ReportWire

Tag: Juries

  • Former DC employee convicted of manslaughter in fatal shooting of 13-year-old boy

    Former DC employee convicted of manslaughter in fatal shooting of 13-year-old boy

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — A former Washington, D.C., city employee was found guilty of manslaughter Friday in the fatal shooting of an unarmed 13-year-old boy that sparked public uproar in the nation’s capital.

    Jurors found Jason Lewis, 42, not guilty of second-degree murder, but convicted him of manslaughter and other charges after the trial in D.C. Superior Court over the killing of seventh grader Karon Blake.

    Lewis, a longtime Parks and Recreation Department employee, turned himself in last year to face charges in Blake’s killing, which happened in January 2023 around 4 a.m., across the street from the middle school Blake attended, authorities said.

    Lewis was seen on video leaving his house and firing at two young people who had been breaking into cars, prosecutors said. After a car was hit with gunfire, Blake ran in Lewis’ direction, and Lewis fired two shots, killing him, prosecutors said.

    Prosecutors played for jurors a video in which Blake could be heard repeatedly saying “I’m sorry” and telling Lewis, “I’m just a kid,” according to media reports.

    An attorney for Lewis didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment from The Associated Press on Friday.

    Lewis took the witness stand in the case, arguing that he acted in self-defense. He told jurors that he thought he saw another person open fire on him and feared for his life, local media reported.

    He is scheduled to be sentenced in October. The manslaughter charge carries up to 45 years in prison.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

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

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

    [ad_1]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    [ad_2]

    Source link

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

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

    [ad_1]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Second day of jury deliberations to start in Sen. Bob Menendez’s bribery trial

    Second day of jury deliberations to start in Sen. Bob Menendez’s bribery trial

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Jury deliberations are set to resume Monday in the bribery trial of Sen. Bob Menendez in New York City.

    A jury that began deliberations on Friday with three hours of work is scheduled to resume in the morning in Manhattan federal court. The corruption trial for the New Jersey Democrat is entering its 10th week.

    Menendez, 70, has denied charges that he engaged in a bribery scheme from 2018 to 2023 to benefit three New Jersey businessman, including by serving as a foreign agent for the government of Egypt.

    He and two businessmen who allegedly paid him bribes of gold and cash have pleaded not guilty.

    As he left court on Friday, Menendez told reporters, “I have faith in God and in the jury.”

    Last week, lawyers spent more than 15 hours delivering closing arguments as they encouraged the jury to carefully review hundreds of exhibits and hours of testimony.

    Prosecutors put a heavy emphasis in their closing arguments on nearly $150,000 of gold bars and over $480,000 in cash seized from the Menendez home during a 2022 FBI raid. They say the valuables were bribe proceeds.

    They also insisted there were multiple ways in which Menendez seemed to serve as an agent of Egypt.

    Lawyers for Menendez insisted the three-term senator never accepted bribes and actions he took to benefit the businessmen were the kinds of tasks expected of a public official.

    They said his actions to help speed $99 million in military shipments of helicopter ammunition to Egypt, while other communications he carried out with Egyptian officials were also part of his job as a senator and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, a position he was forced to relinquish after charges were announced last fall.

    Menendez announced several weeks ago that he plans to run for reelection this year as an independent.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Inside the courtroom as case dismissed against Alec Baldwin in fatal shooting of cinematographer

    Inside the courtroom as case dismissed against Alec Baldwin in fatal shooting of cinematographer

    [ad_1]

    SANTA FE, N.M. — A nearly three-year legal saga for Alec Baldwin in the fatal shooting of a cinematographer ended Friday without a verdict but with tears of relief for the actor and a small coterie of family who had settled into a somber daily routine on wooden benches inside a windowless New Mexico courtroom at trial.

    In the morning, 16 jurors had filed into the courtroom for a third day of scrawling notes and listening with steepled hands to testimony in the involuntary manslaughter trial against Baldwin in the 2021 shooting death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, only to be released for the day as the trial took an unscheduled detour.

    “Have a great weekend,” Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer said.

    Outside the jury’s view, the criminal case against Baldwin was teetering as defense attorneys for Baldwin accused local investigators and prosecutors of concealing evidence that might shed light on the unconfirmed origin of live ammunition on the set of “Rust.”

    It was Baldwin’s fifth day in court. He arrived each morning in a black SUV with his wife, Hilaria Baldwin, to a phalanx of outdoor media cameras. Inside the courtroom Monday, at the start, an energetic Baldwin whispered to an attorney, scrawled on a legal pad and passed post-it notes to his legal team.

    The defense won an early victory as the judge ruled Baldwin could not be held criminally liable for his role as co-producer on “Rust.” The case would focus on Baldwin’s handling of a gun as lead actor.

    Come Tuesday, the defendant’s younger brother, Stephen Baldwin, arrived in the back of the courtroom for jury selections. He would return each day, all day. Among a pool of 70 potential jurors, all but three were familiar with the “Rust” shooting case. By day’s end, a jury of five men and 11 women were seated for trial.

    For opening statements Wednesday, the courtroom was packed to capacity, with half of the gallery reserved for news media, from local network TV to the Times of London, and a few designated photographers. Attorneys and the public filled the other half, some friends and relatives of Baldwin along with local curiosity seekers and traveling amateur trial afficionados.

    Seated in court, Baldwin trained his eyes downward on a notepad, away from the jury as prosecutors gave opening statements and overhead video monitors showed the aftermath of the fatal shooting at a movie set ranch.

    Prosecutors said Baldwin violated the cardinal rules of firearm safety in pointing a real gun toward Hutchins while playing make-believe. Defense attorneys argued Baldwin was just doing his job as an actor, reasonably relying on other professionals to ensure gun safety, though with tragic consequences.

    Baldwin’s older sister, Elizabeth Keuchler, shed tears in court as the statements unfolded. She greeted her brother with an embrace across a courtroom banister and would sit close behind him thereafter.

    A prominent critic of Baldwin also took her seat in the front of the court gallery: victims’ rights attorney Gloria Allred, who is representing the sister and parents of Hutchins in a civil trial seeking damages.

    Baldwin’s every expression at trial registered on a video feed of the trial transmitted by CourtTV and The Associated Press. There was a restrained and attentive gaze during a first full day of witness testimony Wednesday from the A-list actor with a decades-long career in films and television, from “The Hunt for Red October” to “30 Rock” and as a fixture on “Saturday Night Live.”

    Baldwin darted from the courtroom once, but otherwise paced slowly and deliberately through the courtroom and the courthouse, where impromptu interviews and photographs were prohibited.

    On Friday afternoon, Baldwin’s outward demeanor changed little, but tension was building in the courtroom, where Marlowe Sommer weighed a motion to dismiss the case and probed revelations that investigators failed to disclose the receipt of ammunition in March by a man who said it could be related to Hutchins’ death.

    Prosecutors said they deemed the ammunition unrelated and unimportant, while Baldwin’s lawyers alleged they “buried” it.

    During an afternoon break, Baldwin took deep, measured breaths as he walked painstakingly from the courtroom. The air whistled slightly as he breathed out with lips pursed. Hilaria Baldwin took his arm and rubbed his back as they paced the hallway.

    Back inside, the audience chuckled as defense attorney Alex Spiro sparred with the ammunition supplier for “Rust,” Seth Kenney, who had forged a cooperative relationship with investigators in the aftermath of the shooting.

    But the courtroom fell silent amid the clatter of laptop keyboards as the judge questioned a sheriff’s detective about the decision to place the ammunition in an evidence file, separate from the “Rust” shooting case, and whether lead prosecutor Kari Morrissey knew about that.

    “When you say that there were discussions and the decision was made by all of you to put that ammo in a separate file, was Ms. Morrissey part of that discussion?” Marlowe Sommer said.

    “Yes,” the detective responded.

    The case was collapsing. The courtroom gasped as Morrissey acknowledged her co-prosecutor had just resigned.

    Tears welled in Baldwin’s eyes, followed by sobbing, as the judge outlined her decision: “The sanction of dismissal is warranted in this case.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Alec Baldwin’s lawyer grills crime scene tech over search for live ammo at his shooting trial

    Alec Baldwin’s lawyer grills crime scene tech over search for live ammo at his shooting trial

    [ad_1]

    SANTA FE, N.M. — SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — Alec Baldwin ‘s defense attorney questioned a crime scene technician over what he suggested were shoddy and subpar searches for the live ammunition that ended up in the actor’s revolver and killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.

