ReportWire

Tag: Laws

  • Maine state official who removed Trump from ballot was targeted in swatting call at her home

    Maine state official who removed Trump from ballot was targeted in swatting call at her home

    [ad_1]

    A fake emergency call to police resulted in officers responding Friday night to the home of Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows just a day after she removed former President Donald Trump from the state’s presidential primary ballot under the Constitution’s insurrection clause.

    She becomes the latest elected politician to become a target of swatting, which involves making a prank phone call to emergency services with the intent that a large first responder presence, including SWAT teams, will show up at a residence.

    Bellows was not home when the swatting call was made, and responding officers found nothing suspicious.

    While no motive for the swatting attempt was released by the Maine Department of Public Safety, Bellows said she had no doubts it stemmed from her decision to remove Trump from the ballot.

    The swatting attempt came after her home address was posted on social media by a conservative activist. “And it was posted in anger and with violent intent by those who have been extending threatening communications toward me, my family and my office,” she told The Associated Press in a phone call Saturday.

    According to the Maine Department of Public Safety, a call was made to emergency services from an unknown man saying he had broken into a house in Manchester.

    The address the man gave was Bellows’ home. Bellows and her husband were away for the holiday weekend. Maine State Police responded to what the public safety department said ultimately turned out to be a swatting call.

    Police conducted an exterior sweep of the house and then checked inside at Bellows’ request. Nothing suspicious was found, and police continue to investigate.

    “The Maine State Police is working with our law enforcement partners to provide special attention to any and all appropriate locations,” the public safety statement said.

    Bellows said the intimidation factors won’t work. “Here’s what I’m not doing differently. I’m doing my job to uphold the Constitution, the rule of law.”

    Other high-profile politicians who have been targets of swatting calls include U.S. Sen. Rick Scott of Florida, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, Georgia U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost.

    Bellows said she, her family and her office workers have been threatened since her decision to remove Trump from the ballot. At least one Republican lawmaker in Maine wants to pursue impeachment against her.

    “Not only have there been threatening communications, but there have been dehumanizing fake images posted online and even fake text threads attributed to me,” said Bellows, who has worked in civil rights prior to becoming secretary of state.

    “And my previous work taught me that dehumanizing people is the first step in creating an environment that leads to attacks and violence against that person,” she said. “It is extraordinarily dangerous for the rhetoric to have escalated to the point of dehumanizing me and threatening me, my loved ones and the people who work for me.”

    She said the people of Maine have a strong tradition of being able to disagree on important issues without violence.

    “I think it is extraordinarily important that everyone deescalate the rhetoric and remember the values that make our democratic republic and here in Maine, our state, so great,” she said.

    The Trump campaign said it would appeal Bellows’ decision to Maine’s state courts, and Bellows suspended her ruling until that court system rules on the case.

    The Colorado Supreme Court earlier this month removed Trump from that state’s ballot, a decision that also was stayed until the U.S. Supreme Court decides whether he would be barred under the insurrection clause, a Civil War-era provision which prohibits those who “engaged in insurrection” from holding office.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Prosecutors urge appeals court to reject Trump's immunity claims in election subversion case

    Prosecutors urge appeals court to reject Trump's immunity claims in election subversion case

    [ad_1]

    Special counsel Jack Smith urged a federal appeals court Saturday to reject former President Donald Trump’s claims that he is immune from prosecution, saying the suggestion that he cannot be held to account for crimes in office “threatens the democratic and constitutional foundation” of the country.

    The filing from Smith’s team was submitted ahead of arguments next month on the legally untested question of whether a former president can be prosecuted for acts taken while in the White House.

    Though the matter is now being considered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, it’s likely to come again before the Supreme Court, which earlier this month rejected prosecutors’ request for a speedy ruling in their favor holding that Trump can be forced to stand trial on charges that he plotted to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

    The outcome of the dispute is critical for both sides especially since the case has been effectively paused while Trump advances his immunity claims in the appeals court.

    Prosecutors are hoping a swift judgment rejecting those arguments will restart the case and keep it on track for trial, currently scheduled for March 4 in federal court in Washington. But Trump’s lawyers stand to benefit from a protracted appeals process that could significantly delay the case and potentially push it beyond the November election.

    Trump’s lawyers maintain that the appeals court should order the dismissal of the case, arguing that as a former president he is exempt from prosecution for acts that fell within his official duties as president.

    Smith’s team has said no such immunity exists in the Constitution or in case law and that, in any event, the actions that Trump took in his failed effort to cling to power aren’t part of a president’s official responsibilities.

    The four-count indictment charges Trump with conspiring to disrupt the certification in Congress of electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021, when rioters motivated by his falsehoods about the election results stormed the U.S. Capitol in a violent clash with police. It alleges that he participated in a scheme to enlist slates of fake electors in battleground states who would falsely attest that Trump had won those states and encouraged then-Vice President Mike Pence to thwart the counting of votes.

    Those actions, prosecutors wrote, fall well outside a president’s official duties and were intended solely to help him win reelection.

    “A President who unlawfully seeks to retain power through criminal means unchecked by potential criminal prosecution could jeopardize both the Presidency itself and the very foundations of our democratic system of government officials to use fraudulent means to thwart the transfer of power and remain in office,” Smith’s team wrote.

    In their brief, prosecutors also said that though the presidency plays a “vital role in our constitutional system,” so, too, does the principle of accountability in the event of wrongdoing.

    “Rather than vindicating our constitutional framework, the defendant’s sweeping immunity claim threatens to license Presidents to commit crimes to remain in office,” they wrote. “The Founders did not intend and would never have countenanced such a result.”

    While Trump’s lawyers have argued that the indictment threatens “the very bedrock of our Republic,” prosecutors say the defense has it backwards.

    “It is the defendant’s claim that he cannot be held to answer for the charges that he engaged in an unprecedented effort to retain power through criminal means, despite having lost the election, that threatens the democratic and constitutional foundation of our Republic,” they said.

    A three-judge panel is set to hear arguments on Jan. 9. Two of the judges, J. Michelle Childs and Florence Pan, were appointed by President Joe Biden. The third, Karen LeCraft Henderson, was assigned to the bench by former President George H.W. Bush.

    U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan earlier rejected the immunity arguments, asserting that the office of the presidency does not confer a “‘get-out-of-jail free card.” Trump’s lawyers then appealed that decision, prompting Smith to seek to bypass the court and request an expedited decision from the Supreme Court.

    The justices last week denied that request without explanation, leaving the matter with the appeals court.

    Trump faces three other criminal prosecutions. He is charged in Florida with illegally retaining classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate and faces a state prosecution in Georgia that accuses him of trying to subvert that state’s 2020 presidential election and a New York case that accuses him of falsifying business records in connection with a hush money payment to a porn actress.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former Swiss finance executive pleads guilty to tax evasion scheme that hid $60 million

    Former Swiss finance executive pleads guilty to tax evasion scheme that hid $60 million

    [ad_1]

    The Internal Revenue Service headquarters building in Washington, D.C.

    Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images News | Getty Images

    WASHINGTON — A former Swiss finance executive pled guilty in New York federal court on Thursday to conspiring to defraud the U.S. in a tax evasion scheme known as the “Singapore Solution” that hid $60 million in income and assets held by wealthy Americans, prosecutors said.

    Rolf Schnellmann, 61, former head of Zurich-based Allied Finance Trust AG, helped defraud the Internal Revenue Service by stashing money of U.S. taxpayer clients in undeclared accounts at a private Swiss bank, Privatbank IHAG Zurich AG, between 2008 and 2014, according to the Manhattan U.S. Attorney’s Office.

    In the “Singapore Solution,” Schnellmann and colleagues conspired to transfer more than $60 million from the undeclared accounts across several countries and Hong Kong, and back to the private bank in newly opened accounts under a Singapore-based asset management firm established by a co-conspirator.

    Schnellmann and the co-conspirators were paid large fees to assist the tax evasion scheme, prosecutors said.

    He was arrested in August in Italy, and extradited to the U.S.

    Schnellmann faces a maximum possible sentence of five years in prison when he is sentenced on July 19.

    Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO:

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Target blamed theft and violence for 9 store closures. Crime is higher at locations it kept open nearby

    Target blamed theft and violence for 9 store closures. Crime is higher at locations it kept open nearby

    [ad_1]

    Target’s shuttered small-format store on Folsom Street in San Francisco’s SoMa neighborhood, November 2023.

    Gabrielle Fonrouge

    On Sept. 26, Target set off a national firestorm when it said it would close nine stores in four states because theft and organized retail crime had made them too dangerous to run.

    On its face, Target’s announcement was evidence that retail crime was preventing one of the country’s most prominent retailers from operating stores profitably and safely. It challenged skeptics who believed that retailers had exaggerated the impact of organized retail crime and used it as an excuse for poor financial performance.

    There was just one problem with the explanation Target gave for closing stores: The locations it shuttered generally saw fewer reported crimes than others it chose to keep open nearby, a monthslong CNBC investigation has found. 

    CNBC’s findings cast doubt on Target’s explanation and raise questions about whether the company’s announcement was designed to advance its legislative agenda — seeking a crackdown on organized retail crime — and to obscure poor financial performance at the stores as it grapples with sliding sales.

    In some cases, Target chose to keep operating stores in busier areas that had better foot traffic or higher median incomes, even though the locations saw more theft and violence, the probe revealed. In those areas, police departments may be better funded due to higher tax bases, and shoppers may have more to spend on discretionary goods.

    Many of the locations Target closed were “small-format” stores the company opened over the last five years as part of an experiment to expand its footprint in dense, urban areas. The moves followed Target’s decision to shutter four similar stores in the spring that it said were underperforming, Retail Dive previously reported.

    At the time it announced the nine store closures in September, Target said, “We cannot continue operating these stores because theft and organized retail crime are threatening the safety of our team and guests, and contributing to unsustainable business performance. We can only be successful if the working and shopping environment is safe for all.” 

    The news came just hours after the National Retail Federation issued a key annual retail security survey — in which it said violence at stores had increased but losses from theft hadn’t changed much — and exactly one month before the trade group was planning to lobby Congress for stiffer punishment for organized theft offenders. Target CEO Brian Cornell sits on the NRF’s board of directors and is a member of its executive committee. 

    One longtime retail executive and expert questioned whether Target’s claims about theft at the stores were designed to mask its struggles, as the retailer’s sales fell from the prior year in both its second and third quarters.

