ReportWire

Tag: Legal proceedings

  • Families of crash victims rain wrath on Airbus, Air France

    Families of crash victims rain wrath on Airbus, Air France

    [ad_1]

    PARIS — Distraught families whose loved ones died in Air France‘s worst-ever crash on Monday shouted down the CEOs of the airline and of planemaker Airbus as the two companies went on trial on manslaughter charges for the 2009 accident over the Atlantic Ocean.

    Cries of “Shame!” erupted in the courtroom after the executives took the stand.

    The crash of storm-tossed Flight 447 en route from Rio de Janeiro to Paris killed all 228 people aboard and had lasting impact on the industry, leading to changes in regulations for airspeed sensors and in how pilots are trained.

    The victims came from 33 countries, and families from around the world are among the plaintiffs in the case, fighting for more than a decade to see it come to trial.

    “It’s very important that we made it to the trial stage. … Thirteen years of waiting, it is almost inhuman,” said German Bernd Gans, who lost his daughter Ines in the crash. Another man came to the trial with a sign reading: “French Justice. 13 Years Too Late.”

    The official investigation found that multiple factors contributed to the crash, and the companies deny criminal wrongdoing. The two-month trial is expected to focus on pilot error and the icing over of external sensors called pitot tubes.

    An Associated Press investigation at the time found that Airbus had known since at least 2002 about problems with the type of pitots used on the jet that crashed, but failed to replace them until after the crash.

    Airbus CEO Guillaume Faury took the stand on the opening day to say: “I wanted to be present today, first of all to speak of my deep respect and deepest consideration for the victims; loved ones.”

    “Shame on you!” family members retorted.

    “For 13 years you have shown contempt for us!” one shouted.

    Air France CEO Anne Rigail met similar emotions when she told the court she was aware of the families’ pain.

    “Don’t talk to us about pain!” rose an angry voice.

    The presiding judge called for calm and the proceedings resumed.

    Air France has already compensated families of those killed. If convicted, each company faces potential fines of up to 225,000 euros ($219,000) — a fraction of their annual revenues. No one risks prison, as only the companies are on trial.

    Still, the victims’ families see the trial itself as important after their long quest for justice, and aviation industry experts see it as significant for learning lessons that could prevent future crashes.

    The A330-200 plane disappeared from radar over the Atlantic Ocean between Brazil and Senegal with 216 passengers and 12 crew members aboard.

    As a storm buffeted the plane, ice disabled the plane’s pitot tubes, blocking speed and altitude information. The autopilot disconnected. The crew resumed manual piloting, but with erroneous navigation data. The plane went into an aerodynamic stall, its nose pitched upward and then it plunged into the sea on June 1, 2009.

    It took two years to find the plane and its black box recorders on the ocean floor, at depths of more than 13,000 feet (around 4,000 meters).

    Air France is accused of not having implemented training in the event of icing of the pitot probes despite the risks. It has since changed its training manuals and simulations. The company said it would demonstrate in court “that it has not committed a criminal fault at the origin of the accident” and plead for acquittal.

    Airbus is accused of having known that the model of pitot tubes on Flight 447 was faulty, and not doing enough to urgently inform airlines and their crews about it and to ensure training to mitigate the risk. The model in question — a Thales AA pitot — was subsequently banned and replaced.

    Airbus blames pilot error, and told investigators that icing over is a problem inherent to all such sensors.

    The companies’ “image, their reputation” is at stake, said Philippe Linguet, who lost his brother on Flight 447. He expressed hope the trial would expose the failings of Airbus and Air France — two major players in the industry and in the French economy — to the world.

    Daniele Lamy, who heads an association of victims’ families, said they are bracing for a difficult trial.

    “We are going to have to unfortunately relive particularly painful moments,” she said. But she called the trial a welcome opportunity after prosecutors initially sought to close the case.

    “This will allow the family to express themselves, to express their suffering over 13 years,” she said.

    ———

    Angela Charlton and Masha Macpherson contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Airbus, Air France face criminal trial over Rio-Paris crash

    Airbus, Air France face criminal trial over Rio-Paris crash

    [ad_1]

    FILE – Workers unload debris, belonging to the crashed Air France flight AF447, from the Brazilian Navy’s Constitution Frigate in the port of Recife, northeast of Brazil, June 14, 2009. It was the worst plane crash in Air France history, killing people of 33 nationalities and having lasting impact. It led to changes in air safety regulations, how pilots are trained and the use of airspeed sensors. (AP Photo/Eraldo Peres, File)

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Prosecutors seek prison for rioter’s attack on AP journalist

    Prosecutors seek prison for rioter’s attack on AP journalist

    [ad_1]

    Federal prosecutors on Sunday recommended a prison sentence of approximately four years for a Pennsylvania man who pleaded guilty to assaulting an Associated Press photographer and using a stun gun against police officers during a mob’s attack on the U.S. Capitol.

    U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss is scheduled to sentence Alan Byerly on Oct. 21 for his attack on AP photographer John Minchillo and police during the Jan. 6, 2021 riot in Washington, D.C.

    Sentencing guidelines recommend a prison term ranging from 37 to 46 months. Prosecutors are seeking a sentence of at least 46 months of imprisonment followed by three years of supervised release. Byerly’s attorney has until Friday to submit a sentencing recommendation.

    The judge isn’t bound by any of the sentencing recommendations.

    Byerly was arrested in July 2021 and pleaded guilty a year later to assault charges.

    Byerly purchased a stun gun before he traveled from his home in Fleetwood, Pennsylvania, to Washington for the “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6. Leaving the rally before then-President Donald Trump finished speaking, Byerly went to the Capitol and joined other rioters in using a large metal Trump sign as a battering ram against barricades and police officers, prosecutors said.