    On the second day of Baldwin’s New Mexico involuntary manslaughter trial, Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer sided with the prosecution in letting in key statements from the actor that demonstrate his knowledge of guns and the impact of blanks.

    Earlier, Alex Spiro grilled Santa Fe County sheriff’s technician Marissa Poppell in particular over search warrants served on a prop truck a week after the death of Hutchins on the set of the movie “Rust,” and on a prop warehouse more than a month after her shooting.

    The questions eventually led to Spiro asking Poppell whether police and prosecutors “were just trying to get this over with so that prosecutors could focus on Alec Baldwin?”

    “No,” she answered.

    Spiro followed that with asking, “You personally believe that Alec Baldwin committed no crime, is that correct?”

    Poppell answered “no” before special prosecutor Kari Morrissey objected and Marlowe Sommer struck the question and answer.

    The questioning mostly centered on the searches of the truck and warehouse of Seth Kenney, an Albuquerque-based ammunition and weapons supplier to “Rust,” who forged a cooperative relationship with investigators in the immediate aftermath of the fatal shooting.

    Spiro suggested that relationship may have been too close.

    “There was a witness there who assisted in the search,” Spiro said when asking about the warrant served on the truck. “A man named Seth Kenney. And not only did he assist, he actually was the one that opened the safe.”

    “Yes, he had the combination to it,” Poppell said.

    Spiro asked, “Why did law enforcement wait a week to go to the prop truck?”

    “The search warrant needed to be written,” Poppell replied. “I’m not sure why the time difference exactly.”

    Spiro responded that a search warrant for the church building set where the shooting took place was obtained in a day.

    “If you can do a search warrant in one day for one thing why does it take seven days for something else?”

    Spiro asked Poppell, who found a half-dozen live rounds on the set, if she was surprised to find none in the truck.

    “Not necessarily,” she said.

    “You’re finding these live rounds all over the set, right?” Spiro asked. Poppell replied yes.

    “You go a week later to the prop truck, which has all the ammunition right?” Spiro asked. “And there’s not a single live round there, right?”

    Poppell replied “yes” to both.

    “Let me ask you something,” the attorney said eventually. “At any point did you become suspicious of Seth Kenney?”

    Poppell answered, “No.”

    Kenney has not been charged with any wrongdoing. An email sent to his attorney seeking comment was not immediately returned.

    Spiro also got Poppell to testify that it could be very difficult to tell the difference between dummy rounds made to appear as onscreen ammunition that were used on the set, and the live rounds that turned the set fatal.

    It was an attempt to push back against the key assertion of prosecutors’ case: that Baldwin recklessly flouted gun safety.

    Poppell later testified that she and two police detectives searched every box in Kenney’s warehouse in late November. Spiro picked apart the assertion and eventually got her to concede that some boxes were only shaken or briefly glanced into.

    And he asked why apparently no surveillance video was collected from the site despite it being in the search warrant.

    “You could have seen Seth Kenney disposing of ammunition in the 40 days between the incident and when you arrived,” Spiro said. And it “would’ve shown whether or not you all really searched the place.”

    Hutchins’ death and the wounding of director Joel Souza nearly three years ago sent shock waves through the film industry. The fatal shooting led to the felony involuntary manslaughter charge against Baldwin, the 66-year-old star of “30 Rock” and frequent host of “Saturday Night Live,” that could result in up to 18 months in prison.

    His wife Hilaria Baldwin, younger brother Stephen Baldwin and older sister Elizabeth Keuchler sat behind him in the gallery again Thursday as the trial got off to a stumbling start on its second day.

    Seated in two rows of eight each, jurors and alternate jurors scrawled notes as they listened to testimony. Jurors have their own close-up view of visual exhibits, with six monitors installed in the jury box.

    ___

    Dalton reported from Los Angeles.

    ___ For more coverage of Alec Baldwin’s involuntary manslaughter trial, visit: https://apnews.com/hub/alec-baldwin

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jury is seated in Alec Baldwin’s involuntary manslaughter trial in New Mexico

    Jury is seated in Alec Baldwin’s involuntary manslaughter trial in New Mexico

    [ad_1]

    SANTA FE, N.M. — Sixteen jurors were seated Tuesday for Alec Baldwin’s involuntary manslaughter trial in New Mexico, where opening statements are set to start Wednesday.

    Five men and 11 women were chosen by Santa Fe County special prosecutors and the actor’s team of defense attorneys. Twelve will be designated as the jury and four as alternates by the court only after they hear the case.

    They’ll be tasked with deciding whether Baldwin committed the felony when, during a rehearsal in October 2021, a revolver went off while he was pointing it at cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, killing her and wounding director Joel Souza. They were on the set of the Western film “Rust,” at Bonanza Creek Ranch some 18 miles (29 kilometers) from where the trial is being held.

    Media members were not allowed in the courtroom when attorneys used their challenges to strike jurors. Judge Mary Marlowe Summer swore in the jury, told them to avoid news about the case and to report Wednesday morning.

    Baldwin, 66, could get up to 18 months in prison if the jurors unanimously find him guilty.

    The selection got off to a slow start Tuesday with a delay of over two hours due to technical problems, but the panel was selected in a single day as expected.

    When Marlowe Sommer asked the pool of 70 possible jurors if they were familiar with the case, all but two raised their hands to indicate they were.

    Two others indicated they would not be able to be fair and impartial and were excused.

    Baldwin, the star of “30 Rock” and “The Hunt for Red October” and a major Hollywood figure for 35 years, sat in the courtroom with a team of four of his lawyers, dressed in a gray suit, dark tie, white shirt with glasses and neatly combed hair.

    His wife, Hilaria Baldwin, and his brother, “The Usual Suspects” actor Stephen Baldwin, were seated in the back of the courtroom.

    Under questioning from prosecutor Kari Morrissey, a potential juror said she hates firearms, but many others acknowledged owning them and few people expressed strong opinions about guns.

    Baldwin’s lawyer Alex Spiro in his questioning highlighted the gravity of the situation — “obviously someone lost their life” — and asked jurors to come forward with any reservations about their own ability to be fair and impartial.

    “Does anyone have that view, even in the slightest?” Spiro asked the group.

    He asked them to come forward if they’d shared opinions about the case online. None did.

    Spiro asked if any of them had strong opinions on gun safety, and whether a person can rely on an expert to ensure the safety of a gun, not just themselves.

    Several said they always treat a gun as if it were loaded. One man said he was taught to respect and treat guns the same way, but also deferred to an instructor during instruction he got for a concealed carry permit.

    Spiro also asked whether jurors were comfortable questioning the judgment of law enforcement officials, even those testifying under oath.

    He asked whether any knew potential witnesses, and several said they knew Santa Fe County Sheriff Adan Mendoza, who is on the prosecution’s witness list.

    Getting chosen to serve in a trial of such a major star accused of such a major crime would be unusual even in Los Angeles or Baldwin’s hometown of New York. But it will be essentially an unheard-of experience for those who are picked as jurors in Santa Fe, New Mexico, though in recent years the state has increasingly become a hub of Hollywood production.

    Baldwin and his wife arrived at the courthouse early with their youngest child, Ilaria Catalina Irena Baldwin. The couple have seven children, ranging in ages from 1 to 10.

    Baldwin has said the gun fired accidentally after he followed instructions to point it toward Hutchins, who was behind the camera. Unaware that the gun contained a live round, Baldwin said he pulled back the hammer — not the trigger — and it fired.

    Hutchins was considered a rising star in film photography when she was killed at age 42. She was the mother of a young son who grew up on a remote Soviet military base and worked on documentary films in Eastern Europe before studying film in Los Angeles and embarking on a movie-making career.

    ___

    Dalton reported from Los Angeles.

    ___ For more coverage of Alec Baldwin’s involuntary manslaughter trial, visit: https://apnews.com/hub/alec-baldwin

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Americans are split over whether Trump should face prison in the hush money case, AP-NORC poll finds

    Americans are split over whether Trump should face prison in the hush money case, AP-NORC poll finds

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Americans are about evenly split on whether former President Donald Trump should face prison time for his recent felony conviction on hush money charges, according to a new poll from the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

    Among U.S. adults, 48% say the former president and presumptive Republican nominee should serve time behind bars, and 50% say he should not. About 8 in 10 Democrats think Trump should face prison time, while independents are divided. About half, 49%, of independents say he should, and 46% say he should not.

    Most Republicans believe that Trump was mistreated by the legal system and say he should not face jail time. Democrats, conversely, are generally confident that the prosecutors, the judge and members of the jury treated Trump fairly as a defendant.