    “I don’t want to use the word ‘stunt,’ because I don’t know exactly what went on in Minneapolis [where Target is based], but to me, it read like a stunt, looking to divert attention from the company’s lack of performance overall,” said Mark Cohen, a professor and director of retail studies at Columbia Business School who previously served as the CEO of Sears Canada, Bradlees and Lazarus department stores. 

    “They did not disclose their actual shortage statistics,” he added. “They talked about it in general terms; they did not disclose any other factors that would have caused them to decide to close any of those stores. They implied that the only reason they were closing the stores was because of theft. That may or may not be true. My guess is: Not true.”

    In response, Target spokesperson Jim Joice told CNBC that as a growth company, Target is “continuously opening new stores, initiating remodels, investing in our team and infrastructure, and refining our operations as we seek to deliver the shopping experience that people have come to expect of Target.”

    “In 2023 alone, we opened 21 new stores and remodeled 150 stores as part of our nearly $5 billion investment in strategic initiatives. The recently announced store closures related to safety, retail theft, and unsustainable business performance represent less than 0.5% of our U.S. footprint, with 1,956 stores currently operating and serving our guests,” Joice said.

    Target shoppers are encouraged to call for help accessing products that are kept in locked cases.

    Gabrielle Fonrouge

    CNBC used public record requests and law enforcement sources to obtain crime statistics and 911 call data for 21 Target stores in New York City, Seattle, the San Francisco Bay Area, and Portland, Oregon — the four areas where the retailer closed stores. The data includes the nine stores Target shuttered and similar locations it kept open nearby, spanning from January 2021 through September 2023, when the closures were announced. The records show how many times Target was listed as the victim of a crime at the locations, or how many times police were called to the stores and arrested someone, said they addressed the issue or generated a report or log of what occurred. 

    The records paint a startling picture of the frequent crime at the locations. But they also show a clear trend. Nearly every store the retailer closed saw less police activity and fewer reported crime incidents than the locations it kept open nearby. 

    Only one of the nine stores that Target closed across the four regions, a location in Pittsburg, California, saw more crime and police activity than its closest comparable location, in Antioch, California, according to CNBC’s analysis.

    Store-specific crime data for the nine locations Target closed has not been previously reported.

    Like most data on theft, organized retail crime, and “shrink,” or retailers’ inventory loss, the records obtained by CNBC are not complete. Theft and crime overall are difficult to measure, as they frequently go unreported and undetected, experts have told CNBC.

    Target declined to provide its internal crime figures. Without those numbers, the records obtained by CNBC are “the only picture that you’re going to get” about what crime looked like at the locations the retailer closed and the ones it didn’t, said Christopher Herrmann, an assistant professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and an expert in crime analysis and mapping.

    “It’s interesting that they’re using public safety, or employee safety, as an excuse, kind of, for closing the stores,” said Herrmann. “Because the reality is, they’re not closing the stores with the highest rate of retail theft.”

    In response, Target’s Joice told CNBC that “store-level incidents vary widely in severity, and police data won’t show the full extent of what our teams experience on the ground.”

    “We have repeatedly shared financial data and internal data on the increase of theft-related crime,” Joice said. “We have also consistently conveyed our emphasis on safety and highlighted team members’ experiences that demonstrate the impact that theft and organized retail crime have had on our company, our guests, and the communities we serve.”

    “We continue to invest heavily in safety, including strategies to prevent and stop theft and organized retail crime in our stores, as well as partnering with law enforcement, legislators, and retail peers to seek long-term solutions,” Joice said.

    The San Francisco Bay Area

    Target closed three stores in the San Francisco Bay Area — one in San Francisco, one in Oakland and another in Pittsburg, a suburb about 40 miles outside the city. 

    All the locations were within a few miles or a short drive away from another Target that remained open, which could have played a role in the company’s decision to shutter them, experts said.

    Retailers often “miscalculate how much the new store will cannibalize existing stores,” said Cohen, of Columbia Business School.

    Target opened its now-closed small-format store in Oakland in 2019, just two miles away from its Emeryville location. Between January 2021 and September 2023, 96 crime incidents were reported at the Oakland store compared with 440 at the Emeryville store over the same time frame. 

    Target’s Emeryville, California, location remains open about two miles away from a store the retailer closed in Oakland.

    Gabrielle Fonrouge

    The findings reflect some overall theft trends in Oakland and Emeryville in 2023. Overall theft, excluding car theft, was down 15% in Oakland from Jan. 1 to Oct. 29, compared with the same period a year ago, according to police records. In Emeryville, petty theft and grand theft were up 16% and 14%, respectively, for the period from Jan. 1 to Oct. 31, compared with the same period a year ago, police records show.

    Demographics is another factor that could be at play. In the ZIP code where the Oakland store is located, the median income level is $76,953, compared with $114,286 in Emeryville, according to U.S. Census Data.

    People with higher incomes tend to have more money to spend on discretionary goods. Police departments in those areas may also be more inclined to enforce property crimes such as theft if there is less violent crime to attend to, which could explain the difference in police responses between stores, experts who study crime have told CNBC. For example, one homicide and three rapes have been reported in Emeryville so far this year. In comparison, 106 homicides and 159 rapes have been reported in Oakland in the same time frame.

    Looters rob a Target store during protests in Oakland, California, on May 30, 2020, over the death of George Floyd.

    Josh Edelson | AFP | Getty Images

    Within the city of San Francisco, the small-format store on Folsom Street that Target closed saw at least 84 crime incidents that resulted in police reports between January 2021 and September 2023.

    Two miles away at Target’s sprawling Union Square location, which remains open, 486 incidents were recorded during the same time frame. 

    The stores’ neighborhoods and the foot traffic they saw also differentiated them.

    The Target sign from its Mission Street store in San Francisco’s Union Square glows on a building across the street, November 2023.

    Gabrielle Fonrouge

    The closed store was sandwiched between a car dealership and a freeway in an area that locals said had light foot traffic and had attracted a homeless encampment during the Covid pandemic. In comparison, Target’s Union Square location is in the heart of San Francisco’s bustling tourist and shopping district. 

    Portland 

    Target closed three stores in the city of Portland that saw less crime than locations it kept open. 

    For example, the Target on Southeast Washington Street, which remains open, had 718 reported incidents between January 2021 and the end of September 2023, which is more than all three closed stores saw combined over the same time period, according to police records.

    One of the locations, a small-format store on Northeast Halsey Street, was open for less than three years before it was closed.

    Based on available data in Portland, CNBC’s findings echo some area crime statistics.

    In the Hazelwood neighborhood, where Target’s store on Southeast Washington Street remains open, reported larcenies are up 5% in 2023 between Jan. 1 and the end of October, compared with the same period a year ago. In Hollywood and Richmond, where Target closed stores, reported larcenies were down 37% and 8%, respectively, for the same time period.

    However, in downtown Portland, where Target’s store on Southwest Morrison Street was closed, reported larcenies were up 13% for that time period.

    Seattle 

    Target closed two stores in Seattle, both small-format locations that saw fewer crimes than the nearest Target stores.

    For example, the shuttered Targets on Northwest Market Street and University Way Northeast had 235 and 395 reported incidents, respectively, between January 2021 and the end of September 2023. In comparison, two locations about five miles away that remain open, on Second Avenue and Northeast Northgate Way, saw 878 and 901 reported incidents, respectively, during the same time period.

    In some cases, the data also matches local crime statistics. Between Jan. 1, 2021, and Oct. 31, 2023, reported larcenies were 30% lower in the area of Target’s Northwest Market Street location and 33% lower in the area of the University Way store, both of which were closed, than in the area where Target’s Northeast Northgate Way store remains open.

    New York City 

    Target closed one store in New York City. The location was in East Harlem and housed within a larger shopping complex that borders the East River, about a 15-minute walk from the nearest subway station. 

    It recorded at least 844 incidents between January 2021 and the end of September 2023, but the figures pale in comparison with those during the same time period at other Target stores dotted across the Big Apple. 

    A store on Greenwich Street in Lower Manhattan saw 2,090 reported incidents, more than double the number in East Harlem in that time period. At another location, on Grand Street, 1,628 incidents were recorded. 

    The locations are vastly different. The two Lower Manhattan locations are in busier areas with more foot traffic and higher median income levels. In the ZIP code where the East Harlem store was located, the median income is $36,989, compared with more than $250,000 in the area around the Greenwich Street store and $43,362 in the area around the Grand Street location, U.S. Census data shows.

    Target closed the East Harlem location — because of crime and safety, it said — at the same time it planned to open a store about a mile and a half away on West 125th Street in Harlem. Crime trends are worse in the area where the new store is opening, according to police records.

    Target’s New York City store in East Harlem was housed within a larger shopping complex.

    Gabrielle Fonrouge

    At the time Target announced the East Harlem closure, reported petty theft incidents were down 2.5% between Jan. 1 and Sept. 24, 2023, in the area where the East Harlem store was and up 9% during the same period in the area where the proposed store will be, compared with the same period a year ago. Target did not comment on the discrepancy.

    Methodology: When analyzing 911 call logs and other crime data for this report, CNBC included in its tally only incidents that led to an arrest, police report or log, or incidents that police said they responded to and handled. Unfounded complaints, duplicate calls, requests for backup, and store and welfare checks were weeded out from the logs and not counted, along with other irrelevant information. Mental health crises, overdoses, vehicle thefts, vehicle burglaries and other events that weren’t directly related to Target or appeared to happen outside the confines of the store were also not included.

    — Graphics by CNBC’s Gabriel Cortes

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Michigan teen gets life in prison for Oxford High School attack

    Michigan teen gets life in prison for Oxford High School attack

    [ad_1]

    A judge sentenced a Michigan teenager to life in prison Friday for killing four students and terrorizing others at Oxford High School, after listening to hours of gripping anguish from parents and wounded survivors.

    Judge Kwame Rowe rejected pleas from defense lawyers for a shorter sentence and ensured that Ethan Crumbley, 17, will not get an opportunity for parole.

    Moments before learning his fate, the teen apologized and appeared to agree with his victims that the stiffest punishment was appropriate.

    “Any sentence that they ask for, I ask that you do impose it on me,” the shooter said. “I want them to be happy, and I want them to feel secure and safe. I do not want them to worry another day. I really am sorry for what I’ve done. … But I can try my best in the future to help other people, and that is what I will do.”

    Life sentences for teenagers are rare in Michigan since the U.S. Supreme Court and the state’s highest court said the acts of minors must be viewed differently than the crimes of adults. But Oakland County prosecutor Karen McDonald said a no-parole order fit the Oxford case.