    Then he went to the Capitol’s Lower West Terrace of the Capitol, where he and other rioters attacked Minchillo, who was wearing a lanyard with AP lettering. Byerly is one of at least three people charged with assaulting Minchillo, whose assault was captured on video by a colleague.

    After that, Byerly approached police officer behind bike racks and deployed his stun gun.

    “After officers successfully removed the stun gun from Byerly’s hands, Byerly continued to charge toward the officers, struck and pushed them, and grabbed an officer’s baton,” prosecutors wrote.

    Byerly later told FBI agents that he did just “one stupid thing down there and that’s all it was,” according to prosecutors.

    “This was a reference to how he handled the reporter and nothing more,” they wrote.

    Byerly treated Jan. 6 “as a normal, crime-free day, akin to the movie, ‘The Purge,’ when he could do whatever he wanted without judgment or legal consequence,” prosecutors said.

    “He was mistaken,” they added.

    More than 100 police officers were injured during the Capitol siege.

    Approximately 900 people have been charged with federal crimes for their conduct on Jan. 6. More than 400 of them have pleaded guilty, mostly to misdemeanor offenses. Over 280 riot defendants have been sentenced, with roughly half sentenced to terms of imprisonment ranging from one week to 10 years.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Florida school shooter may have been his own worst witness

    Florida school shooter may have been his own worst witness

    [ad_1]

    FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — It’s possible Florida school shooter Nikolas Cruz talked himself into a death sentence.

    Prosecutors played video last week at Cruz’s penalty trial of jailhouse interviews he did this year with two of their mental health experts. In frank and sometimes graphic detail, he answered their questions about his massacre of 17 people at Parkland’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on Feb. 14, 2018 — his planning, his motivation, the shootings.

    While it can’t be known what the 12 jurors are thinking, if any are wavering between voting for death or life without parole, his statements to Dr. Charles Scott, a forensic psychiatrist, and Robert Denney, a neuropsychologist, did not help his cause.

    “All of this made Cruz himself perhaps one of the state’s best witnesses,” said David S. Weinstein, a Miami defense attorney and former prosecutor who has been monitoring the trial.

    The jury will likely decide Cruz’s fate this week. For the 24-year-old to get a death sentence, the jury must be unanimous on at least one victim. But if all 17 counts come back with at least one vote in favor of life in prison, then that would be his sentence. Closing arguments are scheduled Tuesday, with deliberations beginning Wednesday.

    Because Cruz’s defense is that his birth mother’s heavy drinking during pregnancy left him brain damaged, prosecutors could have experts examine him for their rebuttal case.

    Scott and Denney interviewed him separately for several hours. In each, Cruz sat across the table, handcuffed, a sweater draped over his chest. He sometimes asked for a pen and paper to add diagrams and drawings to his explanations.

    “The question is: What will the jury take away from the interviews? Cold-blooded killer who was vengeful and excited about the murders, or a person so hopelessly deranged that he can’t be anything but crazy?” said Bob Jarvis, a professor at Nova Southeastern University’s law school.

    Excerpts from those interviews, some of which are graphic:

    HOW LONG HAD CRUZ BEEN CONTEMPLATING A SCHOOL SHOOTING?

    “A very long time,” Cruz told Scott, starting when he was 13 or 14, about five years before he did it.

    “It was just a thought. I was reading books,” Cruz said. “It would come and go. It would pop up in my mind.”

    The thoughts would return when he watched violent videos, particularly documentaries about mass shootings at Colorado’s Columbine High School, Virginia Tech and elsewhere, he said.

    HOW DID CRUZ PLAN THE MASSACRE?

    “I did my own research,” Cruz told Scott. “I studied mass murderers and how they did it, their plans, what they got and what they used.”

    He detailed the lessons he learned: Watch for would-be rescuers coming around corners, keep some distance from your targeted victims, attack as fast as possible — and “the police didn’t do anything.”

    “I have a small opportunity to shoot people for maybe 20 minutes,” Cruz said.

    HOW DID CRUZ PREPARE?

    He told Scott he put his AR-15-style semi-automatic rifle in a bag the night before and slipped its magazines into a shooting vest. He adjusted the gun’s sights and imagined what the recoil would feel like.

    “I didn’t get any sleep,” Cruz said.

    He donned the burgundy polo shirt he received when he was a member of the Stoneman Douglas Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps program so he could escape by mingling with fleeing students.

    “If I had all my (shooting) gear on, they would have called the cops,” Cruz said.

    When he set out at 2 p.m., he told the Uber driver he was in the school orchestra and the bag carried his instrument.

    WHAT DID CRUZ DO WHEN HE ARRIVED?

    “I walked through the gates. Hopefully, there would be no security guards, but I was wrong,” Cruz told Scott. “I was looking at the guy and he was watching me.”

    When Cruz attended Stoneman Douglas, guards frequently checked him for weapons because of his erratic and sometimes violent behavior. When he was expelled a year before the shooting, a guard predicted he would eventually return and shoot people.

    Fearing he’d been discovered, Cruz sprinted into a three-story classroom building and quickly assembled his weapon. He told a student who happened upon him to flee because something bad was about to happen.

    He then went floor to floor, shooting down hallways and into classrooms, firing 140 shots in all.

    “I thought they would scream,” Cruz said about his first three victims. He shot them point-blank outside a locked classroom door. “It was more like they passed out and blood came pouring out of their head. It was really nasty and sad to see.”

    But he continued.

    “I think I showed mercy to three girls. I was going to walk away, but they showed nasty faces and I went back,” Cruz said. “I thought they were going to attack me.”

    Cruz shot several of his victims a second time after they fell, including his final one — a student writhing from a leg wound. He said the boy “gave me a nasty look. A look of anger.”

    “His head blew up like a water balloon,” Cruz said.

    WHY DID CRUZ STOP SHOOTING?