    The results underscore the partisan divide in opinions about the case, which was the first brought against a current or former U.S. president. Both Trump and Democratic President Joe Biden have made the trial central to how they campaign to their respective bases: Biden frequently pointing out that Trump became the first former president to be convicted of a felony; Trump arguing that Democrats orchestrated the case against him for political purposes.

    Trump’s sentencing was delayed from Thursday, three days before the Republican National Convention opens, to September at the earliest — when early voting in multiple states will already be underway.

    “I thought it was all a sham to begin with,” said Dolores Mejia, a 74-year-old Republican in Peoria, Arizona, who has been closely following the trial. “I wasn’t surprised he got convicted because the court was in New York, a very blue state. … It seemed like it was thoroughly stacked against him.”

    A small but notable slice of Republicans have a different view from the rest of their party. The poll found that 14% of Republicans approve of Trump’s conviction, while 12% believe he should spend time behind bars.

    “I knew he had a big ego and questionable values when I voted for him the first time in 2016, but I thought the mantle of the presidency would be a humbling experience for him, and I was wrong,” said Leigh Gerstenberger, a Pennsylvania Republican who said he agreed with jurors’ finding in the New York case and believes Trump should spend at least some time behind bars.

    “I could not be more disappointed in his conduct both in office and out of office,” the 71-year-old retiree said. “There are plenty of Americans who have spent time behind bars for lesser offenses. President Trump should not be treated any differently.”

    About 4 in 10 U.S. adults are extremely or very confident that Trump has been treated fairly by either the jurors, the judge or the prosecutors. Slightly less than half, 46%, approve of the conviction in the case, in line with an AP-NORC poll conducted in June, while about 3 in 10 disapprove, and one-quarter are neutral.

    Some Americans do not believe Trump should be imprisoned but reject his arguments that he’s been treated unfairly by the justice system.

    “I don’t think the particular crime deserves time,” said Christopher Smith, a 43-year-old independent in Tennessee. “I see what he did, lying on business records because of an affair, as more of a moral crime,” Smith said, explaining that he believes prison should be a punishment for crimes that involve a convicted person actively harming another person.

    The poll found that Americans are less divided about another recent high-profile case. Last month, Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, was convicted of three felonies in federal court for lying about drug use when purchasing a gun. Six in 10 U.S. adults approve of Hunter Biden’s conviction, with much smaller political differences: About 6 in 10 Democrats approve, as do around 7 in 10 Republicans.

    About 6 in 10 U.S. adults believe Hunter Biden should be sentenced to serve time in prison because of his conviction in this case, with Republicans slightly more likely than Democrats to agree that prison time is warranted.

    ___

    The poll of 1,088 adults was conducted June 20-24, 2024, using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4.0 percentage points.

    Barrow reported from Atlanta.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Is she a murderer or was she framed? Things to know about the Boston-area trial of Karen Read

    Is she a murderer or was she framed? Things to know about the Boston-area trial of Karen Read

    [ad_1]

    DEDHAM, Mass. — Jurors in the Karen Read trial were scheduled to meet for a fourth day Friday to decide whose story they believe: that of prosecutors who say she drunkenly and angrily slammed into her Boston police officer boyfriend with her Lexus SUV and left him to die, or defense attorneys who claim one or more colleagues killed John O’Keefe and framed Read to cover it up.

    The Massachusetts jury of six men and six women is deliberating behind closed doors in Norfolk County Superior Court, while a “sidewalk jury” of true crime bloggers and pink-shirted Read supporters gathers outside. The unofficial adjudicators, many of them waving Stars and Stripes, have been present every day since the trial began nearly two months ago.

    Read, 44, had worked as an equity analyst and was an adjunct lecturer in finance at her alma mater, Bentley University. O’Keefe, 46, was a 16-year veteran of the Boston Police Department who was raising his niece and nephew.

    Jurors are deliberating events that unfolded at the Canton home of Brian Albert, a Boston police detective, after a night of bar-hopping in January 2022. Brian Higgins, a federal agent who was among those gathered inside, had exchanged flirty texts with Read earlier that month. The lead investigator was State Trooper Michael Proctor, who was friends with several witnesses and sent offensive texts about Read to friends, family and fellow troopers during the investigation.

    Read was charged with second-degree murder, punishable in Massachusetts by life in prison with the possibility of parole. She also faces lesser charges of manslaughter while operating a vehicle under the influence, punishable by five to 20 years; and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death, punishable by up to 10 years.

    Pieces of Read’s broken taillight were found at the scene and a single hair from O’Keefe was found on the rear bumper of Read’s SUV. Prosecutors say that Read repeatedly said, “I hit him. I hit him. Oh my God, I hit him” to first responders and others. Prosecutors replayed angry voicemails Read left for O’Keefe, painting a picture of a failing relationship. They also questioned her behavior, saying she never cried after O’Keefe’s body was found.

    Read contends that the prosecution’s case is based on lies by officers trying to protect themselves. Her lawyers say the pieces of taillight and the hair were planted at the crime scene, which was left unsecured. They also suggested O’Keefe might have been beaten up by Higgins, who had flirted with Read through texts, and that the men panicked, dumping his body outside before trying to cover up the crime.

    Regardless of any verdict, the case revealed questionable techniques and actions on the part of law enforcement. Proctor, who had personal relationships with several of the people involved, called Read a “wack job” and texted his sister saying he wished Read would “kill herself.” He said that was a figure of speech and that his emotions had gotten the better of him.

    The defense also pointed to sloppy policing: The crime scene was left unsecured for hours; the house wasn’t searched; blood-stained snow was scooped up with red plastic drinking cups; and a leaf blower was used to clear snow. The defense also claims that a prosecution witness conducted an incriminating internet search hours before O’Keefe’s body was discovered and then deleted it, and that others linked with the case destroyed phones and manipulated videos.

    As more evidence emerged about what might have seemed an open-and-shut case, interest picked up among true crime fans and others with suspicions about law enforcement. For more than a year, dozens of Read supporters have gathered outside the courthouse, calling for the charges to be dropped.

    As jurors deliberate, members of this self-proclaimed “sidewalk jury” — wearing pink and waving American flags to symbolize what they call a fight for truth and justice — intently watch their phones for word of a verdict. Some take it further, including a man who dresses as the trial judge and a woman who wears plastic cups as earrings. Their mood has been jubilant, encouraged by passing motorists who honk their horns.

    Many were drawn to the case by Aidan Timothy Kearney, aka Turtleboy, whose website has relentlessly questioned the prosecution. He and other supporters have also been accused of harassing witnesses: Kearney was charged with witness intimidation and conspiracy, which he denies.

    The demonstrators, as many as 100 people, have been ordered to remain 200 feet (60 meters) away. At one point on Wednesday, some said a verdict had come, prompting a mad dash toward the courthouse.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Here’s what you need to know about the verdict in the ‘NFL Sunday Ticket’ trial and what’s next

    Here’s what you need to know about the verdict in the ‘NFL Sunday Ticket’ trial and what’s next

    [ad_1]

    LOS ANGELES — The NFL has been found guilty of breaking antitrust laws in its distribution of out-of-market Sunday afternoon games on the “Sunday Ticket” premium subscription service.

    Even though the jury of five men and three women in a U.S. District Court awarded nearly $4.8 billion in damages Thursday to residential and commercial subscribers of “Sunday Ticket,” don’t expect any settlement checks or the shuttering of the service anytime soon.

    The league broke antitrust laws by selling “Sunday Ticket” only on DirecTV and at an inflated price. By offering the service on only one distributor and with a high price, that limited the subscriber base and satisfied concerns by CBS and Fox about preserving local ratings while the NFL got a lot of money for its broadcast rights.

    Three weeks. It began with opening statements on June 6 and featured 10 days of testimony before closing arguments on Wednesday. The jury deliberated for nearly five hours Wednesday and Thursday before coming to a decision.

    The NFL brought in Commissioner Roger Goodell and Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones to testify, but it didn’t help. The plaintiffs’ mostly used economists and video from pre-trial depositions.

    The class action applied to more than 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses, mostly bars and restaurants, that purchased “NFL Sunday Ticket” from June 17, 2011, to Feb. 7, 2023.

    The jury awarded $4.7 billion to residential subscribers and $96 million to businesses. Because damages are trebled under federal antitrust laws, the NFL could end up being liable for $14.39 billion unless it reaches a settlement or it is reduced

    The residential damages were slightly less than the $5.6 billion offered under the plaintiffs’ College Football Model but more than a model where “Sunday Ticket” would have multiple carriers and a 49.7% reduction in the subscription cost ($2.81 billion).