    “It’s not a moment to celebrate,” McDonald said outside court. “It’s tragic. And the voices today, I think, profoundly show that.”

    Indeed, Rowe’s decision followed deeply emotional remarks by families of the deceased and survivors who said the tragedy had irreparably turned their lives upside down.

    Crumbley, who was 15 when he committed the shooting, pleaded guilty to first-degree murder and terrorism. He brought a gun to school, but his backpack was never checked, even after his parents were summoned that same day about their son’s drawings, which included a gun and words: “The thoughts won’t stop. Help me.”

    “I am a really bad person. I’ve done terrible things,” Crumbley said in court Friday.

    The judge said the shooting was planned well in advance, and he noted that the shooter had plenty of time to stop as he walked through school.

    Rowe was especially troubled by how victim Hana St. Juliana was repeatedly shot and that another, Justin Shilling, was shot at point-blank range in a bathroom while another student was forced to watch. He described it as “execution” and “torture.”

    “The court cannot ignore the deep trauma caused to the state of Michigan and the Oxford community,” the judge said.

    Earlier, Rowe allowed a framed photo of Tate Myre to be placed near him while the slain teen’s father spoke.

    “We are miserable. We miss Tate,” Buck Myre said. “Our family has a permanent hole in it that can never be fixed — ever.”

    Nicole Beausoleil recalled seeing the body of her daughter, Madisyn Baldwin, at the medical examiner’s office, her hand with blue-painted fingernails sticking out from a covering.

    “I looked through the glass. My scream should have shattered it,” Beausoleil said.

    Shilling’s mother, Jill Soave, told the shooter that he executed a boy who could have helped him navigate awkward teenage years.

    “If you were that lonely, that miserable and lost, and you really needed a friend, Justin would have been your friend — if only you had asked,” Soave said.

    Kylie Ossege explained how she had urged St. Juliana a “thousand times” to keep breathing while they waited for help on a blood-soaked carpet. Her classmate died.

    Ossege, now a college student, was shot and continues to struggle with daily pain from spinal injuries.

    “Being able to swing a leg over my horse is my therapy. It is pure joy,” she said of Blaze. “I have not been able to do it for two years.”

    Crumbley’s defense team urged the judge to give him a chance to turn his life around and become eligible for parole. A court-appointed guardian, lawyer Deborah McKelvy, said the teen was not the same person, two years after the murders.

    “He is a bright young man,” she told the judge. “He is an artist. He is a historian. There are days I have been oblivious sitting in a cell for three hours just talking to him. His life is salvageable.”

    Defense lawyer Paulette Michel Loftin said Crumbley has improved with medication and mental health care.

    “He is remorseful. He has been able to keep out the dark voices and thoughts,” Loftin said.

    But victims weren’t impressed.

    “There can be no rehabilitation,” St. Juliana’s father, Steve St. Juliana, told the judge. “There is absolutely nothing the defendant can do to earn my forgiveness. His age plays no part.”

    In a journal, the shooter wrote about his desire to watch students suffer and the likelihood that he would spend his life in prison. He made a video on the eve of the shooting, declaring what he would do the next day.

    Linda Watson said her son Aiden, who was shot in the leg, still doesn’t go to school for a full day. She recalled the family staying in a hotel because a nail gun being used in her neighborhood sounded like a real gun to him.

    “Aiden will be dealing with this for the rest of his life. … This shooter — this monster — should have to feel everything hard and painful for the rest of his life,” Watson said.

    Meanwhile, parents Jennifer and James Crumbley are locked up in the county jail. They are awaiting trial on involuntary manslaughter charges, accused of making a gun accessible at home and neglecting their son’s mental health.

    The shooting happened in Oxford Township, about 40 miles (60 kilometers) north of Detroit. Besides the four students who were killed, six more students and a teacher also were wounded.

    The Oxford school district hired an outside group to conduct an independent investigation. A report released in October said “missteps at each level” — school board, administrators, staff — contributed to the tragedy.

    Crumbley’s behavior in class, including looking at a shooting video and gun ammunition on his phone, should have identified him as a “potential threat of violence,” the report said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump gag order in fraud case reinstated by New York appeals court

    Trump gag order in fraud case reinstated by New York appeals court

    [ad_1]

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump attends trial in a civil fraud case that state Attorney General Letitia James brought against him, his adult sons, the Trump Organization and others, in New York City, Oct. 3, 2023.

    Eduardo Munoz | Reuters

    A New York appeals court Thursday reinstated a gag order on Donald Trump in the former president’s $250 million civil business fraud trial.

    The order bars Trump from making public statements about the staff of Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron, who is presiding over the ongoing trial.

    Engoron had imposed the gag order on Trump after Trump repeatedly targeted the judge’s principal law clerk, Allison Greenfield.

    Engoron later imposed a similar gag order on Trump’s attorneys, barring them from making any public statements about confidential communications between the judge and his staff. The gag orders on Trump’s attorneys were also reinstated Thursday.

    Engoron has said his chambers have been “inundated” with threats and harassment against him and his staff during the trial. An official who monitors threats for the New York Court System’s Department of Public Safety told the appeals court in a sworn statement that Trump’s comments about Greenfield have prompted “hundreds” of threatening messages, many of which were antisemitic.

    In its ruling Thursday, a four-judge appellate panel lifted a temporary suspension of the gag orders on Trump and his attorneys that was put in place while Trump appealed the speech restrictions.

    The gag orders are now likely to stay in place for the remainder of the trial, which is expected to last until mid-January.

    Engoron acknowledged the ruling in court and informed the parties in the case that he intends to “enforce the gag orders rigorously and vigorously.”

    Trump attorney Christopher Kise said the appeals court’s ruling marked a “tragic day for the rule of law” in a statement to NBC News.

    “Hard to imagine a more unfair process and hard to believe this is happening in America,” Kise said, claiming the ruling prevents Trump from publicly explaining why he believes his trial is unfair.

    The appellate ruling came three days after Trump’s attorneys urged the appeals court not to reimpose the gag orders, arguing that they unconstitutionally blocked Trump from accusing Engoron and Greenfield of political bias.

    Engoron has found Trump in violation of his gag order twice, imposing a total of $15,000 in fines on the former president since the fraud trial began in early October.

    The narrow order does not block Trump from attacking Engoron or New York Attorney General Letitia James, who brought the case accusing him and his co-defendants of falsely inflating Trump’s assets for financial gain.

    Trump has repeatedly attacked both of them, casting the judge as a Trump “hater” and decrying the case as a “witch hunt.”

    On Wednesday, Trump sent at least six separate Truth Social posts targeting Engoron’s wife, accusing her of criticizing Trump and commenting on the trial on X, formerly Twitter.

    Engoron’s wife told Newsweek earlier this month that she does not have an account on X and has not posted any anti-Trump messages. After the gag orders were reinstated, Office of Court Administration spokesman Al Baker said that the judge’s wife “has sent no social media posts regarding the former president.”

    “They are not hers,” Baker said in a statement, NBC reported.

    Trump sent at least three additional posts Thursday claiming that Engoron’s wife sent anti-Trump social media messages.

    Read more CNBC politics coverage

    Engoron has already found Trump, his two adult sons, the Trump Organization and its top executives liable for fraudulently misstating the values of real estate properties and other assets. The trial will determine penalties and resolve other claims of wrongdoing in James’ suit.

    In addition to seeking around $250 million in damages, James wants to permanently bar Trump Sr., Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump from running a New York business.

    Engoron on Thursday morning extended the scheduled end of the trial from mid-December. He set closing arguments for Jan. 11 after Trump’s lawyers asked for more time to prepare.

    The defense is expected to call Trump back to the stand as its final witness on Dec. 11. Engoron plans to issue a verdict in the case a few weeks after the trial ends.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump mistrial request denied in $250 million New York fraud case

    Trump mistrial request denied in $250 million New York fraud case

    [ad_1]

    A New York judge on Friday denied a request by former President Donald Trump and his co-defendants for a mistrial in the $250 million civil business fraud case against them.

    Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron said the arguments for a mistrial were “utterly without merit” as he declined to sign the defendants’ bid for a motion to throw out the case.

    The ruling came two days after attorneys for Trump Sr., Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, the Trump Organization and its top executives argued that the case had been undermined by political bias.

    The defense lawyers claimed that Engoron and his principal law clerk have “tainted these proceedings” and that “only the grant of a mistrial can salvage what is left of the rule of law.”

    But Engoron in Friday’s ruling disputed each allegation of bias, and made clear that he intends to preside over the case until its conclusion.

    “As expected, today the Court refused to take responsibility for its failure to preside over this case in an impartial and unbiased manner,” Trump’s attorney Alina Habba said in a statement. “We, however, remain undeterred and will continue to fight for our clients’ right to a fair trial.”

    The lawsuit, brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, accuses the defendants of fraudulently inflating the values of Trump’s real estate properties and other assets for years in order to obtain tax benefits, better loan terms and other financial perks.

    In addition to seeking $250 million in damages, James wants to permanently bar Trump and his two adult sons from running a New York business.

    Engoron has already found the defendants liable for fraud and ordered the cancellation of their New York business certificates. The trial, which is being conducted without a jury, will determine penalties and resolve James’ other claims of wrongdoing by Trump and his co-defendants.

    An appeals court has temporarily paused the process of dissolving Trump’s business entities.

    In Friday’s ruling, Engoron went through all of the defendants’ arguments for a mistrial and explained why each was “without merit.”

    The defense lawyers had pointed to articles that Engoron had linked to in his alumni newsletter, claiming they created an appearance of impropriety because they were related to the fraud case.

    Engoron responded that he “neither wrote nor contributed to any of the articles on which defendants focus, and no reasonable reader could possibly think otherwise.”

    He also shrugged off claims that he and his clerk are “co-judging,” writing, “my rulings are mine, and mine alone.”

    The clerk has become such a target of criticism that Engoron has imposed gag orders barring both Trump and his lawyers from making comments about her. Trump has already violated the narrow gag order twice, receiving a total of $15,000 in fines.

    A New York appeals judge on Thursday temporarily suspended those gag orders, citing the “constitutional and statutory rights at issue.”

    In their bid for a mistrial, the defense lawyers had also that the clerk’s presence in the case damages its integrity because of contributions she made to Democratic groups, including some that are supporting the attorney general.

    They had also accused the clerk of making contributions over the $500 limit that applies to members of a New York judge’s staff.

    But Engoron said Trump’s lawyers were ignoring that the clerk is a candidate for judicial office, and therefore is not bound by the $500 limit when contributing to her own campaign or buying tickets to political functions.