    Students and teachers fled the building or locked themselves in classrooms. The third-floor hallway was now empty except for victims.

    “I couldn’t find anyone to kill,” he said. “I didn’t want to do it anymore and I didn’t think there was anyone else in the building.”

    He dropped his gun and vest on the stairwell and fled. He was captured an hour later — the police officer had been looking for a young male in a Stoneman Douglas ROTC polo.

    CRUZ’S FINAL SAY

    As Denney was finishing the final interview, he asked Cruz if there was anything else he should know. Cruz thought for 10 seconds before responding: “Why I chose Valentine’s Day.”

    “Because I thought no one would love me,” Cruz explained. “I didn’t like Valentine’s Day and I wanted to ruin it for everyone.”

    “Do you mean for the family members of the kids that were killed?” Denney asked.

    “No, for the school,” Cruz replied.

    The holiday will never be celebrated there again, he said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Maryland AG joins family’s appeal in ‘Serial’ murder case

    Maryland AG joins family’s appeal in ‘Serial’ murder case

    [ad_1]

    FILE – Adnan Syed, center right, leaves the courthouse after a hearing on Sept. 19, 2022, in Baltimore. Hae Min Lee’s brother, Young Lee, has asked the Maryland Court of Special Appeals to halt court proceedings for Syed, whose conviction in Lee’s 1999 killing was reversed by Baltimore Circuit Judge Melissa Phinn in September 2022. Now, the office of Maryland’s attorney general is supporting the brother’s appeal. (Jerry Jackson/The Baltimore Sun via AP, File)

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Domestic violence charge casts shadow over judge’s race

    Domestic violence charge casts shadow over judge’s race

    [ad_1]

    MUSKEGON, Mich — A Michigan judicial candidate is facing domestic assault charges partly based on video footage suggesting he hit his girlfriend repeatedly with a belt, prompting local domestic violence advocates to actively speak out against his candidacy.

    The candidate’s girlfriend and his attorney deny that he actually struck her.

    According to the Detroit Free Press, Jason Kolkema was arraigned on the misdemeanor charges in mid-September. Kolkema, a 51-year-old attorney running for Muskegon County’s 14th Circuit Court judicial seat, contends he was striking a chair with a belt and not his girlfriend as suggested by the video shot by an office worker in a building neighboring Kolkema’s apartment.

    “I understand that the optics are bad. I understand the anger and disappointment, especially from the people who voted for me and supported me … All of the facts will be revealed in due time,” Kolkema wrote on Facebook in response to a comment.

    Kolkema has declined to comment to the newspaper, instead referring questions to his girlfriend. His attorney, Terry Nolan, told WOOD-TV in September that Kolkema did not strike his girlfriend and said the incident shouldn’t disqualify him from seeking a seat on the bench.

    The woman, who is not identified in the Free Press reporting, told the newspaper she was wearing a headset and that Kolkema struck the chair’s armrest to get her attention. The woman said she took some blame for the incident, writing to the Free Press that “it was rude of me to ignore him.”

    The newspaper found court and police records describing earlier violent confrontations involving Kolkema and his girlfriend.

    One incident came two days before the videotaped belt strikes. According to Ottawa County court records, Kolkema allegedly spit at the woman’s 12-year-old daughter, threw water on them followed by a Gatorade bottle which missed them but hit a lamp.

    Three months earlier, the woman reported to Fruitport police that Kolkema had slapped her. When officers arrived, the girlfriend recanted and Kolkema told police that she “gets like this when she is drunk … and makes things up.”

    The woman told the Free Press that Kolkema has never hurt her or her daughter.

    “He never beat me,” she wrote. “He’s not scary or threatening as a person … Just boisterous, animated.”

    Muskegon County Prosecutor D.J. Hilson, whose office charged Kolkema with misdemeanor domestic assault in the filmed Aug. 18 incident, said it doesn’t matter if Kolkema actually struck his girlfriend that day.

    “Domestic violence includes violence that can either be physical, or threatened,” he told the newspaper. “Contact is not required.”

    Kolkema’s trial is not scheduled to begin until nearly two weeks after the Nov. 8 election. The footage and subsequent media attention have triggered intense debate in western Michigan.

    “I cannot imagine a victim sitting in front of a ‘Jason Kolkema’ and asking him to protect her from an assailant,” said Muskegon resident Heather Fry, who is a domestic abuse survivor and victim’s advocate.

    Whatever happened, the scene that unfolded on the video shows “a violent act meant to instill fear,” Fry said.

    Supporters on Kolkema’s social media pages have offered support, saying that he deserves the presumption of innocence and that his life should not be destroyed for “one mistake.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Indiana man gets 65-year sentence for son’s murder, abuse

    Indiana man gets 65-year sentence for son’s murder, abuse

    [ad_1]

    BLOOMINGTON, Ind. — An Indiana man has been sentenced to 65 years in prison for abusing his 12-year-old son and starving the boy to death.

    Monroe Circuit Judge Christine Talley Haseman said Friday that nothing could justify the physical abuse and withholding of food and water that Luis Eduardo Posso Jr. inflicted on his young child.

    Before issuing her decision, Haseman detailed the brutal treatment that Eduardo Posso endured and showed photographs of the boy taken just a few years apart.

    By the time of his death in 2019, Eduardo was the size of a typical 4-year-old and had been punched, slapped, kicked, shocked with a dog collar and chained up by his father and stepmother, Haseman said.

    Posso’s behavior was “incomprehensible, heinous and cruel,” she said.

    Posso pleaded guilty to murder in June and prosecutors agreed not to seek life in prison without parole, along with dismissing charges of neglect, criminal confinement and battery.

    His wife, Dayana Medina-Flores, pleaded guilty to murder and received the same sentence in 2021 tied to her stepson’s death.