    The business damages were much lower than the plaintiffs presented in any of their three models. The lowest was $332 million under what was called the “NFL Tax” model.

    It would be spread equally among the 32 teams. That means each one could be paying as much as $449.6 million.

    Changes to the “Sunday Ticket” package and/or the ways the NFL carries its Sunday afternoon games would be stayed until all appeals have been concluded. If the league was smart though, it would start offering team-by-team or week-by-week packages along with reducing the price.

    ESPN proposed offering “Sunday Ticket” for $70 per season with team-by-team packages in 2022, but it was turned down by the NFL before it went with YouTube TV.

    If the NFL offered team-by-team packages all along, one of the key class members likely would not have been part of the lawsuit.

    Rob Lippincott — a New Orleans native who moved to California — bought “Sunday Ticket” only for Saints games.

    “He just wanted the Saints. If he had a choice to buy a single-team package and watch the Saints games, he absolutely would have,” plaintiffs attorney Amanda Bonn said during her opening remarks on June 6.

    The landmark college football TV case in 1984 was determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. This was at the U.S. District Court level.

    The NFL said it would appeal the verdict. That appeal would go to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and then possibly the Supreme Court.

    It wouldn’t be the first time the 9th Circuit has seen this case.

    The lawsuit was originally filed in 2015 by the Mucky Duck sports bar in San Francisco. On June 30, 2017, U.S. District Judge Beverly Reid O’Connell dismissed the lawsuit and ruled for the NFL. Two years later, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the case.

    During his closing remarks, lead attorney Bill Carmody showed an April 2017 NFL memo that showed the league was exploring a world without “Sunday Ticket” in 2017, where cable channels would air Sunday afternoon out-of-market games not shown on Fox or CBS.

    Judge Philip S. Gutierrez voiced his frustration with the plaintiffs’ attorneys midway through the trial, but the closing argument by Carmody was clear and easy to understand.

    The NFL might be the king of American sports and one of the most powerful leagues in the world but it often loses in court, especially in Los Angeles. It was in an LA federal court in 1982 that a jury ruled the league violated antitrust rules by not allowing Al Davis to move the Raiders from Oakland to Los Angeles.

    All eyes turn to July 31 when Gutierrez is scheduled to hear post-trial motions. That will include the NFL’s request to have him rule in favor of the league because the judge determined the plaintiffs did not prove their case.

    All the major leagues offer out-of-market packages they are keeping an eye on this case because individual teams selling their out-of-market streaming rights, especially in baseball, would further separate the haves from the have nots.

    A major difference though is that MLB, the NBA and the NHL sell their out-of-market packages on multiple distributors and share in the revenue per subscriber instead of receiving an outright rights fee.

    ___

    AP NFL: https://apnews.com/hub/nfl

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Assistant found guilty of dismembering former boss with a saw to keep him from discovering theft

    Assistant found guilty of dismembering former boss with a saw to keep him from discovering theft

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — A personal assistant was convicted Monday of killing and dismembering his former boss after stealing an estimated $400,000 from him, Manhattan’s district attorney said.

    A jury found Tyrese Haspil, 25, guilty in the 2020 death of Fahim Saleh, 33, whose beheaded, armless body was found by a cousin who had gone to his luxury Manhattan condo to check on him.

    Haspil was arrested days later in a posh Airbnb that authorities say he had rented with stolen money for his girlfriend’s birthday party.

    Haspil handled finances and personal matters for Saleh, whose ventures included Gokada, a ride-hailing motorcycle service in Africa. Within months of being hired in 2018, investigators said Haspil began funneling money into bogus accounts using two separate schemes, prosecutors said.

    He resigned after a year but continued to embezzle funds, even after Saleh confronted him about one of the schemes in January 2020 and let Haspil repay $35,000 over a two-year period to avoid criminal prosecution.

    Afraid Saleh would discover the continuing theft, Haspil hatched a detailed murder plot, first posing as a potential buyer for a vacant apartment across the street from Saleh’s residence so that he could install a camera to surveil Saleh’s building, prosecutors said.

    When Saleh returned home from a run on the morning of July 13, 2020, Haspil followed him into the elevator to his seventh-floor apartment, shocked him with a Taser and stabbed him to death, prosecutors said. He returned the next day to dismember the body with an electric saw, which eventually died, authorities said. It was while Haspil was out buying a battery charger that the victim’s cousin arrived and discovered the body, authorities said.

    “Tyrese Haspil tragically cut Mr. Saleh’s life short – a man who came from a close-knit immigrant family and followed his passions to become a successful entrepreneur,” Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said in a statement. “I hope the accountability delivered by today’s verdict can provide a measure of comfort to Mr. Saleh’s loved ones as they continue to mourn his loss.”

    Haspil’s sentencing on murder and other counts is scheduled for September.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Judge rather than jury will render verdict in upcoming antitrust trial

    Judge rather than jury will render verdict in upcoming antitrust trial

    [ad_1]

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A judge rather than a jury will decide whether Google violated federal antitrust laws by building a monopoly on the technology that powers online advertising.

    The decision Friday by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema was a defeat for the Justice Department, which sought a jury trial when it filed the case last year in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia.

    But the government’s right to a jury trial was based largely on the fact that it sought monetary damages to compensate federal agencies that purchased online ads and claimed they were overcharged as a result of Google’s anticompetitive conduct. The dollar values associated with those claims, though, were relatively small — less than $750,000 — and far less significant than other remedies sought by the government, which might include forcing Google to sell off parts of its advertising technology.

    As a result, Google last month took the extraordinary step of writing the government a check for more than $2 million — the $750,000 in damages claimed by the government multiplied by three because antitrust cases allow for trebled damages.

    Mountain View, California-based Google argued that writing the check rendered moot any government claim of monetary damages and eliminated the need for a jury trial.

    At a hearing Friday in Alexandria, Justice Department lawyers argued that the check Google wrote was insufficient to moot the damages claim, prompting a technical discussion over how experts would try to quantify the damages.

    Brinkema ruled in favor of Google. She said the amount of Google’s check covered the highest possible amount the government had sought in its initial filings. She likened receipt of the money, which was paid unconditionally to the government regardless of whether the tech giant prevailed in its arguments to strike a jury trial, as equivalent to “receiving a wheelbarrow of cash.”

    Google said in a statement issued after Friday’s hearing it is “glad the Court ruled that this case will be tried by a judge. As we’ve said, this case is a meritless attempt to pick winners and losers in a highly competitive industry that has contributed to overwhelming economic growth for businesses of all sizes.”

    In its court papers, Google also argued that the constitutional right to a jury trial does not apply to a civil suit brought by the government. The government disagreed with that assertion but said it would not seek a ruling from the judge on that constitutional question.

    The antitrust trial in Virginia is separate from a case in the District of Columbia alleging Google’s search engine is an illegal monopoly. A judge there has heard closing arguments in that case but has not yet issued a verdict.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The prosecution is wrapping up in Hunter Biden’s gun trial. There are 2 more witnesses expected

    The prosecution is wrapping up in Hunter Biden’s gun trial. There are 2 more witnesses expected

    [ad_1]

    WILMINGTON, Del. — Federal prosecutors are wrapping up their gun case against Hunter Biden, with two more witnesses expected Friday in their effort to prove to jurors that the president’s son lied on a mandatory gun purchase form when he said he wasn’t “an unlawful user of, or addicted to” drugs.

    Prosecutors were still planning to call a drug expert and an FBI chemist, capping a week that has been largely dedicated to highlighting the seriousness of his drug problem through highly personal and sometimes salacious testimony.

    Jurors heard from his ex-wife and a former girlfriend who testified about his habitual crack use and their failed efforts to help him get clean. They saw images of the president’s son bare-chested and disheveled in a filthy room, and half-naked holding crack pipes, and they watched video of his crack cocaine weighed on a scale.

    Prosecutor say the evidence is necessary to prove that Hunter, 54, was in the throes of addiction when he bought the gun and therefore lied when he checked “no” on the form. His attorney, Abbe Lowell, has argued Hunter did not think of himself as an “addict” when he bought the gun and did not intend to deceive anyone.

    Meanwhile, President Joe Biden worked to walk the line between president and father, telling ABC in an interview that he would accept the jury’s verdict and ruling out a pardon for his son. Earlier this week he issued a statement saying: “I am the President, but I am also a Dad. Jill and I love our son, and we are so proud of the man he is today.”