    Engoron said it was “nonsensical” to assume that the clerk’s attendance at events sponsored by political organizations suggests that she, and by proxy the judge himself, must therefore agree with the views of those groups.

    “And in any event, they are a red herring, as my Principal Law Clerk does not make rulings or issue orders — I do,” Engoron wrote.

    He noted that the attorney general’s office has called for a full briefing schedule on the mistrial motion. But “in good conscience, I cannot sign a proposed order to show cause that is utterly without merit, and upon which subsequent briefing would therefore be futile.”

    The trial, which began last month, is expected to last until late December. Trump, a leading Republican presidential candidate, faces four pending criminal cases in addition to the fraud case and other civil matters.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Morgan Stanley fined for putting customer personal data at risk in computer purge: New York AG

    Morgan Stanley fined for putting customer personal data at risk in computer purge: New York AG

    [ad_1]

    Shannon Stapleton | Reuters

    Morgan Stanley agreed to pay a fine of $6.5 million to a coalition of six states for compromising the personal data of millions of customers while decommissioning computers at the financial services giant, New York’s attorney general said Thursday.

    Morgan Stanley as part of the settlement agreed to adopt provisions “that better protects the personal information of its consumers going forward,” New York AG Letitia James‘ office said.

    The settlement comes more than three years after Morgan Stanley notified the states’ attorneys general of two incidents involving data security.

    In the first incident, involving the closure of two company data centers in 2016, Morgan Stanley contracted with a vendor to remove data from the computers that were set to be decommissioned, but later learned that the vendor subcontracted certain services to an unauthorized provider, according to the agreement.

    Read more CNBC politics coverage

    Some computers then ended up being auctioned off “while still containing consumers’ personal information, including data belonging to 1.1 million New Yorkers,” according to James’ office.

    “In a second incident, Morgan Stanley discovered during a decommissioning process that 42 servers, all potentially containing unencrypted customer information, were missing,” James’ office said in a statement. “During this process, the company learned that the local devices being decommissioned may have contained unencrypted data due to a manufacturer flaw in the encryption software.”

    An investigation found that Morgan Stanley failed to maintain proper controls for vendors and hardware inventory.

    “Had these controls been in place, both data security events could have been prevented,” James’ office said.

    James, in a statement, said, “No one should have their personal information auctioned off without their knowledge because a company failed to take basic steps to erase it before selling their old computers.”

    New York will receive $1.66 million in the settlement, and the rest of the fine will be split between the other states: Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, New Jersey and Vermont.

    A Morgan Stanley spokesperson, in a statement to CNBC, said, “We have previously notified all potentially impacted clients regarding these matters, which occurred several years ago, and are pleased to have resolved this related investigation.”

    Since the incidents were discovered, the company has not detected unauthorized access or misuse of client information, and it has made significant changes to how it handles data destruction and vendors.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Access to CBD Leads to Decrease in Opioid Prescriptions, Study Shows | High Times

    Access to CBD Leads to Decrease in Opioid Prescriptions, Study Shows | High Times

    [ad_1]

    A recent report published in the Southern Economic Journal on Oct. 26 found evidence that legal access to CBD has helped lead to a decrease in opioid prescriptions.

    A study called “CBD as a cure-all? The impacts of state-level legalization of prescription cannabidiol (CBD) on opioid prescriptions,” was authored by economists associated with South Carolina-based Wofford College, and California State University Bakersfield. “We find that the ability to purchase CBD legally leads to 6.6% to 8.1% fewer opioid prescriptions,” the authors stated.

    Researchers make it clear that it wasn’t just CBD legalization that led to opioid prescription reduction, but that of legal access to CBD products. “In general, we find that state level legalization of CBD products only leads to a statistically significant reduction in opioid prescriptions when states also allow for open and legal dispensaries, suggesting that adequate supply-side access is necessary to realize the potential benefits of legalization,” authors wrote.

    The report stated that stores selling CBD help decrease opioid prescriptions by 3.5% just two years after legalization goes into effect. It’s not the same for every state though, as this statistic varied for states with stricter regulations on CBD sales, including the requirement that people provide their ID or submit their personal info to a registry. “…(i) state legalization of prescription CBD alone does not reduce opioid usage; (ii) regulations limited purchasing, such as ID laws, negate nearly all of the benefits of demand-side legalization; and (iii) supply-side access, either via interstate purchasing or legal and open dispensaries, are vital in using pain-management substances to fully combat the opioid epidemic.”

    “Our paper provides important preliminary evidence that CBD may in fact reduce opioid prescription rates,” the authors said. “While CBD products may not necessarily be the cure-all they are marketed as, they do appear to be net substitutes for opioids.”

    The authors examined individual state laws and regulations specifically focused on CBD, such as Iowa, Tennessee, and Texas, between 2010-2019. During that window, there was a significant shift in CBD as an accepted and mainstream product. “Although the fastest growing segment of the CBD market is over-the-counter [OTC] usage, the vast majority of states that have established industrial hemp programs did not do so until 2016, meaning that OTC CBD products were largely unavailable until later in our study period.”

    They also examined Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data for opioid prescriptions on a county level, but noted that it suggests “…that further research on the impacts of CBD is warranted.”

    The 2018 Farm Bill transformed the hemp industry in the U.S. Prior to the passage of the bill though, access was more limited. As time passed, states such as Tennessee decided to permit legal importation of CBD products from outside the state in 2016.

    The authors explained that while opioid prescriptions were reduced in those CBD-only states, the states that also allowed medical marijuana laws (MMLs) and/or recreational marijuana laws (RMLs) still made more of an impact on opioid prescription reduction. “Compared to states with no legal usage of marijuana, those who have adopted MMLs or RMLs prescribe fewer opioids per 100 population. However, these areas tend to be healthier and have more doctors, suggesting it is possible difference in opioid usage rates are not due to the presence of legal marijuana.”

    A state with a variety of CBD-only dispensaries appears to lead to the most significant drops in opioid prescriptions though. “Importantly, we see that [states with] CBD laws have lower opioid prescribing rates than states with no laws, though still higher than in states with MMLs or RMLs,” However, when we look at states that have allowed CBD dispensaries, we see that opioid prescribing rates are lower than those found in states with MMLs or RMLs, even with similar objective health measures (obesity and diabetes) to states with CBD laws.”

    Medical cannabis states experienced a 35% decrease in opioid prescriptions, but states that have not yet legalized still saw a decrease of 33%.

    Researchers concluded that their study is just a glimpse into the positive benefits of CBD and its effect on opioid prescriptions. “While further work is needed to understand the degree to which our results are generalizable to the over-the-counter market for CBD, our results suggest policy makers should consider the costs of regulation and carefully balance the tradeoffs between ensuring the quality of and restricting access to CBD,” authors said in their conclusion.

    In 2020, a former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent, Anthony Armour, who tried to swap opioids with CBD was fired from his position. Most recently in September 2023, the DEA defended its decision to fire the individual. “Mr. Armour argues that he ‘displayed negligence or poor decision-making,’ and DEA properly held him accountable for his poor decisions when they resulted in a verified positive drug test. DEA lost trust in Mr. Armour and properly removed him.”

    Separately, the DEA is currently considering recommendations from the Department of Health and Human Services. It’s uncertain if the agency will move forward to reschedule cannabis into a less restrictive category that shows medical value of the plant.

    [ad_2]

    Nicole Potter

    Source link

  • Trump attacks judge in NY fraud case who fined him $15,000

    Trump attacks judge in NY fraud case who fined him $15,000

    [ad_1]

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump attends the Trump Organization civil fraud trial, in New York State Supreme Court in the Manhattan borough of New York City, U.S., October 25, 2023. 

    Jeenah Moon | Reuters

    Former President Donald Trump on Thursday railed against the judge who will deliver verdicts in his $250 million New York fraud trial, one day after storming out of the courtroom in the middle of witness testimony.

    Trump’s fusillade on Truth Social followed a dramatic trial day in which Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron put Trump on the witness stand, fined him $10,000 for violating his gag order and shot down a request for a sweeping verdict in his favor.

    The latest attacks show Trump, a prolific social media user who is running for president again in the 2024 election, turning to the court of public opinion to fight his mounting legal challenges.

    But his efforts are constrained by gag orders in two separate cases, including special counsel Jack Smith’s federal case charging Trump with conspiring to subvert his loss to President Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election.

    In that case, Trump is prohibited from publicly targeting Smith or potential witnesses, both of whom he has frequently referenced online and on the campaign trail. When those restrictions were temporarily paused last week, Trump fired off attacks against both the special counsel and his former White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, a witness in Smith’s case.

    In the New York civil fraud case, meanwhile, Engoron has already ruled twice that Trump violated his narrow gag order, which merely bars him from attacking the judge’s staff.

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump is questioned by Judge Arthur F. Engoron before being fined $10,000 for violating a gag order for a second time, during the Trump Organization civil fraud trial in New York State Supreme Court in the Manhattan borough of New York City, U.S., October 25, 2023 in this courtroom sketch. 

    Jane Rosenberg | Reuters

    Upon finding that Trump’s testimony rang “hollow and untrue,” Engoron has now fined him a total of $15,000. The judge has warned Trump that additional violations will yield much more severe sanctions — including possible imprisonment.

    With his targets narrowing, Trump’s attacks appear to be intensifying.

    In at least four lengthy social media posts on Thursday, Trump ripped Engoron as a “tyrannical and unhinged” and “fully biased Trump Hater” who “should be ashamed of himself” for his handling of the case.

    “HE HAS GONE CRAZY IN HIS HATRED OF ‘TRUMP,’” wrote the former president, who also railed against New York Attorney General Letitia James, his ex-attorney Michael Cohen and a New York Times reporter.

    Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign, meanwhile, sought to capitalize on the case by criticizing it in multiple fundraising pleas as a “sham trial” led by a “Democrat judge” who “continues to harass” Trump.

    Engoron has already found Trump and other defendants liable for fraudulently inflating the values of real estate properties and key assets on years of financial statements. James, who brought the case, accuses Trump, his two adult sons, the Trump Organization and top executives of falsifying those asset values for a host of financial perks, including tax benefits and more favorable loan terms.

    The trial, which is scheduled to last until late December, will resolve six other claims in James’ lawsuit. Engoron himself will deliver verdicts in the trial, which is being conducted without a jury — a fact Trump frequently protests on social media and at the courthouse.