    The Herald-Times reports that people sentenced to the maximum 65-year prison sentence for murder in Indiana typically serve three-fourths of their sentence — about 49 years.

    Posso’s attorney, public defender Kyle Duffer, said he will appeal the judge’s sentence.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Breonna Taylor warrant details deepen mistrust in police

    Breonna Taylor warrant details deepen mistrust in police

    [ad_1]

    LOUISVILLE, Ky. — Recent revelations about the search warrant that led to Breonna Taylor’s death have reopened old wounds in Louisville’s Black community and disrupted the city’s efforts to restore trust in the police department.

    Former Louisville officer Kelly Goodlett admitted in federal court that she and another officer falsified information in the warrant. That confirmed to many, including U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, that Taylor never should have been visited by armed officers on March 13, 2020.

    Protest leaders who took to the streets of Kentucky’s largest city after she was fatally shot by police say Goodlett’s confession confirms their suspicions that Louisville police can’t be trusted and that systemic issues run deep. They say officers abused demonstrators after the botched raid, and that her fatal shooting is just one of many reasons why the community remains wary.

    “What bothers me so incredibly, is that so many lives were lost because of this lie,” said Hannah Drake, a Louisville poet and leader in a push for justice after Taylor’s death. “They don’t even understand the far-reaching tentacles of what they did.”

    More than once during that long, hot summer, individual officers escalated rather than calmed a situation. An officer who shot into the restaurant, injuring the dead man’s niece, was fired after taunting demonstrators on social media, daring them to challenge the police. Another Louisville officer faces a federal charge over hitting a kneeling protester in the back of the head with a baton.

    “We were right to protest,” Louisville Urban League President Sadiqa Reynolds tweeted shortly after Goodlett’s plea. “People are dead and lives upended because of a pile of lies.”

    Some Louisville officers have been disciplined, fired, and even charged with crimes for abusing protesters, in addition to the four officers now charged federally in relation to the botched raid. But the problems can’t be blamed on a few rogue officers, according to a lawsuit brought by Taylor’s white neighbors, who were nearly hit by gunfire during the raid.

    They accuse the department of having a “warrior culture” and cultivating an “us vs. them” mentality. And the family of a Black man shot dead in his restaurant’s kitchen by law enforcement says in a lawsuit that police aggression during a curfew instigated his death.

    Louisville is working on numerous reforms, implementing a new 911 diversion program, increasing leadership reviews of search warrant requests and improving officer training. The city has outlawed “no knock” warrants, conducted an independent audit and paid Taylor’s mother $12 million in a civil settlement. A new police chief, Erika Shields, was hired in 2021.

    Such reforms have been implemented amid a continuing U.S. Department of Justice investigation of LMPD’s policing practices, which could land at any moment.

    The chief called Taylor’s death “horrific,” and said in an interview with The Associated Press that she welcomes the federal investigations, which led to charges against Goodlett and the other officers. “I think we’re in an important place that was necessary to get to, before we move on,” she said.

    Mayor Greg Fischer, whose 12-year run ends this year, said city officials turned the probes over to state and federal officials “because the community rightfully was saying LMPD should not be investigating LMPD, and I agree with that.”

    Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron’s investigation then ended without any officers being charged directly in Taylor’s death. It took federal prosecutors to convict Goodlett — she pleaded guilty to conspiracy and admitted to helping create a phony link between Taylor and a wanted drug dealer. Goodlett resigned the day before her charges were announced in August and awaits sentencing next month.

    In August court filings, federal prosecutors said another former officer, Joshua Jaynes, inserted the crucial information into the warrant request that drew Taylor into the narcotic squad’s investigation — claiming that a postal inspector had verified that the drug dealer was receiving packages at Taylor’s apartment.

    Goodlett and Jaynes knew that was false, as did their sergeant, Kyle Meany, when he signed off on the request, Garland said.

    “Breonna Taylor should be alive today,” Garland said.

    Goodlett, Jaynes and Meany were all fired, as was a fourth officer, Brett Hankison, who faces federal charges for blindly firing into Taylor’s home through a side door and window. He was exonerated on similar state charges earlier this year. Jaynes and Meany are being tried together. That trial, along with Hankison’s, is scheduled for next year. Goodlett is expected to testify against Jaynes.

    Metro Council President David James, a former police officer, said that to restore trust, Louisville’s Black community “just wants the police to treat them the same way they would treat people in another part of the city.”

    No incident highlighted the racial divide more than the fatal shooting of Black restaurant owner David McAtee as police sought to enforce the city’s curfew in a predominantly African American neighborhood far from the center of the Taylor protests.

    Just before midnight on May 31, 2020, Louisville officers and Kentucky National Guard members were sent to a gathering spot near McAtee’s YaYa’s BBQ “for a show of force (and) intimidation,” McAtee’s family alleges in a lawsuit.

    A few nights earlier, officer Katie Crews had been photographed in a line of police as a protester offered her a handful of flowers. Crews posted the image on social media, writing that she hoped the protester was hurting from the pepper balls she “got lit up with a little later on.”

    “Come back and get ya some more ole girl, I’ll be on the line again tonight,” Crews wrote.

    When officers marched toward McAtee’s restaurant, Crews escalated the tension by firing non-lethal pepper balls at the crowd, an LMPD investigation found. Many people rushed into McAtee’s kitchen, where his niece was shot in the neck by Crews with the non-lethal rounds.

    That prompted McAtee to pull a pistol from his hip and fire a shot. Seeing that, Crews and other officers switched to live rounds and McAtee, leaning out his kitchen door, was fatally shot in the chest by a National Guard member. The deadly force was found to be justified, but the police chief was fired by Fischer because the Louisville officers involved had failed to turn on their body cameras, just as they did during the Taylor raid.