    Biden is in France this week for D-Day anniversary events. First lady Jill Biden, who attended court most of the week, flew from France Thursday and was expected at the trial again Friday before returning to France for a state dinner.

    Hunter Biden been charged with three felonies: lying to a federally licensed gun dealer, making a false claim on the application by saying he was not a drug user and illegally having the gun for 11 days.

    He has pleaded not guilty. He’d hoped to resolve the gun case and another separate tax case in California with a plea deal last year, the result of a yearslong investigation into his business dealings. The deal had him pleading guilty to lower-level charges that would have resolved both cases and spared him the spectacle of a trial so close to the 2024 election. It fell apart after Judge Maryellen Noreika questioned unusual aspects of the proposed agreement and the lawyers couldn’t resolve them.

    Hunter Biden said he got charged because the Justice Department bowed to pressure from Republicans who argued the Democratic president’s son was getting special treatment, and who have escalated their attacks on the criminal justice system since Donald Trump’s recent conviction in New York City in a hush money case.

    Lowell said he would call the president’s brother James as a witness, but it’s unclear yet whether Hunter Biden will testify.

    But jurors have already heard his voice. Prosecutors have played lengthy audio excerpts in court of his 2021 memoir “Beautiful Things,” in which he writes about his lifelong addiction issues and spiraling descent after death of his brother Beau in 2015. The book, written after he got sober, covers the period he had the gun but doesn’t mention it specifically.

    Lowell has said Hunter Biden’s state of mind was different when he wrote the book than when he purchased the gun, when he didn’t believe he had an addiction. He pointed out to jurors that some of the questions on the firearms transaction record are in the present tense, such as “are you an unlawful user of or addicted to” drugs.

    And he’s suggested Hunter Biden might have felt he had a drinking problem at the time, but not a drug problem. Alcohol abuse doesn’t preclude a gun purchase.

    The reason law enforcement raised any questions about the revolver is because Hallie Biden, Beau’s widow, found it unloaded in Hunter’s truck on Oct. 23, 2018, panicked and tossed it into a garbage can at a nearby market. She testified about the episode Thursday.

    She told jurors she considered hiding the gun but thought her kids might find it, so she decided to throw it away.

    “I realize it was a stupid idea now, but I was panicking,” she said. “I didn’t want him to hurt himself, and I didn’t want my kids to find it and hurt themselves.”

    Hallie Biden, who had a brief romantic relationship with Hunter after Beau died, testified that from the time Hunter returned to Delaware from a 2018 trip to California until she threw his gun away, she did not see him using drugs. That time period included the day he bought the weapon.

    But much of her testimony focused on Oct. 23, 2018 — 11 days after he bought it. Hunter was staying with her and seemed exhausted. Asked by the prosecutor if it appeared that Hunter was using drugs around then, she said, “He could have been.”

    As Hunter slept in her home, Hallie Biden went to check his car. She said she was hoping to help him get or stay sober, free of both alcohol and cocaine. She said she found the remnants of crack cocaine and drug paraphernalia. She also found the gun Hunter purchased in a box with a broken lock that kept it from fully closing. There was ammunition too.

    She put in a leather pouch put the pouch in a bag and tossed it into in the trash can at Janssen’s Market. He noticed it missing and asked her whether she had taken it.

    “Are you insane?” he texted. He told her to go back to the market to look for it.

    Surveillance footage played for jurors showed her digging around in the trash can for the gun, but it wasn’t there. She asked store officials if someone had taken out the trash. Hallie testified Hunter told her to file a police report because the gun was registered in his name. She called the police while she was still at the store.

    Officers located the man who inadvertently took the gun along with other recyclables from the trash and retrieved it. The case was eventually closed because of lack of cooperation from Hunter Biden, who was considered the victim.

    Jurors also heard from the officers who handled the case, from the man who found the gun and from the store clerk who sold Hunter the revolver.

    If convicted, Hunter Biden faces up to 25 years in prison, though first-time offenders do not get anywhere near the maximum, and it’s unclear whether the judge would give him time behind bars.

    He also faces a separate trial in September on charges of failing to pay $1.4 million in taxes.

    ___

    Long reported from Washington.

    ___

    Follow the AP’s coverage of Hunter Biden at https://apnews.com/hub/hunter-biden.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden says questioning Trump’s guilty verdicts is ‘dangerous’ and ‘irresponsible’

    Biden says questioning Trump’s guilty verdicts is ‘dangerous’ and ‘irresponsible’

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden said Friday that Donald Trump being found guilty in his New York hush money case reaffirms “the American principle that no one is above the law,” and he said “it’s reckless” and “dangerous” for his predecessor to suggest the legal system was rigged against him.

    “Donald Trump was given every opportunity to defend himself. It was a state case, not a federal case and it was heard by a jury of 12 citizens, 12 Americans, 12 people like you,” Biden told reporters at the White House, a day after a jury in New York found Trump guilty on all 34 felony counts in a case stemming from the 2016 election.

    He added that Trump’s “jury’s chosen the same way every jury in America’s chosen,” noted that jurors heard five weeks of evidence and after “careful deliberation” reached “a unanimous verdict: They found Donald Trump guilty on all 34 felony counts.”

    The president said Trump could appeal the case “just like everyone else has that opportunity” then pointedly said, “It’s reckless, it’s dangerous, It’s irresponsible for anyone to say this was rigged just because they don’t like the verdict.”

    “Our justice system has endured for nearly 250 years, and it literally is the cornerstone of America,” Biden said. “The justice system should be respected. And we should never let never allow anyone to tear it down.”

    As the president left the podium after his remarks, a reporter shouted if he had any reaction to Trump calling himself a political prisoner and blaming the president directly for what’s happening to him. Biden stopped and flashed a grin, but did not answer the question.

    He similarly didn’t answer when another reporter asked if he thought Trump should appear on November’s ballot.

    None of the developments changed Trump’s defiant tone as he looked to galvanize supporters ahead of November. Moments after Biden spoke, Trump sent a fundraising email declaring, “I WAS JUST CONVICTED IN A RIGGED TRIAL. I AM A POLITICAL PRISONER!”

    Biden was at his vacation home in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, marking the anniversary of the 2015 death of his grown son, Beau from brain cancer when the jury reached its verdicts on Thursday, and he offered no personal reaction to the trial at the time. But he returned to Washington on Friday for an event at the White House with the Super Bowl Champion Kansas City Chiefs, and spoke to reporters about the situation in the Middle East before answering questions about Trump’s case.

    In comments to reporters at his namesake tower in Manhattan earlier Friday, Trump tried to cast himself as a martyr, suggesting that if he could be convicted, “They can do this to anyone.”

    “I’m willing to do whatever I have to do to save our country and save our Constitution. I don’t mind,” Trump said.

    Biden for months had carefully avoided involvement in Trump’s legal drama, looking to keep from feeding into his Republican rival’s claims that his criminal woes were the result of politically motivated prosecutions. But as the New York trial concluded, Biden’s campaign became far more vocal about it.

    His campaign had released a series of innuendo-laced statements that alluded to the trial to attack Trump’s policy positions, and then Biden himself quipped that he heard Trump was “free on Wednesdays” — the trial’s scheduled day off — in a video statement when he agreed to debate Trump head-to-head.

    With closing arguments underway on Tuesday, Biden’s campaign even showed up outside the Manhattan courthouse with actor Robert De Niro and a pair of former police officers who responded to the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol insurrection, in what it said was an effort to refocus the presidential race on the former president’s role in the riot. That decision came as the campaign felt its message about the stakes of the election was struggling to break through the intense focus on the trial.

    Shortly after Thursday’s verdict, Biden’s reelection campaign sought to keep the focus on the choice confronting voters in November and the impact of a second Trump presidency.

    “A second Trump term means chaos, ripping away Americans’ freedoms and fomenting political violence – and the American people will reject it this November,” Biden spokesman Michael Tyler said in a statement.

    ___

    Weissert reported from Rehoboth Beach, Delaware.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Clerk over Murdaugh trial spent thousands on bonuses, meals, gifts: ethics complaint

    Clerk over Murdaugh trial spent thousands on bonuses, meals, gifts: ethics complaint

    [ad_1]

    COLUMBIA, S.C. — South Carolina officials have filed 76 counts of ethics violations against the court clerk who handled the Alex Murdaugh murder trial.