    CNBC Politics

    Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

    “He is a judge that found me GUILTY before the trial even started,” Trump said of Engoron in his social media screed Thursday.

    The posts also called Engoron a “Radical Left Judge” and claimed that he is ignoring a prior appeals court ruling “overturning” his decisions. A New York appeals court panel last month had cleared the trial to begin, denying Trump’s request to delay it.

    Engoron had imposed a narrow gag order on Trump on the second day of the trial, after Trump sent a Truth Social post attacking the judge’s law clerk, Allison Greenfield, who sits next to him in court.

    About two weeks later, the judge found that Trump violated that gag order by failing to remove the post from his campaign website. Engoron fined Trump $5,000 in that instance and warned him that future violations would yield more severe sanctions, potentially including imprisonment.

    During a break in the trial Wednesday, Trump complained to reporters outside the courtroom, “This judge is a very partisan judge with a person who’s very partisan sitting alongside him, perhaps even more partisan than he is.”

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump attends the Trump Organization civil fraud trial, in New York State Supreme Court in the Manhattan borough of New York City, October 25, 2023.

    Jeenah Moon | Reuters

    After hearing about those remarks, Engoron briefly called Trump to the witness stand to explain himself.

    Trump said that he was referring to Michael Cohen, Trump’s former personal lawyer, who had been testifying throughout the trial day. But Engoron found that answer unconvincing, and he fined Trump $10,000.

    “Don’t do it again or it will be worse,” Engoron warned in court.

    In his written order Thursday morning, Engoron ruled that Trump intentionally violated the gag order. He noted that Cohen was sitting in the witness box, not alongside him, and said that Trump’s past attacks on Cohen have been less ambiguous.

    “Using imprecise language as an excuse to create plausible ambiguity about whether defendant violated this Court’s unequivocal gag order is not a defense; the subject of Donald Trump’s public statement to the press was unmistakably clear,” the judge wrote.

    The clash over the gag order was not the only contentious moment in the trial on Wednesday.

    Defense lawyer Cliff Robert had asked for a directed verdict after Cohen, Trump’s once-loyal aide who is now a key witness against him, testified that he did not recall if Trump had asked him to inflate the values of his assets. Engoron denied the request, prompting Trump to get up and leave.

    Cohen later clarified that while Trump speaks in indirect ways like a “mob boss,” he did communicate the outcome he wanted, according to NBC News.

    Engoron rejected another request for a directed verdict later in the day, telling Robert, “there’s enough evidence in this case to fill the courtroom.”

    On social media, Trump complained, “The unhinged Judge, a highly political and fully biased Trump Hater, refused to dismiss this HOAX of a case, and has lost all CREDIBILITY.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Police Group Says Jersey City’s Lawsuit Over Off-Duty Marijuana Use By Officers Is A ‘Waste Of Taxpayer Dollars’

    Police Group Says Jersey City’s Lawsuit Over Off-Duty Marijuana Use By Officers Is A ‘Waste Of Taxpayer Dollars’

    [ad_1]

    The New Jersey Fraternal Order of Police is lashing out against a newly filed lawsuit by Jersey City officials that seeks to undo a state policy that generally allows police officers to use marijuana while off duty, calling the legal challenge “an unfortunate waste of taxpayer dollars.”

    Jersey City and its public safety director, James Shea, sued the state in federal court on Monday, arguing that the policy, released by the state attorney general’s office in February, is preempted by federal law.

    The lawsuit, the fraternal organization said in a press release, risks undermining what’s otherwise clear guidance from state officials.

    “The law of the State of New Jersey and the guidance from the Office of the Attorney General clearly provides that police officers may use cannabis while off duty but are prohibited from being under the influence of cannabis while engaged in the performance of their duties,” it says. “The members of the New Jersey State Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police abide by the law and will continue to do so. Jersey City’s attempt to muddy these clear directives through frivolous litigation is an unfortunate waste of taxpayer dollars.”

    Jersey City’s lawsuit cites a federal statute that prevents people who use marijuana from acquiring firearms or ammunition. It argues city officials would be forced to violate federal law under the state policy, “because they would be required, at minimum, to provide ammunition to officers who they know are users of cannabis.”

    The suit also says that police who use cannabis are themselves committing felonies because they “must possess and receive a firearm and ammunition in order to be a police officers [sic].”

    A plain reading of the federal firearms policy, however, suggests a different standard applies when firearms are distributed by government agencies.

    Here’s the federal policy for people seeking to purchase or possess firearms with respect to marijuana: 

    “It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person…is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance…”

    “It shall be unlawful for any person…who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance…to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.”

    And here’s the relevant exception that could apply to local law enforcement officers: 

    “The provisions of this chapter, except for sections 922(d)(9) and 922(g)(9) and provisions relating to firearms subject to the prohibitions of section 922(p), shall not apply with respect to the transportation, shipment, receipt, possession, or importation of any firearm or ammunition imported for, sold or shipped to, or issued for the use of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof.”

    The Jersey City Police Department has terminated several officers over positive THC metabolite tests and has stood firm against the state’s policy permitting off-duty cannabis use. But two administrative law judges, most recently in August, have ruled against the city and ordered the reinstatement of two fired police officers, with backpay.

    Gina Coleman/Weedmaps

    As Jersey City officials emphasized at a press conference Tuesday, no test is available to reliably show whether an officer is impaired by cannabis during work. Allowing law enforcement officers to use marijuana at all, officials said, puts public safety at risk and exposes the city to legal liability.

    Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop (D), who is running for governor, said on social media that there’s “no way to confirm whether cannabis was used an hour, a day, or week before a shift.”

    He added that the city’s lawsuit cites “the same federal law that Hunter Biden was indicted under with regards to firearms,” referring to President Joe Biden’s son, who is facing federal charges related to allegedly possessing a gun while also being a consumer of cocaine.

    The question of gun ownership and marijuana use is one that’s worked its way through federal courts in recent years, although rulings have reached different conclusions.

    Earlier this month, a federal appeals court panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit heard oral arguments in a case around gun ownership by medical marijuana patients. In that matter, plaintiffs are appealing a lower court judge’s ruling that upheld the federal ban.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, however, ruled in August that the federal ban on firearms by cannabis users is unconstitutional. A disagreement between the two circuit courts could lead the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the issue.

    The Department of Justice has advised the Eleventh Circuit that it feels the Fifth Circuit ruling was “incorrectly decided,” and at oral argument asserted that “there are some reasons to be uncertain about the foundations” of that decision.

    Some district courts have also ruled against the federal prohibition.

    The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma ruled in February that the ban prohibiting people who use marijuana from possessing firearms is unconstitutional, with the judge stating that the federal government’s justification for upholding the law is “concerning.”

    In the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, a judge ruled in April that banning people who use marijuana from possessing firearms is unconstitutional—and it said that the same legal principle also applies to the sale and transfer of guns, too.

    Shortly before the Eleventh Circuit hearing, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) reportedly sent a letter to Arkansas officials saying that the state’s recently enacted law permitting medical cannabis patients to obtain concealed carry gun licenses “creates an unacceptable risk,” and could jeopardize the state’s federally approved alternative firearm licensing policy.

    After Minnesota’s governor signed a legalization bill into law in May, the agency issued a reminder emphasizing that people who use cannabis are barred from possessing and purchasing guns and ammunition “until” federal prohibition ends.

    In 2020, ATF issued an advisory specifically targeting Michigan that requires gun sellers to conduct federal background checks on all unlicensed gun buyers because it said the state’s cannabis laws had enabled “habitual marijuana users” and other disqualified individuals to obtain firearms illegally.

    Meanwhile, attorneys for Hunter Biden—who has been indicted on a charge of buying a gun in 2018 at a time when he disclosed that he was an active user of crack cocaine—have previously cited the court ruling on the unconstitutionality of the federal ban, arguing that it applies to their client’s case as well.

    Republican congressional lawmakers have filed two bills so far this session that focus on gun and marijuana policy.

    Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL), co-chair of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus, filed legislation in May to protect the Second Amendment rights of people who use marijuana in legal states, allowing them to purchase and possess firearms that they’re currently prohibited from having under federal law.

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has committed to attaching that legislation to a bipartisan marijuana banking bill that advanced out of committee last month and is pending floor action.

    Meanwhile, Mast is also cosponsoring a separate bill from Rep. Alex Mooney (R-WV) this session that would more narrowly allow medical cannabis patients to purchase and possess firearms.

    This article originally appeared on Marijuana Moment.

    [ad_2]

    Marijuana Moment

    Source link

  • California Implements New Cryptocurrency Laws to Combat Bitcoin ATM Scams

    California Implements New Cryptocurrency Laws to Combat Bitcoin ATM Scams

    [ad_1]

    Bitcoin (BTC) ATMs have become both convenient and worrying, with scammers taking advantage of unsuspecting victims. Authorities in the US and other jurisdictions are now waging a war against crypto-ATM-based scams.

    California takes a stance on new cryptocurrency laws

    The state of California has introduced rules for cryptocurrency transactions. Senate Bill 401, signed by Governor Gavin Newsom, means you can only make $1,000 worth of cryptocurrency transactions at ATMs each day, and starting in 2025, the maximum they can charge you is $5, or 15% of the transaction. Whichever is higher.

    Initially, some Bitcoin ATMs allowed up to $50,000 in transactions with fees ranging between 12% and 25% above the value of the digital asset. These changes are intended to protect people from scams and high fees, explained Sen. Monique Lemon, one of the co-authors.

    Scammers taking advantage of the convenience of Bitcoin ATMs have been a growing concern, with the Federal Trade Commission reporting that more than 46,000 people have lost more than $1 billion to cryptocurrency scams since 2021. New transaction limits give victims more time to spot scams before loss of money. But Charles Bell of the Blockchain Advocacy Coalition worries that these rules could hurt the cryptocurrency industry and small businesses.



    You may also like:

    Explore Australia’s rapid rise in the global cryptocurrency ATM scene

    FBI Alerts About Bitcoin ATM and QR Code Scams

    The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has raised the alarm about fraudulent schemes exploiting ATMs for cryptocurrencies and quick response (QR) codes for payments. These schemes take various forms, including online impersonation, romance scams, and lottery fraud, all using cryptocurrency ATMs and QR codes as tools.

    QR codes, which smartphone cameras can scan, simplify cryptocurrency payments. However, criminals are now using it to trick victims into paying money. Victims are often asked to withdraw money from their accounts and use a QR code provided by scammers to complete transactions at physical cryptocurrency ATMs.