    Crews later admitted that no one in the crowd had been disorderly. She was fired by Shields in February. Now she faces up to 10 years in prison if convicted of a federal charge of using unreasonable force.

    James groaned while recalling McAtee’s death, saying he was saddened because he knew him and had eaten his food. The “extremely unfortunate and tragic” shooting has stuck with him as an example of bad policing, he said.

    Drake said more systemic changes are needed. In the meantime, she said authorities should apologize for their treatment of protesters, and drop any cases against people arrested for demonstrating that summer. Hundreds have been cleared, but some remain criminally charged. Knowing it was all so unnecessary only deepens the pain, she said.

    “We could have avoided all this,” Drake said. “And I think that’s where the pain comes from — we were right!”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ex-Oath Keeper: Group leader claimed Secret Service contact

    Ex-Oath Keeper: Group leader claimed Secret Service contact

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes told a member of the extremist group before the 2020 election that he had a contact in the Secret Service, a witness testified Thursday in Rhodes’ Capitol riot trial.

    John Zimmerman, who was part of the North Carolina chapter, told jurors that Rhodes claimed to have a Secret Service agent’s number and to have spoken with the agent about the logistics of a September 2020 rally that then-President Donald Trump held in Fayetteville, North Carolina.

    The claim came on the third day of testimony in the case against Rhodes and four others charged with seditious conspiracy for what authorities have described as a detailed, drawn-out plot to stop the transfer of power from Trump to Democrat Joe Biden, who won the election.

    Zimmerman could not say for sure that Rhodes was speaking to someone with the Secret Service — only that Rhodes told him he was — and it was not clear what they were discussing. Zimmerman said Rhodes wanted to find out the “parameters” that the Oath Keepers could operate under during the election-year rally.

    The significance of the detail in the government’s case is unclear. Rhodes, from Granbury, Texas, and and the others are accused of spending weeks plotting to use violence in a desperate campaign to keep Trump in the White House.

    Trump’s potential ties to extremist groups have been a focus of the House committee investigating the riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

    Another Oath Keeper expected to testify against Rhodes has claimed that after the riot, Rhodes phoned someone seemingly close to Trump and made a request: tell Trump to call on militia groups to fight to keep him in power. Authorities have not identified that person; Rhodes’ lawyer says the call never happened.

    A Secret Service spokesperson said the agency is aware that “individuals from the Oath Keepers have contacted us in the past to make inquiries.” The agency said that when creating a security plan for events, it is “not uncommon for various organizations to contact us concerning security restrictions and activities that are permissible in proximity to our protected sites.”

    The others on trial are Thomas Caldwell of Berryville, Virginia; Kenneth Harrelson of Titusville, Florida; Jessica Watkins of Woodstock, Ohio; and Kelly Meggs of Dunnellon, Florida. The trial is expected to last several weeks.

    Authorities say the Oath Keepers organized paramilitary training and stashed weapons with “quick reaction force” teams at a Virginia hotel in case they were needed before members stormed the Capitol alongside hundreds of other Trump supporters.

    Jurors also heard testimony from a man who secretly recorded a Nov. 9, 2020, conference call held by Rhodes in which the leader rallied his followers to prepare for violence and go to Washington.

    The man, Abdullah Rasheed, said he began recording the call with hundreds of Oath Keepers members because Rhodes’ rhetoric made it sound like “we were going to war with the United States government.”

    Rasheed said he tried to get in touch with authorities, including the U.S. Capitol Police and the FBI, about the call but that no one called him back until “after it all happened.” An FBI agent has testified that the bureau received a tip about the call in November 2020, and when asked if the FBI ever conducted an interview, he said ”not to my knowledge.” The man contacted the FBI again in March 2021, was interviewed and gave authorities the recording of the call.

    Rhodes’ lawyers have said the Oath Keepers leader will testify that his actions leading up to Jan. 6 were in preparation for orders he believed were coming from Trump, but never did. Rhodes has said he believed Trump was going to invoke the Insurrection Act and call up a militia to support his bid to hold power.

    The defense says the Oath Keepers often set up quick reaction forces for events but they were only to be used to protect against violence from antifa activists or in the event Trump invoked the Insurrection Act.

    Zimmerman, the former Oath Keeper from North Carolina, described getting a quick reaction force ready for the “Million MAGA March” in Washington on Nov. 14, 2020, in case Trump invoked the Insurrection Act. Thousands of Trump supporters that day gathered at Freedom Plaza along Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington to rally behind Trump’s false election claims.

    Zimmerman told jurors that the Oath Keepers stashed at least a dozen rifles and several handguns in his van parked at Arlington National Cemetery to serve as the quick reaction force. He said they never took the guns into Washington.

    Zimmerman wasn’t in the city on Jan. 6 because he was recovering from the coronavirus and he said that after the Nov. 14 event, the North Carolina Oath Keepers split from Rhodes. Zimmerman said the split came over Rhodes’ suggestion that the Oath Keepers wear disguises to entice antifa activists to attack them so the Oath Keepers could give them a “beat down.”

    Zimmerman said Rhodes suggested dressing up as older people or mothers pushing strollers and putting weapons in the stroller.

    “I told him ‘No, that’s not what we do,’” Zimmerman said. “That’s entrapment. That’s illegal.”

    In a separate case on Thursday, Jeremy Joseph Bertino of North Carolina became the first member of the Proud Boys extremist group to plead guilty to seditious conspiracy in the Jan. 6 attack. Three Oath Keeper members have also pleaded guilty to the charge.

    ———

    For full coverage of the Capitol riot, go to https://www.apnews.com/capitol-siege

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Man charged with killing 22 Texas women gets 2nd conviction

    Man charged with killing 22 Texas women gets 2nd conviction

    [ad_1]

    DALLAS — A man charged with killing 22 elderly women in the Dallas area over a two-year span was found guilty Friday in one of their deaths — his second murder conviction.