    The 25 pages of allegations accuse former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill of allowing a photo of Murdaugh in a holding cell to be taken to promote her book on the trial, giving herself bonuses, and using county money to buy dozens of lunches for her staff, prosecutors and a vendor.

    Hill also struck a deal with a documentary maker to use the county courtroom in exchange for promoting her book on the trial, which later she admitted had plagiarized passages, according to the South Carolina Ethics Commission complaint earlier this month.

    The commission will hold a hearing similar to a trial in December on the accusations unless Hill and her lawyer settle the case before then. Hill could have to reimburse the expenses and face thousands of dollars or more in fines. And if the commission thinks she broke any laws, they can forward the information to prosecutors.

    A criminal investigation into whether Hill tampered with the Murdaugh jury or misused her office continues, the State Law Enforcement Division said Thursday.

    Hill resigned in March during the last year of her four year term, citing the public scrutiny of Murdaugh’s trial and wanting to spend time with her grandchildren. She hasn’t publicly addressed the ethics allegations and her lawyer didn’t return a message Thursday.

    Murdaugh was convicted of killing his wife and younger son after a six-week trial in Colleton County last year. The case involved power, danger, money and privilege and an attorney whose family lorded over his small South Carolina county for nearly a century.

    Murdaugh is appealing his conviction and life without parole sentence in part accusing Hill of trying to influence jurors to vote guilty and being biased against Murdaugh for her book. Murdaugh is also serving decades in prison for admitting to stealing millions of dollars from settlements for clients who suffered horrible injuries or deaths and from his family’s law firm.

    An initial appeal was denied, but the judge said she wasn’t sure Hill told the truth about her dealings with jurors and was “attracted by the siren call of celebrity.”

    The ethics allegations against Hill say she bought lunches for prosecutors and then paid herself back with county money. One count said she spent $543.89 for food and alcohol for a going away lunch for an employee in a local prosecutor’s office.

    None of the allegations mention spending for public defenders or defense attorneys.

    Hill gave herself nearly $10,000 in bonuses from federal money that is meant to improve child support collection but has few rules on how it is spent, according to the complaint.

    The former clerk used public money to buy meals for her staff, her family, judges, court employees and others 36 times. She reimbursed herself for gifts bought for jurors and her staff on Valentine’s Day and for her employees on Mother’s Day, Father’s Day and Easter, the complaint said.

    Expenses included $481 for a 50th birthday party for a staffer and dog food, bones and a pet bed for another, ethics officials said.

    In all, Hill is accused of spending nearly $20,000 in county money in ways she shouldn’t, according to the complaint.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jurors in Trump’s hush money trial zero in on testimony of key witnesses as deliberations resume

    Jurors in Trump’s hush money trial zero in on testimony of key witnesses as deliberations resume

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — The jury in Donald Trump’s hush money trial is to resume deliberations Thursday after asking to rehear potentially crucial testimony about the alleged hush money scheme at the heart of the history-making case.

    The 12-person jury deliberated for about 4 1/2 hours on Wednesday without reaching a verdict.

    Besides asking to rehear testimony from a tabloid publisher and Trump’s former lawyer and personal fixer, the jury also requested to revisit at least part of the judge’s hourlong instructions that were meant to guide them on the law.

    It’s unclear how long the deliberations will last. A guilty verdict would deliver a stunning legal reckoning for the presumptive Republican presidential nominee as he seeks to reclaim the White House while an acquittal would represent a major win for Trump and embolden him on the campaign trail. Since verdicts must be unanimous, it’s also possible the case ends in a mistrial if the jury can’t reach a consensus after days of deliberations.

    Trump struck a pessimistic tone after leaving the courtroom following the reading of jury instructions, repeating his assertions of a “very unfair trial” and saying: “Mother Teresa could not beat those charges, but we’ll see. We’ll see how we do.”

    He remained inside the courthouse during deliberations, where he posted on his social media network complaints about the trial and quoted legal and political commentators who view the case in his favor. He did not testify in his own defense, a fact the judge told jurors they could not take into account.

    Trump is charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records at his company in connection with an alleged scheme to hide potentially embarrassing stories about him during his 2016 Republican presidential election campaign.

    The charge, a felony, arises from reimbursements paid to then-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen after he made a $130,000 hush money payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels to silence her claims that she and Trump had sex in 2006. Trump is accused of misrepresenting Cohen’s reimbursements as legal expenses to hide that they were tied to a hush money payment.

    Trump has pleaded not guilty and contends the Cohen payments were for legitimate legal services. He has also denied the alleged extramarital sexual encounter with Daniels.

    To convict Trump, the jury would have to find unanimously that he created a fraudulent entry in his company’s records, or caused someone else to do so, and that he did so with the intent of committing or concealing another crime.

    The crime prosecutors say Trump committed or hid is a violation of a New York election law making it illegal for two or more conspirators “to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means.”

    While the jury must unanimously agree that something unlawful was done to promote Trump’s election campaign, they don’t have to be unanimous on what that unlawful thing was.

    The jurors — a diverse cross-section of Manhattan residents and professional backgrounds — often appeared riveted by testimony in the trial, including from Cohen and Daniels. Many took notes and watched intently as witnesses answered questions from Manhattan prosecutors and Trump’s lawyers.

    Jurors started deliberating after a marathon day of closing arguments in which a prosecutor spoke for more than five hours, underscoring the burden the district attorney’s office faces in needing to establish Trump’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

    The Trump team need not establish his innocence to avoid a conviction but must instead bank on at least one juror finding that prosecutors have not sufficiently proved their case.

    In their first burst of communication with the court, jurors asked to rehear testimony from Cohen and former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker about an August 2015 meeting with Trump at Trump Tower where the tabloid boss agreed to be the “eyes and ears” of his fledgling presidential campaign.

    Pecker testified that the plan included identifying potentially damaging stories about Trump so they could be squashed before being published. That, prosecutors say, was the beginning of the catch-and-kill scheme at the heart of the case.

    Jurors also want to hear Pecker’s account of a phone call he said he received from Trump in which they discussed a rumor that another outlet had offered to buy former Playboy model Karen McDougal’s alleged story that she had a yearlong affair with Trump in the mid-2000s. Trump has denied the affair.

    Pecker testified that Trump told him, “Karen is a nice girl” and asked, “What do you think I should do?” Pecker said he replied: “I think you should buy the story and take it off the market.” He added that Trump told him he doesn’t buy stories because they always get out and that Cohen would be in touch.

    The publisher said he came away from the conversation thinking Trump was aware of the specifics of McDougal’s claims. Pecker said he believed the story was true and would have been embarrassing to Trump and his campaign if it were made public.

    The National Enquirer’s parent company, American Media Inc., eventually paid McDougal $150,000 for the rights to her story in an agreement that also included writing and other opportunities with its fitness magazine and other publications.

    The fourth item jurors requested is Pecker’s testimony about his decision in October 2016 to back out of an agreement to sell the rights to McDougal’s story to Trump through a company Cohen had established for the transaction, known as an “assignment of rights.”

    “I called Michael Cohen, and I said to him that the agreement, the assignment deal is off. I am not going forward. It is a bad idea, and I want you to rip up the agreement,” Pecker testified. “He was very, very, angry. Very upset. Screaming, basically, at me.”

    Pecker testified that he reiterated to Cohen that he wasn’t going forward with the agreement.

    He said that Cohen told him: “The boss is going to be very angry at you.”

    ___

    Follow the AP’s coverage of former President Donald Trump at https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jurors could soon decide the fate of Idaho man charged in triple-murder case

    Jurors could soon decide the fate of Idaho man charged in triple-murder case

    [ad_1]

    BOISE, Idaho — Prosecutors will make their final arguments to jurors on Wednesday in the case of an Idaho man accused of killing his wife and his new girlfriend’s two youngest children.

    The trial of Chad Daybell has already lasted roughly two months, featuring testimony from dozens of witnesses at times turning strange and gruesome.

    Prosecutors say Daybell, 55, promoted unusual and apocalyptic spiritual beliefs in order to justify the murders, all so that he could fulfill his desire for money, sex and power. They have said they will seek the death penalty if Daybell is convicted.

    Daybell’s defense attorney, John Prior, contends there simply isn’t enough evidence to conclusively tie Daybell to the deaths, or even to prove that his late wife, Tammy Daybell, was killed instead of dying from natural causes. Several witnesses, including Chad and Tammy Daybell’s adult children, testified for the defense.

    Daybell is charged with three counts of first-degree murder, insurance fraud, and conspiracy to commit murder and grand theft in connection with the deaths of Tammy Daybell, 7-year-old Joshua “JJ” Vallow and 16-year-old Tylee Ryan.