    Once the victim makes the payment, the cryptocurrency is transferred to the scammer’s wallet, making recovery nearly impossible due to the decentralized nature of cryptocurrencies. The FBI offers several tips to protect against these schemes, focusing on caution, verification, and avoiding cryptocurrency ATM transactions that promise anonymity using only a phone number or email.



    You may also like:

    Bitbuy is partnering with Canada’s largest Bitcoin ATM provider

    Cryptocurrency regulation efforts in California

    The passage of Senate Bill 401 in California is part of a broader effort to regulate the cryptocurrency industry while protecting consumers. Another law, scheduled to take effect in July 2025, will require digital financial asset companies to obtain licenses from the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation. This represents a clear shift towards tightening government regulation and oversight in the world of digital finance.

    Gavin Newsom’s decision to sign these bills into law demonstrates California’s commitment to strengthening the cryptocurrency industry and protecting its citizens. Balancing innovation and security remains a challenge, especially in a rapidly evolving digital landscape.

    Bitcoin Depot’s historic debut on the NASDAQ

    In July, Bitcoin Depot, a leading bitcoin ATM operator, went public on the Nasdaq. This milestone comes after Bitcoin Depot merged with GSR II Meteora, a blank check company.

    The move to go public demonstrates the growing legitimacy and acceptance of cryptocurrencies in major financial markets.

    Authorities vs. illegal crypto ATMs

    The UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is taking a strong stance against illegal cryptocurrency ATM operators. Using its power under money laundering regulations, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has carried out raids on cryptocurrency ATMs suspected of illegal activities across England.

    The measures, which follow previous operations in east London and Leeds, are part of the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) efforts to crack down on unregulated cryptocurrency operations. This highlights global pressure for stronger cryptocurrency regulation, mirroring steps taken in California. The balance between innovation and security remains a fundamental concern for regulatory bodies around the world.



    Read more:

    McLennan County Bitcoin ATM Lawsuit Resolved

    [ad_2]

    Editorial Team

    Source link

  • Elon Musk’s X illegally fired employee who publicly challenged return-to-work plans, NLRB alleges

    Elon Musk’s X illegally fired employee who publicly challenged return-to-work plans, NLRB alleges

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK, US – SEPTEMBER 17: Elon Musk arrives at the Turkish House to meet with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan ahead of the 78th session of the United Nations (UN) General Assembly in New York, United States on September 17, 2023. (Photo by Fatih Aktas/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

    Anadolu Agency | Anadolu Agency | Getty Images

    Elon Musk’s X broke the law in firing an employee who criticized management’s return-to-work policy, the National Labor Relations Board alleged, in its first formal complaint against the company formally known as Twitter.

    The NLRB’s “Region 20” San Francisco branch on Friday claimed that X violated the National Labor Relations Act by terminating Yao Yue, a principal software engineer, shortly after Musk took over in late October. The NLRB alleged that X fired Yue after she attempted to organize other Twitter workers who were upset about Musk’s sudden change to the company’s work requirements.

    CNBC reported that Musk sent emails to Twitter employees detailing his expectations, going so far as to say “any manager who falsely claims that someone reporting to them is doing excellent work or that a given role is essential, whether remote or not, will be exited from the company.”

    “If you can physically make it to an office and you don’t show up, resignation accepted,” Musk said, according to the NLRB. That led several workers to express “concern and outrage” over the directive to return to the office immediately, according to the original legal charge document that was filed in March.

    Yue then tweeted, “Don’t resign, let him fire you. You gain literally nothing out of resignation.” She also posted in a company Slack channel a message saying, “Don’t be fired. Seriously.”

    Many of Yue’s colleagues responded to her messages, according to the legal charge document. Meanwhile, Musk also directed his management team to scan any online posts and Slack “in order to identify who should be fired,” the document said.

    Five days later, Yue was fired and told that she was violating an unspecified company policy, the legal document said.

    “Ms. Yue alleges that Twitter chose her for layoff in retaliation for her attempt to organize her co-workers not to resign, so they would have better legal footing to challenge any separation from Twitter,” the document said.

    The NLRB alleges that X has “been interfering with, restraining, and coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed” under national labor law.

    A spokesperson for X didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

    “After 12 amazing years and 3 weeks of chaos, I’m officially fired by Twitter,” Yue said in a tweet on Nov. 15. “Never expected I would have stayed this long, and never expected I would be this relieved to be gone.”

    The NLRB said it’s seeking to “Make Yao Yue whole for any direct or foreseeable pecuniary harm, as well as other consequential damages suffered as a result of Respondent’s unlawful conduct” in addition to providing “all other relief as may be just and proper to remedy the unfair labor practices alleged.”

    A hearing on the case is scheduled for Jan. 30, in San Francisco.

    WATCH: Elon Musk has “cut off the good guys, empowered the bad guys” on X

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump may seek to pause $250 million New York business fraud trial

    Trump may seek to pause $250 million New York business fraud trial

    [ad_1]

    Former President Donald Trump sits in the courtroom for the third day of his civil fraud trial in New York, Oct. 4, 2023.

    Angela Weiss | AFP | Getty Images

    Lawyers for Donald Trump may ask a New York appeals court to pause his ongoing $250 million business fraud trial and stay a judge’s order that could gut the former president’s company, lawyers said Thursday afternoon.

    Trump’s attorney Christopher Kise told Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron that as of Thursday he plans to seek a stay of the trial Engoron is presiding over, as well as a stay of the judge’s order related to dissolving Trump corporate entities.

    But Kise said he did not want to reveal the scope of the appeal planned for Friday morning, upsetting a lawyer from the New York Attorney General’s Office.

    The Attorney General’s lawyer, Andrew Amer, told Engoron that his office is entitled to 24-hour advance notice of such an appeal.

    CNBC Politics

    Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

    Attorney General Letitia James in a lawsuit alleges that Trump, his adult sons, the Trump Organization, and company executives misstated the values of real estate properties to get better loan terms and tax advantages, grossly exaggerating Trump’s net worth as disclosed on financial statements.

    The trial is dealing with six remaining claims in that suit.

    Engoron last month issued a summary judgment finding that James had proven her top claim, that the defendants engaged in business fraud.

    As part of that finding, which Trump’s lawyers are expected to ask an appeals court to block Friday, Engoron canceled business certificates held by the defendants.

    Engoron in that ruling also ordered the appointment of an independent receiver to manage the dissolution of the canceled business entities.

    On Thursday, the judge issued a series of orders to the defendants which appeared to begin clearing the way for a sell-off of the businesses.

    Engoron also ordered the defendants to give an independent monitor for the Trump Organization notice of “the creation of a new entity to hold or acquire the assets” of the to-be-dissolved businesses.

    Trump was present in court for the first 2½ days of the trial, which began Monday.

    He left in the middle of proceedings Wednesday, after complaining that he was being taken away from his Republican presidential primary campaign because he was “stuck” in court.

    Trump was not required to attend the trial on those days. But he may have to testify at some point in the trial, which is set to last until late December.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘The Donald Trump show is over,’ AG says after ex-president leaves New York fraud trial

    ‘The Donald Trump show is over,’ AG says after ex-president leaves New York fraud trial

    [ad_1]

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump appears in the courtroom with his lawyers for his civil fraud trial at New York State Supreme Court on Oct. 3, 2023.

    Seth Wenig | Getty Images

    New York Attorney General Letitia James declared that “the Donald Trump show is over” after the former president left his $250 million civil business fraud trial in the middle of proceedings Wednesday.

    “I will not be bullied,” James said at Manhattan Supreme Court. She accused Trump engaging in a “political stunt,” and a “fundraising stop” by attending the trial for two-and-a-half days.

    James, who is Black, also condemned Trump for making “comments that unfortunately fomented violence, or comments that I would describe as race baiting.”

    Trump earlier Wednesday called James a “political animal.”

    He also claimed her lawsuit against him was designed to hurt his chances of winning the 2024 presidential election.

    “Mr. Trump’s comments were offensive. They were baseless,” James told reporters after Trump had left the building. “They were void of any facts and or any evidence.”

    “This case was brought simply because it was a case where individuals have engaged in a pattern and practice of fraud,” James said, “and I will not sit idly by and allow anyone to subvert the law.”

    “So Mr. Trump is no longer here,” James said. “The Donald Trump show is over. This was nothing more than a political stunt.”

    Trump, who is seeking the 2024 GOP nomination, flew out of New York after leaving court, where he griped he was “stuck here.”

    New York Attorney General Letitia James arrives at a Manhattan courthouse trial in a civil fraud case brought by her against Former U.S. President Donald Trump, his adult sons, the Trump Organization and others in New York City, U.S., October 4, 2023. 

    Mike Segar | Reuters

    “I’d rather be right now in Iowa, I’d rather be in New Hampshire or South Carolina or Ohio or a lot of other places, but I’m stuck here because I have a corrupt attorney general,” the Queens native said, before hopping into his motorcade.

    Trump was not required to attend the trial, which began Monday.

    But he told reporters he showed up for three days of it to show “how corrupt it is.”

    “Our whole system is corrupt,” said Trump, who claimed the judge in the case is “run by the Democrats” and “already knows what he’s going to do.”

    Trump’s son Eric remained in the courtroom until the trial adjourned Wednesday afternoon. Both Eric and his brother Donald Trump Jr., who jointly run the Trump Organization, are co-defendants in the lawsuit.

    On Tuesday, Trump was slapped with a limited gag order for criticizing the judge’s law clerk.

    The trial resumed Wednesday morning with the continuation of cross-examination of Trump’s former accountant Donald Bender.

    Trump’s attorneys grilled Bender about his involvement in preparing financial statements for the Trump Organization.

    Bender previously testified that he compiled the statements using information provided by Trump and his company.

    Those statements are at the heart of James’ lawsuit.

    The suit accuses Trump, his sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, the Trump Organization and top executives of misstating the true values of real estate properties in order to obtain better loan and insurance terms, and tax advantages.

    In addition to seeking $250 million in damages, James wants the court to permanently bar Trump, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump from serving as officers of any New York business.

    Bender, a former partner at Mazars USA, is the first witness called in the case, which is expected to last until late December.

    Also Wednesday, Trump’s lawyers filed an appeal of a pre-trial ruling by Judge Arthur Engoron that found Trump and other defendants liable for fraud, the top claim in the lawsuit. Engoron in that ruling yanked the business licenses of various Trump corporate entities and ordered their dissolution.

    The trial is dealing with the six remaining claims in the suit: falsifying business records, conspiracy to falsify business records, issuing false financial statements, conspiracy to falsify false financial statements, insurance fraud, and conspiracy to commit insurance fraud.