    With the verdict, Billy Chemirmir, 49, automatically received a second sentence of life without parole, this time for the smothering death of 87-year-old Mary Brooks. Jurors took less than 30 minutes to reach the verdict against Chemirmir, who was already sentenced to life in prison without parole for an April conviction in the death of 81-year-old Lu Thi Harris.

    Authorities allege that he preyed on older women, killing them and stealing their valuables. Time after time, their deaths were initially determined to be from natural causes, even as family members raised alarm bells about missing jewelry.

    “This is a conscious, dedicated effort to stalk, surveil, kill, steal, strip and sell,” Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot said in closing arguments.

    Creuzot decided against seeking the death penalty. After Friday’s verdict he said the two sentences mean Chemirmir is “going to die in a penitentiary.”

    Creuzot said the 11 additional capital murder cases against Chemirmir in Dallas County will now be dismissed. Prosecutors in neighboring Collin County haven’t yet said if they will try any of their nine capital murder cases against Chemirmir, who has maintained his innocence.

    Prosecutors told jurors that the evidence showed that Chemirmir followed Brooks home from Walmart, smothered her and took her jewelry.

    One woman’s survival of a March 2018 attack set Chemirmir’s arrest in motion. Mary Annis Bartel, then-91, told police a man forced his way into her apartment at an independent living community for seniors, tried to smother her with a pillow and took her jewelry.

    After Chemirmir’s arrest, police across the Dallas area reexamined deaths and the charges against him grew. Many of the victims’ children have said they were left perplexed by the deaths at the time, as their mothers, though older, were still healthy and active. Four indictments were added this summer.

    Most lived in apartments at independent living communities for older people. One woman who lived in a private home was the widow of a man Chemirmir cared for while working as an at-home caregiver.

    Defense attorneys told the jury that prosecutors hadn’t presented enough evidence to convict.

    “They are begging that you plug in the holes that they cannot,” defense attorney Phillip Hayes said in his closing argument.

    After the verdict, he told reporters that he plans to appeal.

    While jurors this week were deciding Chemirmir’s guilt only in Brooks’ death, they also heard evidence that led to his conviction in Harris’ death as well as details related to the death of 80-year-old Martha Williams. Prosecutors for the first time presented DNA evidence linking Chemirmir to one of the deaths — Williams’.

    The jury also heard testimony that Chemirmir was in either in possession of jewelry and valuables belonging to the women or had offered pieces for sale and that cellphone records put him in the vicinity of the victims.

    Before Bartel died in 2020, she described the attack in a taped interview that has been played at Chemirmir’s trials. She said the minute she opened her door and saw a man wearing rubber gloves, she knew she was in “grave danger.”

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

    Evidence presented at trial showed that just hours before Harris was found dead, Chemirmir was at the Walmart where Harris was shopping.

    When Brooks’ grandson had found her dead in her condo several weeks earlier, grocery bags from a trip to the same Walmart were sitting out on her counter. Surveillance video showed a car matching the description of Chemirmir’s pulling out just after Brooks and going in the same direction.

    Brooks’ daughter, Ann Brooks, said after the verdict that her family was “thrilled that this defendant will never be able to hurt any other family again.”

    “Our beloved mother, Mary Sue, her life is over and her jewelry is gone, but her love and her memories will live in us forever,” she said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Lawyer gets prison for laundering millions in drug money

    Lawyer gets prison for laundering millions in drug money

    [ad_1]

    SAN DIEGO — A lawyer who laundered millions of dollars in drug money for a violent Mexican drug cartel was sentenced Friday to 15 years and eight months in federal prison.

    Juan Manuel Álvarez Inzunza, 40, told a federal judge in San Diego, California, that he was “deeply remorseful” and thanked the U.S. government for his capture. The Mexican citizen said his 2016 arrest ended his criminal career and helped make sure “my conduct didn’t get any worse,” the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.

    Álvarez Inzunza was sentenced on a money-laundering conspiracy charge. In 2016, he was arrested in Mexico, where he was held until his extradition to the U.S. last year.

    With credit for time already spent in custody, he was likely to spend nine more years in prison and then will be deported to Mexico, the Union-Tribune said.

    In a plea agreement with federal prosecutors, Álvarez Inzunza acknowledged that he laundered money for the Sinaloa Cartel from at least December 2013 to August 2015.

    Álvarez Inzunza was orphaned and raised by poor relatives in Culiacán, the capital of Mexico’s Sinaloa state. He had a private law firm there when, about a decade ago, “the wrong client came in, and he listened to them” and began his criminal career, defense attorney Frederick Carroll said at Friday’s hearing.

    Álvarez Inzunza would relay orders from cartel bosses to an associate in Colombia who would coordinate couriers to pick up cash in the U.S., the prosecution said.

    During an investigation, U.S. federal agents found that Álvarez Inzunza had organized the transfer of millions of dollars from the United States to Mexico and other countries and they were able to seize at least $3.5 million in cash, including large amounts of drug money from Boston, Detroit and New York, authorities said.

    Álvarez Inzunza was “trying to provide for his family” but ended up “destroying his family,” his attorney said.

    At his sentencing. U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw acknowledged that Álvarez Inzunza was remorseful but said his actions helped fund the violent cartel, which doesn’t “exist without money.”

    “You’re complicit in all of this activity — it’s not just the money laundering,” Sabraw said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US jury convicts man in deadly Alabama kidnapping of child

    US jury convicts man in deadly Alabama kidnapping of child

    [ad_1]

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

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

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

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

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

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

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jury resumes deliberations in Alex Jones’ Sandy Hook trial

    Jury resumes deliberations in Alex Jones’ Sandy Hook trial

    [ad_1]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    ———

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

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • To buy Twitter, Musk has to keep banks, investors on board

    To buy Twitter, Musk has to keep banks, investors on board

    [ad_1]

    If the squabbling ever stops over Elon Musk’s renewed bid to buy Twitter, experts say he still faces a huge obstacle to closing the $44 billion deal: Keeping his financing in place.