    Last year, the children’s mother, Lori Vallow Daybell, received a life sentence without parole for the killings.

    Chad Daybell and Lori Vallow Daybell married just two weeks after Tammy Daybell’s death in October 2019, raising suspicion among local law enforcement officials. Tammy Daybell’s body was later exhumed, and officials say an autopsy showed she died of asphyxiation. Chad Daybell had told officials that Tammy Daybell had been sick, and that she died in her sleep.

    Witnesses for both sides seem to agree on a few things, however: Chad Daybell and Lori Vallow Daybell were having an affair that began well before Tammy Daybell died, and the two young children were missing for months before their remains were found buried in Chad Daybell’s backyard.

    The case began in the fall of 2019, when Lori Vallow Daybell’s then-estranged husband, Charles Vallow, was shot to death at his home in a Phoenix, Arizona suburb. Vallow Daybell’s brother Alex Cox committed the shooting, but told police it was in self-defense. Cox was never charged.

    Lori Vallow Daybell, her kids JJ and Tylee, and her brother Cox all moved to eastern Idaho, settling in a town not far from the rural area where Chad Daybell lived. Just a few months later, extended family reported the two children missing and law enforcement officials launched a search that spanned several states.

    The children’s remains were found nearly a year later buried on Chad Daybell’s property. Investigators later determined both children died in September 2019. Prosecutors say Cox conspired with Chad Daybell and Vallow Daybell in all three deaths, but Cox died of natural causes during the investigation and was never charged.

    During the trial, prosecutors presented testimony from Lori Vallow Daybell’s niece, who said the couple believed that people could be possessed by evil spirits, rendering the person a “zombie.” They said that zombies would eventually be overcome by the dark spirit and die, Melani Pawlowski told jurors. Her testimony echoed that given last year by another friend of the couple, Melanie Gibb. Gibb testified during Lori Vallow Daybell’s trial that she heard Vallow Daybell call the two kids “zombies” before they vanished.

    Jurors heard grim testimony from law enforcement officers who described finding the children’s bodies in Daybell’s yard. They were also presented with dozens of cellphone records and messages between Daybell and Vallow Daybell, including some that showed she called him the day Charles Vallow died. Daybell allegedly told Vallow Daybell in one message that JJ was “barely attached to his body” and that there “is a plan being orchestrated for the children.”

    Defense witnesses included Dr. Kathy Raven, a forensic pathologist who reviewed reports from Tammy Daybell’s autopsy and said she believed the cause of death should have been classified as “undetermined.”

    Chad Daybell’s son, Garth Daybell, testified that his mother had been fatigued and sickly before she died. He told jurors he was home the night his mother died and that he heard no disturbances from his bedroom next to his parents’ room. He said he later felt like police officers and prosecutors were trying to pressure him to change his story, even threatening him with perjury charges at one point.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Latest | Trump’s hush money trial enters its final leg with closing arguments set to begin

    The Latest | Trump’s hush money trial enters its final leg with closing arguments set to begin

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Closing arguments in Donald Trump ‘s historic hush money trial are set to begin Tuesday morning, giving prosecutors and defense attorneys one final opportunity to convince the jury of their respective cases before deliberations begin.

    Jurors will undertake the unprecedented task of deciding whether to convict the former U.S. president of felony criminal charges stemming from hush money payments tied to an alleged scheme to buy and bury stories that might wreck Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

    At the heart of the charges are reimbursements paid to Michael Cohen for a $130,000 hush money payment that was paid to porn actor Stormy Daniels in exchange for not going public with her claim about a 2006 sexual encounter with Trump.

    Prosecutors say the payments to Cohen, Trump’s then-lawyer, were falsely logged as “legal expenses” to hide the true nature of the transactions.

    Trump has denied all wrongdoing.

    He pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records, charges which are punishable by up to four years in prison.

    Closing arguments are expected to last all day Tuesday, with jury deliberations beginning as soon as Wednesday.

    The case is the first of Trump’s four indictments to go to trial as he seeks to reclaim the White House from Democrat Joe Biden.

    The other cases center on charges of illegally hoarding classified documents at his estate in Palm Beach, Florida, and conspiring to overturn the 2020 presidential election. It’s unclear whether any of them will reach trial before the November election.

    Currently:

    — Here’s what every key witness said at Donald Trump’s hush money trial

    — As Trump’s hush money trial nears end, would-be spectators camp out for days to get inside

    — Closing arguments, jury instructions and maybe a verdict? Major week looms

    — Trump hush money case: A timeline of key events

    — Key players: Who’s who at Trump’s hush money criminal trial

    — Hush money, catch and kill and more: A guide to unique terms used at Trump’s trial

    Here’s the latest:

    Several of Donald Trump’s family members plan to be at court Tuesday for his hush money trial.

    They include his sons, Don Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, daughter-in-law Lara Trump, daughter Tiffany Trump and her husband Michael Boulos.

    Other family members have not yet joined him in court, including his wife, former first lady Melania Trump, and his eldest daughter, Ivanka Trump.

    Prosecutors and defense lawyers will have their final opportunity to address the jury in closing arguments.

    The arguments don’t count as evidence in the case charging Donald Trump with falsifying business records to cover up hush money payments during the 2016 presidential election. They’ll instead function as hourslong recaps of the key points the lawyers want to leave jurors with before the panel disappears behind closed doors for deliberations.

    Jurors over the course of a month have heard testimony about sex and bookkeeping, tabloid journalism and presidential politics. Their task ahead will be to decide whether prosecutors who have charged Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records have proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

    With closing arguments in Donald Trump’s hush money trial expected to get underway Tuesday morning, jurors have a weighty task ahead of them — deciding whether to convict the former U.S. president of some, all or none of the 34 felony counts he’s charged with.

    To convict Trump of felony falsifying business records, prosecutors must convince jurors beyond a reasonable doubt that he not only falsified or caused business records to be entered falsely but also did so with intent to commit or conceal another crime. Any verdict must be unanimous.

    To prevent a conviction, the defense simply needs to convince at least one juror that prosecutors haven’t proved Trump’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard for criminal cases.

    New York also has a misdemeanor falsifying business records charge, which requires proving only that a defendant made or caused the false entries, but it is not part of Trump’s case and will not be considered by jurors.

    For many Americans, Memorial Day weekend was a moment to remember the sacrifices of U.S. military personnel and to unplug from the bustle of daily life.

    For others, it was a chance to snag a prime spot in line for entry into Donald Trump’s hush money trial ahead of Tuesday’s closing arguments. Last Friday afternoon saw several people camped out — including professional line sitters with pup tents — for a chance to see the tail end of the historic proceedings up close and personal.

    Though most of the seats inside the courtroom are reserved for lawyers, members of Trump’s entourage, security personnel and journalists, a few are open to the general public.

    The former president’s Manhattan trial has drawn visitors from all over, including students from local schools and plenty of out-of-towners.

    Closing arguments in Donald Trump’s hush money trial are expected to begin on Tuesday, marking the beginning of the end of the historic proceedings that kicked off in April.

    Prosecutors and defense lawyers will make their final pitch to jurors, hoping to sway them in one direction or another after more than four weeks of witness testimony.

    Following the conclusion of closing arguments, which are expected to last all day, Judge Juan M. Merchan will spend about an hour instructing the jury on the law governing the case, providing a roadmap for what it can and cannot take into account as it evaluates the Republican former president’s guilt or innocence.

    Jurors could begin deliberations as early as Wednesday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Cohen: Trump involved in all aspects of hush money scheme

    Cohen: Trump involved in all aspects of hush money scheme

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Donald Trump was intimately involved with all aspects of a scheme to stifle stories about sex that threatened to torpedo his 2016 campaign, his former lawyer said Monday in matter-of-fact testimony that went to the heart of the former president’s hush money trial.

    “Everything required Mr. Trump’s sign-off,” said Michael Cohen, Trump’s fixer-turned-foe and the prosecution’s star witness in a case now entering its final, pivotal stretch.

    In hours of highly anticipated testimony, Cohen placed Trump at the center of the hush money plot, saying the then-candidate had promised to reimburse the lawyer for the money he fronted and was constantly updated about behind-the-scenes efforts to bury stories feared to be harmful to the campaign.

    “We need to stop this from getting out,” Cohen quoted Trump as telling him in reference to porn actor Stormy Daniels’ account of a sexual encounter with Trump a decade earlier. The then-candidate was especially anxious about how the story would affect his standing with female voters.