    Justice Arthur Engoron speaks during the trial of former U.S. President Donald Trump for Trump’s civil fraud trial at New York State Supreme Court on October 03, 2023 in New York City.

    Shannon Stapleton | Getty Images

    Before the trial resumed Wednesday, Trump outside the courtroom again called the case a “witch hunt” and a “disgrace,” and claimed James sued solely for political purposes.

    Trump also called James, who is Black, a “political animal.”

    James is a Democrat. Trump is currently the front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.

    But Trump did not make any comment about Engoron’s law clerk, whom he had attacked Tuesday in statements to reporters and in a social media post. The clerk sits with Engoron during the trial and sometimes speaks with lawyers during the proceedings.

    Trump’s post on Truth Social about her included her full name and a photo from her Instagram account of her posing with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat.

    Trump accused the clerk of being “Schumer’s girlfriend” and “running this case against me.”

    An angry Engoron later Tuesday called the attack on his staffer unacceptable.

    CNBC Politics

    Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

    The judge ordered Trump to delete the Truth Social, and barred Trump and others in the case from talking about his aides publicly.

    “Consider this a gag order on all parties with respect to posting or publicly speaking about any member of my staff,” Engoron said.

    The trial is being conducted without a jury, meaning Engoron alone will deliver verdicts.

    Trump on Wednesday reiterated claims that the New York state statute at issue in the case strips him of his right to a jury trial.

    MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin said Trump could have asked for a jury trial, but that he likely would have been denied that request.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump rips New York Attorney General Letitia James before Day 2 of business fraud trial

    Trump rips New York Attorney General Letitia James before Day 2 of business fraud trial

    [ad_1]

    Former US President Donald Trump speaks to members of the media while arriving for the second day of his civil fraud trial in New York on October 3, 2023.

    Kena Betancur | AFP | Getty Images

    Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday blasted New York Attorney General Letitia James as he headed into court for the second day of trial for her business fraud lawsuit against him and his company.

    “This case should be dismissed,” Trump told reporters in a hallway in Manhattan Supreme Court.

    “And she should probably be dismissed also,” he said of James.

    The attorney general accuses Trump, two of his adult sons, the Trump Organization, and top executives of fraudulently valuing real estate properties to obtain more favorable loan and insurance terms, and tax benefits.

    CNBC Politics

    Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

    Trump on Tuesday said, “Her numbers are fraudulent.”

    He had glared at James on Monday when walking out of the courtroom.

    James is seeking $250 million in damages in the case, as well as a ban on Trump and his sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, from running a business in New York.

    This is developing news. Please check back for updates.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump arrives at New York court for $250 million fraud trial

    Trump arrives at New York court for $250 million fraud trial

    [ad_1]

    Former U.S. President Donald Trump attends the trial of himself, his adult sons, the Trump Organization and others in a civil fraud case brought by state Attorney General Letitia James, at a Manhattan courthouse, in New York City, U.S., October 2, 2023. 

    Seth Wenig | Reuters

    The $250 million civil fraud trial that could see former President Donald Trump permanently banned from doing business in New York began Monday.

    The trial comes a year after New York Attorney General Letitia James sued him, his company, three of his adult children, and top Trump Organization officials.

    James alleged the defendants misstated the values of real estate properties by billions of dollars in business records to obtain better loan and insurance terms, and tax benefits.

    Trump, who is seeking the 2024 GOP presidential nomination, arrived at Manhattan Supreme Court for the start of the trial.

    Before it began, Trump claimed the case was a “witch hunt” aimed at undermining his presidential campaign.

    “Everything was perfect. There was no crime. The crime is against me,” Trump told reporters in the hallway outside the courtroom.

    CNBC Politics

    Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

    James notched a massive win against Trump and other defendants last week when Judge Arthur Engoron ruled they were liable for the fraud claims. Engoron in that ruling canceled the defendants’ New York business certificates and ordered an independent receiver to oversee their dissolution.

    Engoron, not a jury, will decide whether the defendants are liable for the other six claims at the trial, which is expected to conclude in late December.

    “The people have already proven” that Trump’s financial statements from 2011 to 2021 were “false and misleading,” said Kevin Wallace, a prosecutor from the attorney general’s office, in his opening statement to the judge.

    Wallace played video clips of depositions from key witnesses, including Trump, former Trump Org Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg and former personal attorney Michael Cohen.

    In one clip, Cohen said that he and Weisselberg would inflate the value of real estate assets in order to reach the figure that Trump wanted in order to help him climb higher on Forbes’ wealth rankings.

    Wallace argued while a person may exaggerate their wealth for Forbes Magazine or television audiences, they “cannot do it while conducting business in the State of New York.”

    But defense attorney Christopher Kise said the evidence will show that “there was no intent to defraud.”

    The loans that Trump’s business secured were “successful” and “profitable,” Kise said.

    “The banks made well over a hundred million dollars,” Kise added.

    A box is carried as the civil fraud trial of former President Donald Trump is set to begin at New York State Supreme Court on October 02, 2023 in New York City.

    Michael M. Santiago | Getty Images

    James, who is also in court, in a statement said, “For years, Donald Trump falsely inflated his net worth to enrich himself and cheat the system.”

    “We won the foundation of our case last week and proved that his purported net worth has long been rooted in incredible fraud,” James said. “No matter how rich or powerful you are, there are not two sets of laws for people in this country. The rule of law must apply equally to everyone, and it is my responsibility to make sure that it does.”

    Ivanka Trump was removed from the case in June, after an appeals court ruled that the claims against her were barred by the statute of limitations. But two of Trump’s other children, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, who took over the family business after their father became president in 2016, remain as defendants.

    This is developing news. Please check back for updates.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • First co-defendant in Trump Georgia election case pleads guilty

    First co-defendant in Trump Georgia election case pleads guilty

    [ad_1]

    Republican poll watcher Scott Hall is shown in a police booking mugshot released by the Fulton County Sheriff’s Office, after a grand jury brought back indictments against former U.S. President Donald Trump and 18 of his allies in their attempt to overturn the state’s 2020 election results in Atlanta, Georgia, August 22, 2023.

    Fulton County Sheriff’s Office | via Reuters

    Scott Hall, one of the 18 co-defendants of former President Donald Trump in his Georgia election interference case, pleaded guilty Friday in Atlanta to five misdemeanor conspiracy charges.

    Hall is the first person charged with Trump to plead guilty in the case, which alleges a widespread racketeering conspiracy to overturn Trump’s 2020 electoral loss to President Joe Biden.

    At a hearing in Fulton County Superior Court, Hall confirmed to Judge Scott McAfee that his plea deal requires him to testify in future proceedings in the case, including trials of his co-defendants, including Trump.

    The 59-year-old bail bondsman will serve five years of probation, pay a $5,000 fine, and perform 200 hours of community service as part of that deal.

    McAfee also ordered Hall to write a letter of apology to the state of Georgia for his crimes and to have no involvement in the administration of elections.

    CNBC Politics

    Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

    Hall was accused in the indictment issued last month of willfully tampering with electronic voting machines in Coffee County, Georgia, and of working with several other co-defendants, including the pro-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, in that effort.

    He originally was charged with seven criminal counts.

    But that was reduced Friday to the five misdemeanor counts of conspiracy to commit intentional interference with the performance of an election that he pleaded guilty to.

    A spokesman for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, who is prosecuting the Trump defendants, did not immediately respond to a request for comment about Hall’s plea.

    The guilty pleas came as a federal court judge in Georgia denied efforts by several co-defendants in the case, Jeffrey Clark, Cathy Latham, David Shafer and Shawn Still to remove their cases from Fulton County court to federal court.

    Trump’s attorneys previously indicated they planned to seek to have his trial moved to federal court.

    But in a surprise court filing Thursday, Trump’s lawyers told Judge McAfee that they would not do so.

    “This decision is based on his well-founded confidence that this honorable court intends to fully and completely protect his constitutional right to a fair trial, and guarantee him due process of law throughout the prosecution of his case,” Trump’s lawyer Steven Sadow told McAfee in that filing.

    Trump’s decision not to see a federal trial in the case could reflect the recent lack of success his White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, had in requesting a transfer of his trial there in the same case.

    Meadows is appealing a federal district judge’s denial of his transfer bid.

    Powell and another co-defendant, Kenneth Chesebro, are set to begin their trial on Oct. 23. Both of those defendants, who are attorneys, had requested speedy trials for their cases.

    Judge Scott McAfee on Friday denied a motion by Chesebro to dismiss the charges against him.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump and company liable for fraud in New York lawsuit, judge rules

    Trump and company liable for fraud in New York lawsuit, judge rules

    [ad_1]

    A judge on Tuesday ruled that Donald Trump and his company are liable for fraud by misstating the true values of multiple real estate properties for years and thus grossly overstating the former president’s net worth by billions of dollars.

    Judge Arthur Engoron in his bombshell decision also canceled the New York business certificates of Trump, the Trump Organization, and the other defendants, including two of his sons, in a lawsuit by the state Attorney General’s Office.

    The judge said he would appoint an independent receiver to manage the dissolution of the corporate entities whose business certificates he canceled.

    It is not clear whether Engoron’s decision means the Trump Organization and related entities will have to completely cease doing business in New York, or whether the companies can be legally reconstituted later.

    A spokeswoman for Attorney General Letitia James declined to comment on that question.

    But Trump’s lawyer Chris Kise, who called the decision “outrageous,” said it “seeks to nationalize one of the most successful corporate empires in the United States and seize control of private property all while acknowledging there is zero evidence of any default, breach, late payment or any complaint of harm.”

    “While the full impact of the decision remains unclear, what is clear is that President Trump and his family will seek all available appellate remedies to rectify this miscarriage of justice,” Kise said.

    Engoron’s ruling, which also dismissed Trump’s request to dismiss the case, did not settle six other claims in dispute in the case whose defendants included him, the company and his sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, as well as former Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg, company executive Jeff McConney.

    Those issues remaining claims will be addressed at a nonjury trial due to begin Monday.

    James is seeking $250 million in damages in the case and wants Trump and his two adult sons barred from doing business in the state.

    Engoron, in granting partial summary judgment to James on the fraud claim, found that Trump made false and misleading valuations for multiple real estate assets in statements to insurers and banks for years as he sought more favorable terms on insurance coverage and loans.

    Because of those misstatements, Trump also inflated his true net worth in annual financial statements by billions of dollars, according to the decision.