    Earlier this week, Musk reversed course and said he’d go through with acquiring the social media company under the same terms he agreed to in April. But after months of tweetstorms and legal barbs, there are scars and suspicions on both sides.

    Experts say that behind the scenes, banks could be scrambling to find buyers for $12.5 billion in debt from the deal, and Musk is trying to hold together a group of equity investors that is pitching in billions more. The erratic billionaire is on the hook for the rest.

    The fighting continued Thursday, when Musk’s attorneys said Twitter is refusing to accept his revived bid to buy the company. They sought to delay an upcoming trial on Twitter’s lawsuit that could force him to complete the deal.

    But Twitter’s attorneys said it’s Musk who is holding everything up, and his effort to put the trial on hold “is an invitation to further mischief and delay.”

    In the end, a judge agreed to give Musk more time to close the deal but said the trial will go ahead in November if he doesn’t.

    It’s still possible the sale could close. But with so much at play, here’s what could throw the deal off track, again:

    BANK FINANCING

    A group of banks, including Morgan Stanley and Bank of America, signed on to loan $12.5 billion of the money Musk needs for the deal. In Thursday’s court motion, Musk alleges that Twitter doesn’t want to set the lawsuit aside because of a “baseless” fear that Musk could fail to get the bank financing.

    “No such failure has occurred to date,” the motion said. “Counsel for the debt financing parties has advised that each of their clients is prepared to honor its obligations.”

    The banks are “essentially cemented” to the deal by solid contracts, Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said. But the debt market has changed dramatically since April. The stock market has tumbled, inflation is high, and interest rates are up as the Federal Reserve tries to slow the economy.

    Banks would sell the debt to institutional investors, but there’s not much appetite now to take part in takeovers that saddle companies with big debts. Banks could be on the hook to make loans themselves.

    “The banks would be really happy to not to have to take the risk of funding these loans,” said Erik Gordon, a law and business professor at the University of Michigan. “The agreements seem to be very strong, but I think the banks have their lawyers pulling all-nighters trying to get them out of it if they can.”

    EQUITY INVESTORS

    Investors who would get equity in Twitter are supposed to kick in billions. Ives estimates they had agreed to $15 billion to $16 billion. But some investors may be skittish about staying in given the market changes and Musk’s repeated accusations against Twitter about the number of bots on the platform.

    Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund declined comment this week on the $375 million its subsidiary pledged in May. Several other investors didn’t respond to requests for comment on whether they were still chipping in.

    Musk’s equity commitments — including $1 billion from Musk’s friend and Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison — are on shakier ground if any in that diverse group of backers have changed their minds, said Kevin Kaiser, an adjunct finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School.

    “Nobody knows — I don’t know anyway — what their commitment is,” Kaiser said. “So are they able to back out? Because if they’re able to back out, he is on the hook.”

    MUSK MONEY

    Musk, the world’s richest person with a net worth of $231 billion according to Forbes, has to kick in his own money, but just how much depends on how many equity investors stay in.

    Most of his wealth is tied up in stock of the electric car company that he runs, Tesla Inc. Since April, he has sold more than $15 billion worth of Tesla stock, presumably to pay his share.

    If any equity investors drop out, though, Musk will either have to replace them or throw in more money, fueling speculation that he might have to sell more Tesla shares. Musk’s share of the original deal was about $15.5 billion, Ives estimated.

    THE GUARANTEE

    It’s clear that Twitter’s board is very suspect of Musk because he has trashed the company for months now, alleging that it has far fewer daily users than it reports to investors, said Gordon.

    That has diminished Twitter’s value and made investing in the deal less attractive, he says. And because Musk already tried to back out of the deal once, Twitter will want a guarantee of some sort that he won’t back out again.

    That, Ives said, is likely to be a large chunk of money held in a non-refundable escrow account that would go to Twitter if Musk doesn’t deliver.

    SIGNS OF PROGRESS

    There are some signs that the deal will yet go through. Twitter says it looks forward to closing the deal by Oct. 28. Musk’s deposition in the lawsuit, scheduled for Thursday in Austin, Texas, was postponed. Musk’s motion says the bankers are still in. And the original group of investors is not talking publicly about bailing out.

    ———

    Krisher reported from Detroit, O’Brien from Providence, Rhode Island.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Mom’s triple murder case paused for competency determination

    Mom’s triple murder case paused for competency determination

    [ad_1]

    BOISE, Idaho — An Idaho judge has postponed the trial of a woman charged with conspiring to kill her two youngest children and her fifth husband’s late wife until officials can determine if she’s mentally competent.

    Seventh District Judge Steven Boyce ruled Thursday, a few days after Lori Vallow Daybell’s defense attorneys asked that the case be paused. The documents detailing the request were sealed and a short hearing on the matter was closed to the public.

    The trial had been set for next January.

    Both Vallow Daybell and her husband, Chad Daybell, have pleaded not guilty to the charges. The strange details of the case have drawn attention from around the world.

    Idaho law enforcement officers started investigating the couple in November 2019 after extended family members reported her two youngest children, Joshua “JJ” Vallow and Tylee Ryan, were missing. At the time, JJ Vallow was 7 years old and Tylee Ryan was nearing her 17th birthday.

    Daybell and Vallow Daybell had married just two weeks after his previous wife, Tammy Daybell, died unexpectedly. The children’s bodies were later found buried on his property in rural eastern Idaho.

    The couple was eventually charged with murder, conspiracy and grand theft in connection with the deaths of the children and Daybell’s late wife. They have pleaded not guilty and could face the death penalty if convicted.