    A similar episode occurred when Cohen alerted Trump that a Playboy model was alleging that she and Trump had an extramarital affair. “Make sure it doesn’t get released,” was Cohen’s message to Trump, the lawyer said. The woman, Karen McDougal, was paid $150,000 in an arrangement that was made after Trump received a “complete and total update on everything that transpired.”

    “What I was doing, I was doing at the direction of and benefit of Mr. Trump,” Cohen testified.

    Trump has pleaded not guilty and denied having sexual encounters with the two women.

    Cohen is by far the prosecution’s most important witness, and though his testimony lacked the electricity that defined Daniels’ turn on the stand last week, he nonetheless linked Trump directly to the payments and helped illuminate some of the drier evidence such as text messages and phone logs that jurors had previously seen.

    The testimony of a witness with such intimate knowledge of Trump’s activities could heighten the legal exposure of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee if jurors deem him sufficiently credible. But prosecutors’ reliance on a witness with such a checkered past — Cohen pleaded guilty to federal charges related to the payments — also carries sizable risks with a jury and could be a boon to Trump politically as he fundraises off his legal woes and paints the case as the product of a tainted criminal justice system.

    The men, once so close that Cohen boasted that he would “take a bullet” for Trump, had no visible interaction inside the courtroom. The sedate atmosphere was a marked contrast from their last courtroom faceoff, when Trump walked out of the courtroom in October after his lawyer finished questioning Cohen during his civil fraud trial.

    This time around, Trump sat at the defense table with his eyes closed for long stretches of testimony as Cohen recounted his decade-long career as a senior Trump Organization executive, doing work that by his own admission sometimes involved lying and bullying others on his boss’s behalf.

    Jurors had previously heard from others about the tabloid industry practice of “catch-and-kill,” in which rights to a story are purchased so that it can then be quashed. But Cohen’s testimony, which continues Tuesday, is crucial to prosecutors because of his direct communication with the then-candidate about embarrassing stories he was scrambling to suppress.

    Cohen also matters because the reimbursements he received from a $130,000 hush money payment to Daniels, which prosecutors say was meant to buy her silence in advance of the election, form the basis of 34 felony counts charging Trump with falsifying business records. Prosecutors say the reimbursements were logged, falsely, as legal expenses to conceal the payments’ true purpose. Defense lawyers say the payments to Cohen were properly categorized as legal expenses.

    Under questioning from a prosecutor, Cohen detailed the steps he took to mask the payments. When he opened a bank account to pay Daniels, an action he said he told Trump he was taking, he told the bank it was for a new limited liability corporation but withheld the actual purpose.

    “I’m not sure they would’ve opened it,” he said, if they knew it was ”to pay off an adult film star for a nondisclosure agreement.”

    To establish Trump’s familiarity with the payments, Cohen told the jury that Trump had promised to reimburse him. The two men even discussed with Allen Weisselberg, a former Trump Organization chief financial officer, how the reimbursements would be paid as legal services over monthly installments, Cohen testified.

    And though Trump’s lawyers have said he acted to protect his family from salacious stories, Cohen described Trump as preoccupied instead by the impact they would have on the campaign.

    He said Trump even sought to delay finalizing the Daniels transaction until after Election Day so he wouldn’t have to pay her.

    “Because,” Cohen testified, “after the election it wouldn’t matter” to Trump.

    Cohen also gave jurors an insider account of his negotiations with David Pecker, the then-publisher of the National Enquirer, who was such a close Trump ally that Pecker told Cohen his publication maintained a “file drawer or a locked drawer” where files related to Trump were kept.

    That effort took on added urgency following the October 2016 disclosure of an “Access Hollywood” recording in which Trump was heard boasting about grabbing women sexually.

    The Daniels payment was finalized several weeks after that revelation, but Monday’s testimony also centered on a deal earlier that fall with McDougal.

    Cohen testified that he went to Trump immediately after the National Enquirer alerted him to a story about the alleged McDougal affair. “Make sure it doesn’t get released,” he said Trump told him.

    Trump checked in with Pecker about the matter, asking him how “things were going” with it, Cohen said. Pecker responded, ‘We have this under control, and we’ll take care of this,” Cohen testified.

    Cohen also said he was with Trump as Trump spoke to Pecker on a speakerphone in his Trump Tower office.

    “David had stated that it’s going to cost them $150,000 to control the story,” Cohen said. He quoted Trump as saying: “No problem, I will take care of it,” which Cohen interpreted to mean that the payment would be reimbursed.

    To lay the foundation that the deals were done with Trump’s endorsement, prosecutors elicited testimony from Cohen designed to show Trump as a hands-on manager. Acting on Trump’s behalf, Cohen said, he sometimes lied and bullied others, including reporters.

    “When he would task you with something, he would then say, ‘Keep me informed. Let me know what’s going on,’” Cohen testified. He said that was especially true “if there was a matter that was troubling to him.”

    Defense lawyers have teed up a bruising cross-examination of Cohen, telling jurors during opening statements that he’s an “admitted liar” with an “obsession to get President Trump.”

    Prosecutors aim to blunt those attacks by acknowledging Cohen’s past crimes to jurors and by relying on other witnesses whose accounts, they hope, will buttress Cohen’s testimony. They include a lawyer who negotiated the hush money payments on behalf of Daniels and McDougal, as well as Pecker and Daniels.

    After Cohen’s home and office were raided by the FBI in 2018, Trump showered him with affection on social media and predicted that Cohen would not “flip.” Months later, Cohen did exactly that, pleading guilty to federal campaign-finance charges.

    Besides pleading guilty to the hush money payments, Cohen later admitted lying to Congress about a Moscow real estate project that he had pursued on Trump’s behalf during the heat of the 2016 campaign. He was sentenced to three years in prison, but spent much of it in home confinement.

    [ad_2]

    By MICHAEL R. SISAK, JILL COLVIN, ERIC TUCKER and JAKE OFFENHARTZ – Associated Press

    Source link

  • Jury selection to begin in the corruption trial of Sen. Bob Menendez

    Jury selection to begin in the corruption trial of Sen. Bob Menendez

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Jury selection was scheduled to start Monday in the trial of Sen. Bob Menendez, a Democrat charged with accepting bribes of gold and cash to use his influence to deliver favors that would aid three New Jersey businessmen.

    Menendez, 70, will stand trial in Manhattan federal court along with two of the businessmen — real estate developer Fred Daibes and Wael Hana. All three have pleaded not guilty. A third businessman has pleaded guilty and agreed to testify against the other defendants. The senator’s wife is also charged, but her trial is delayed until at least July.

    Opening statements were possible, but unlikely, before Tuesday for a trial that has already sent the senator’s political stature tumbling. After charges were announced in September, he was forced out of his powerful post as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

    The three-term senator has announced he will not be seeking reelection on the Democratic ticket this fall, although he has not ruled out running as an independent.

    It will be the second corruption trial for Menendez this decade. The previous prosecution on unrelated charges ended with a deadlocked jury in 2017.

    In the new case, prosecutors say the senator’s efforts on behalf of the businessmen led him to take actions benefitting the governments of Egypt and Qatar. Menendez has vigorously denied doing anything unusual in his dealings with foreign officials.

    Besides charges including bribery, extortion, fraud and obstruction of justice, Menendez also is charged with acting as a foreign agent of Egypt.

    Among evidence his lawyers will have to explain are gold bars worth over $100,000 and more than $486,000 in cash found in a raid two years ago on his New Jersey home, including money stuffed in the pockets of clothing in closets.

    The Democrat’s wife, Nadine Menendez, was also charged in the case, but her trial has been postponed for health reasons. She is still expected to be a major figure. Prosecutors say that Nadine Menendez often served as a conduit between the men paying the bribes and Menendez.

    The senator’s lawyers in court papers have said they plan to explain that Menendez had no knowledge of some of what occurred because she kept him in the dark.

    According to an indictment, Daibes delivered gold bars and cash to Menendez and his wife to get the senator’s help with a multimillion-dollar deal with a Qatari investment fund, prompting Menendez to act in ways favorable to Qatar’s government.

    The indictment also said Menendez did things benefitting Egyptian officials in exchange for bribes from Hana as the businessman secured a valuable deal with the Egyptian government to certify that imported meat met Islamic dietary requirements.

    In pleading guilty several weeks ago, businessman Jose Uribe admitted buying Menendez’s wife a Mercedes-Benz to get the senator’s help to influence criminal investigations involving his business associates.

    [ad_2]

    Source link