    “In defendants’ world: rent regulated apartments are worth the same as unregulated apartments; restricted land is worth the same as unrestricted land; restrictions can evaporate into thin air; a disclaimer by one party casting responsibility on another party exonerates the other party’s lies,” Engoron wrote.

    “That is a fantasy world, not the real world.”

    Engoron also ordered sanctions of $7,500 for five attorneys who represented the Trump defendants for making frivolous and previously rejected arguments in court filings. Kise is among those fined by the judge.

    “Today, a judge ruled in our favor and found that Donald Trump and the Trump Organization engaged in years of financial fraud,” James wrote in a post on the X social media site.

    “We look forward to presenting the rest of our case at trial,” James added.

    Trump, the front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, separately faces a total of 91 felony charges in four criminal cases. Two of those cases relate to efforts to reverse his re-election defeat in 2020. Another case involves his retention of classified government documents at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida, a property that is mentioned in Engoron’s ruling Tuesday.

    In the fourth criminal case, Trump is charged with falsifying business records related to a 2016 hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels.

    He has pleaded not guilty to all of the charges.

    Engoron in his ruling wrote that James’ office in its civil fraud suit “has prevailed on liability on its first cause of action … as against all defendants.”

    The judge added that if liability for fraud is established under New York law, that statute allows the attorney general to obtain an order enjoining defendants from continuing to do business or “any fraudulent or illegal acts.”

    Even after Engoron appointed an independent financial monitor for the Trump Organization last year, “defendants have continued to disseminate false and misleading information while conducting business,” the judge wrote.

    “This ongoing flouting of this Court’s prior order, combined with the persistent nature of the false [statements of financial condition] year after year, have demonstrated the necessity of canceling the [defendants’ business] certificates … as the statute provides,” the judge wrote.

    Engoron’s 35-page ruling details how Trump fraudulently valued his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, once by more than 2,000%, Trump Park Avenue and 40 Wall Street in New York City, his Seven Springs property in Westchester County, New York, and his golf course in Aberdeen, Scotland.

    “Time and time again, the Court is not comparing one appraisal to another; it is comparing an independent professional appraisal to a pie-in-the-sky dream of concocted potential,” Engoron wrote.

    After noting that Trump submitted statements falsely claiming that the Trump Tower apartment in which he resided for decades was nearly three times its actual size, and was worth a whopping $327 million, the judge wrote, “a discrepancy of this order of magnitude, by a real estate developer sizing up his own living space of decades, can only be considered fraud.”

    “The documents here clearly contain fraudulent valuations that defendants used in business,” Engoron wrote.

    “Defendants respond that: the documents do not say what they say; that there is no such thing as ‘objective’ value; and that, essentially, the Court should not believe its own lying eyes,” the judge noted.

    Kise, the Trump attorney, said Engoron’s “outrageous decision is completely disconnected from the facts and governing law.’

    “The Court ignored fully the Appellate Division mandate and basic legal, accounting and business principles,” Kise said. “Without even conducting a trial, the Court substituted its own judgment for that of nationally recognized experts from the NYU Stern School of Business and beyond.  More importantly, the Court disregarded the viewpoint of those actually involved in the loan transactions who testified there was nothing misleading, there was no fraud, and the transactions were all highly profitable.”

    Another Trump attorney, Alina Habba, in a statement said, “It’s important to remember that the Trump Organization is an American success story and the fact that a judge without trial would say there is no question of fact and issue a decision like this in summary judgement is concerning.”

    Habba who was among the attorneys sanctioned by Engoron.

    Trump responded to Engoron’s ruling by reposting a statement on social media attacking James and the judge, while doubling down on his claims of having a much higher net worth than what was displayed on the financial statements at the center of the fraud case.

    “It is very unfair, and I call for help from the highest Courts in New York State, or the Federal System, to intercede,” Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social site.

    In a tweet Tuesday, Eric Trump, who runs the Trump Organization with Donald Trump Jr., wrote, “In an attempt to destroy my father and kick him out of New York, a Judge just ruled that Mar-a-Lago, in Palm Beach Florida, is only worth approximate ‘$18 Million dollars’ “

    “Mar-a-Lago is speculated to be worth [well] over a billion dollars making it arguably the most valuable residential property in the country. It is all so corrupt and coordinated,” Eric wrote.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • JPMorgan Chase settles Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking suit by U.S. Virgin Islands for $75 million

    JPMorgan Chase settles Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking suit by U.S. Virgin Islands for $75 million

    [ad_1]

    JPMorgan Chase said Tuesday it will pay $75 million to settle a lawsuit by the U.S. Virgin Islands alleging that the huge American bank facilitated and benefited from sex trafficking of young women by its longtime customer Jeffrey Epstein.

    JPMorgan did not admit any wrongdoing in the settlement, which will give $55 million to Virgin Islands charities and the American territory’s anti-trafficking efforts.

    The remaining $20 million will cover attorneys’ fees incurred by the Virgin Islands as part of the litigation in federal court in New York.

    The Virgin Islands said the deal “includes several substantial commitments by JPMorgan Chase to identify, report, and cut off support for potential human trafficking, including establishing and implementing comprehensive policies and procedures.”

    Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell attend de Grisogono Sponsors The 2005 Wall Street Concert Series Benefitting Wall Street Rising, with a Performance by Rod Stewart at Cipriani Wall Street on March 15, 2005 in New York City.

    Joe Schildhorn | Patrick McMullan | Getty Images

    The territory said that $10 million of the money received would be used to create a fund to provide mental health services for Epstein’s victims.

    JPMorgan also said Tuesday that it had reached a settlement with Jes Staley, a former executive at the bank who had been friends with Epstein, to resolve claims by JPMorgan that he was responsible for any civil damages and costs associated with Epstein-related litigation.

    The terms of the agreement with Staley are confidential.

    JPMorgan said that it “deeply regrets” its association with Epstein, who was a client from 1998 until 2013.

    Virgin Islands Attorney General Ariel Smith said the agreement settles what was the first enforcement action against a bank for facilitating and profiting from human trafficking.

    “As part of the settlement, JPMorgan has agreed to implement and maintain meaningful anti-trafficking measures, which will help prevent human trafficking in the future,” Smith said in a statement.

    “This settlement is an historic victory for survivors and for state enforcement, and it should sound the alarm on Wall Street about banks’ responsibilities under the law to detect and prevent human trafficking.”

    Jes Staley, former chief executive officer of Barclays Plc, arrives at the offices of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP in New York, US, on Sunday, June 11, 2023. Staley has faced his first day of testimony about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein as part of lawsuits alleging the bank enabled the late financier’s sex-trafficking. Photographer: Stephanie Keith/Bloomberg via Getty Images

    Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    The deals come months after a separate $290 million settlement by JPMorgan with victims of the now-dead predator. That earlier deal ended a similar lawsuit by one of those victims in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

    As with that prior agreement, the new pacts let the bank avoid a trial on the Virgin Islands’ allegations in that same court, which was due to start Oct. 23.

    The territory had said it would ask jurors at that trial to award it at least $190 million in damages from JPMorgan.

    The Virgin Islands previously obtained a $105 million settlement from Epstein’s estate, and another $62.5 million from billionaire investor Leon Black to resolve potential claims related to Epstein.

    CNBC Politics

    Read more of CNBC’s politics coverage:

    JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon and other top bank executives had been questioned by lawyers for the Virgin Islands as part of its suit against the firm.

    Related court filings and hearings have led to a stream of embarrassing headlines about the bank since the case was filed in late 2022, more than three years after Epstein killed himself in a Manhattan jail following his arrest on federal child sex trafficking charges.

    The Virgin Islands claimed JPMorgan effectively ignored repeated red flags that Epstein was trafficking women to his private island in the territory because it wanted to retain his business and that of his wealthy and powerful friends.

    Among those red flags was Epstein’s 2008 guilty plea in Florida to a state charge of soliciting sex from an underage girl, a conviction that led to a 13-month jail stint.

    In late August, a JPMorgan attorney told Judge Jed Rakoff that after Epstein died, the bank notified the Treasury Department that it since had identified more than $1 billion in transactions related to “human trafficking” by him dating back 16 years.

    But the bank also had alleged in court filings that the Virgin Islands was complicit in Epstein’s crimes, saying he gave high-ranking territory officials money, advice, and favors in exchange for their allowing him to traffick women there unhindered.

    NBC archive footage shows Trump partying with Jeffrey Epstein in 1992

    In a press release announcing the new agreement with the Virgin Islands, JPMorgan said it “believes this settlement is in the best interest of all parties, particularly for those who can benefit from efforts to combat human trafficking, and for survivors who suffer unimaginable abuse at the hands of these criminals.”

    “While the settlement does not involve admissions of liability, the firm deeply regrets any association with this man, and would never have continued doing business with him if it believed he was using the bank in any way to commit his heinous crimes,” the statement said.

    “The firm will continue to work with law enforcement to combat human trafficking and help to identify improper money movement into the global payments systems.”

    JPMorgan said that under the deal a large portion of the money will got to the Virgin Islands “to enhance the infrastructure and capabilities of law enforcement to prevent and combat human trafficking and other crimes in their territories.”

    The bank said it will pay millions more”to support USVI charitable organizations whose work is aimed at addressing social ills, including fighting human trafficking and other sex crimes, and to support survivors on their paths to healing.”

    With the remaining money going to attorneys’ fees, JPMorgan is paying the same amount, $75 million, that Deutsche Bank agreed to pay Epstein victims to settle a third Manhattan federal court lawsuit that alleged that bank facilitated his sex trafficking when he was a customer from 2013 through 2018.

    Deutsche Bank had taken on Epstein as a customer after JPMorgan ended its relationship with him when Staley left the bank.

    Epstein for years socialized with high-profile people such as former President Donald Trump and Bill Clinton, Britain’s Prince Andrew, and had business relationships with billionaires such as Black and former L. Brands CEO Les Wexner.

    Ghislaine Maxwell, a British socialite who once was Epstein’s girlfriend, was convicted at a federal criminal trial in Manhattan in December 2021 of procuring underage girls to be sexually abused by him.

    Maxwell later was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

    Staley, the former JPMorgan executive has denied claims of wrongdoing, including an allegation that he sexually assaulted a woman identified as “Jane Doe,” whose class action suit led to the prior settlement with the bank.

    In November 2021, Staley stepped down as CEO of Barclays after an investigation by British bank regulators into how he had characterized his relationship with Epstein.

    This is breaking news. Check back for updates.

    [ad_2]

    Source link