opening statements Monday.

    “I think our client’s credibility is one of the strongest parts of what the jury is going to hear,” said Wil Florin, an attorney for Jingyao Liu. “The incredible courage and fortitude that this young lady has shown is truly admirable.”

    Diane Doolittle, an attorney for Richard Liu, said that the woman has changed her story and that the evidence will clear her client’s name.

    “We are looking forward to presenting the evidence, presenting the truth, so that the world will know that Mr. Liu is fully and completely innocent of these allegations against him,” she said.

    The woman alleges the attack happened in 2018 while Richard Liu was in Minneapolis for a weeklong residency in the University of Minnesota’s doctor of business administration China program, geared toward high-level executives in China.

    Jingyao Liu, a Chinese citizen, was at the university on a student visa and was a volunteer in the program at the time. The Associated Press does not generally name people alleging sexual assault, but Jingyao Liu has agreed to be identified publicly.

    Richard Liu and Jingyao Liu are not related. Jingyao Liu was 21 at the time; Richard Liu was 46.

    Richard Liu is a celebrity in China, part of a generation of entrepreneurs who created the country’s internet, e-commerce, mobile phone and other technology industries since the late 1990s. Forbes estimated his wealth at $11.5 billion.

    Richard Liu, who stepped down as CEO of JD.com this year amid increased government scrutiny of China’s technology industry, was arrested on suspicion of felony rape, but prosecutors never filed criminal charges, saying the case had “profound evidentiary problems.”

    Jingyao Liu sued Richard Liu and JD.com in 2019, alleging sexual assault and battery, along with false imprisonment.

    The case drew widespread attention at a time when the #MeToo movement was gaining traction in China. Richard Liu’s supporters and opponents waged aggressive public relations campaigns on Chinese social media; censors shut down some accounts that supported Jingyao Liu for “violating regulations.”

    Jingyao Liu says in her lawsuit that she had to withdraw from classes in fall 2018 and seek counseling and treatment. Her attorney says she has since graduated but has post-traumatic stress disorder. She seeks compensatory damages to cover medical bills, emotional distress and pain and suffering, and Judge Edward Wahl ruled she could also seek punitive damages from Richard Liu.

    She is seeking more than $50,000, a standard figure that must be listed in Minnesota if a plaintiff intends to seek anything above that amount. She is expected to ask a jury to award much more.

    According to the lawsuit, on the night of the alleged attack, Richard Liu and other executives went to a Japanese restaurant in Minneapolis, and one of the men invited Jingyao Liu at Richard Liu’s request. Jingyao Liu felt coerced to drink as the powerful men toasted her, and Richard Liu said she would dishonor him if she did not join in, she said in her lawsuit.

    According to text messages reviewed by The Associated Press and Jingyao Liu’s interviews with police, she said that after the dinner, Richard Liu pulled her into a limousine and groped her despite her protests. She said he raped her at her apartment. She texted a friend: “I begged him don’t. But he didn’t listen.”

    After police went to her apartment, Jingyao Liu told one officer, “I was raped but not that kind of rape,” according to police. When asked to explain, she changed the subject and said Richard Liu was famous and she was afraid. She told the officer that the sex was “spontaneous” and that she did not want police to get involved.

    Officers released Richard Liu because “it was unclear if a crime had actually taken place,” according to police. In an interview later with an investigator, Richard Liu said that the sex was consensual and that the woman “enjoyed the whole process very much.”

    According to police, Jingyao Liu told a sergeant she wanted to talk with Richard Liu’s attorney and threatened to go to the media if she did not. Richard Liu’s former attorney recorded the phone call, in which Jingyao Liu said that she didn’t want the case to be in the newspaper and that “I just need payment money and apologize and that’s all.”

    That phone call will be allowed as evidence in the trial. The jurors will also be told that they may presume any electronic messages deleted by Jingyao Liu contained information unfavorable to her. Both pretrial rulings were considered wins for the defense.

    Surveillance videos from the restaurant, its exterior and the halls of the woman’s apartment complex will be shown at trial. Richard Liu’s attorneys have said the video shows that Jingyao Liu does not appear to be intoxicated or in distress, as she initially claimed, and that she changed her story after the video surfaced.

    She says in her lawsuit that she went to her apartment building with Richard Liu to be polite, and that she believed he was simply walking her to the door. Florin, Jingyao Liu’s attorney, intends to play body camera video from police that he says shows his client feared Richard Liu because he is powerful.

    “Insanely wealthy men, they always have the card that they play: ‘Well, I’m being accused of this because I’m wealthy,’” Florin said.

    “What happened that night was an evening of consensual sex,” Doolittle, one of Richard Liu’s attorneys, said. “Mr. Liu regrets that, and he regrets being unfaithful to his wife.”

    The burden of proof is lower than in a criminal trial, and jurors need only find a preponderance of evidence in either side’s favor, said Chris Madel, a Minneapolis attorney who isn’t involved in the case.

    If jurors proceed to considering punitive damages, that portion of the case requires a different standard of proof. To award punitive damages, jurors must find “clear and convincing evidence” that Richard Liu “deliberately disregarded the rights or safety of others,” Madel said.

    After cases like this, Madel said, no matter how much evidence is presented, jurors will typically say: “We just listened to him, we listened to her, and we made our minds up.”

    Source link