    Prosecutors say the couple promoted unusual religious beliefs to further the alleged murder conspiracies. Vallow Daybell’s former husband, Charles Vallow, died while the two were estranged but had said in divorce documents that Vallow Daybell believed she was a god-like figure responsible for ushering in the apocalyptical end times. Daybell wrote doomsday-focused fiction books and recorded podcasts about preparing for the apocalypse.

    Friends of the couple told law enforcement investigators the pair believed people could be taken over by dark spirits, and that Vallow Daybell referred to her children as “zombies,” which was a term they used to describe those who were possessed.

    Vallow Daybell is also charged with conspiracy to commit murder in Arizona in connection with the death of Vallow. Her previous husband was shot and killed by Vallow Daybell’s brother, Alex Cox, who said it was self-defense. Cox later died of what police said was natural causes.

    The Arizona legal proceedings are on hold while the Idaho case is underway and Vallow Daybell has not been scheduled to make a plea in the Arizona case.

    It’s the second time the Idaho case against Vallow Daybell has been put on hold. The criminal case was paused in 2021 after she was declared incompetent to stand trial and she was committed to the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare for treatment. She was declared competent 10 months later.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Judge delays trial between Twitter and Elon Musk, giving Musk more time to close $44B deal to buy company

    Judge delays trial between Twitter and Elon Musk, giving Musk more time to close $44B deal to buy company

    [ad_1]

    Judge delays trial between Twitter and Elon Musk, giving Musk more time to close $44B deal to buy company

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Twitter tells Delaware court it opposes Elon Musk’s attempt to halt trial

    Twitter tells Delaware court it opposes Elon Musk’s attempt to halt trial

    [ad_1]

    Twitter tells Delaware court it opposes Elon Musk’s attempt to halt trial

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Musk lawyers say Twitter won’t accept renewed $44 billion bid for the company, ask Delaware court to halt upcoming trial

    Musk lawyers say Twitter won’t accept renewed $44 billion bid for the company, ask Delaware court to halt upcoming trial

    [ad_1]

    Musk lawyers say Twitter won’t accept renewed $44 billion bid for the company, ask Delaware court to halt upcoming trial

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • EXPLAINER: What’s next in Musk’s epic battle with Twitter?

    EXPLAINER: What’s next in Musk’s epic battle with Twitter?

    [ad_1]

    Elon Musk’s monthslong tussle with Twitter took another twist this week when the Tesla billionaire seemed to return to where he started in April — offering to buy the company for $44 billion.

    But it’s not over yet. Twitter says it intends to close the deal at the agreed-upon price, but the two sides are still booked for an Oct. 17 trial in Delaware over Musk’s earlier attempts to terminate the deal.

    The judge presiding over the case said this week that she will “continue to press on toward our trial” because neither side has formally moved to stop it and on Thursday she ordered both sides to wrap up disputes over evidence.

    IS THE TRIAL STILL ON?

    Chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick, the Delaware Chancery Court’s head judge, hasn’t explicitly weighed in on Musk’s new proposal, but in a Wednesday ruling on an unrelated evidence dispute she made clear that nothing had changed for the court.

    “The parties have not filed a stipulation to stay this action, nor has any party moved for a stay,” she wrote. “I, therefore, continue to press on toward our trial set to begin on October 17.”

    On Thursday, she reiterated that the “trial is fast approaching” in a letter to lawyers and ordered Musk’s side to respond to outstanding evidentiary disputes by midday Friday.

    Musk’s lawyer told Twitter this week that the Tesla CEO will complete the deal as long as he lines up the promised debt financing and provided that the Delaware court drops Twitter’s lawsuit against him. But Twitter is unlikely to give up on its legal proceedings unless it confirms that the deal is for real this time and not a tactical gambit.

    WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

    Twitter lawyers had been preparing to grill Musk in a deposition set to begin Thursday, but it appears to have been put off as Musk’s renewed takeover offer remained in play.

    The interview was scheduled to happen in Austin, Texas, not far from Tesla’s headquarters, after wrangling between the two sides over its location and timing. An earlier meeting was also postponed after Musk raised concerns about potential exposure to COVID-19, which led Twitter lawyers to complain to the judge about Musk’s “long resistance” to the meeting and concerns that he is “seeking to evade fair examination” as the central witness in the dispute with less than two weeks before the trial begins.

    At the time he had been scheduled to be deposed, Musk was tweeting about Russia’s war in Ukraine.

    IS MUSK READY FOR TWITTER TAKEOVER?

    Musk’s ability to avert a trial and take Twitter private depends in part on how soon he and his co-investors can put up $44 billion to close the deal he spent months fighting to get out of.

    Musk had already started preparing for the possibility — a likely one according to legal experts — that the court could side with Twitter in forcing the merger to go through. He sold about $7 billion worth of Tesla shares in August, saying it was important to avoid an emergency stock sale if the deal were forced to close and “some equity partners don’t come through.”

    It’s not clear where those equity partners are today. Musk in May announced he had strengthened his stake with commitments of more than $7 billion from a group of investors, including Silicon Valley heavy hitters like Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, who contributed $1 billion.

    “I agree that is has huge potential … and it would be lots of fun,” Ellison told Musk in April, according to text messages disclosed last week in a court filing. But Ellison hasn’t weighed in publicly on the renewed offer.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Judge: Fake heiress can fight deportation on house arrest

    Judge: Fake heiress can fight deportation on house arrest

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — A U.S. immigration judge cleared the way Wednesday for fake German heiress Anna Sorokin to be released from detention to home confinement while she fights deportation, if she meets certain conditions.

    She must post a $10,000 bond, provide a residential address where she’ll stay for the duration of her immigration case and refrain from social media posting, Manhattan Immigration Judge Charles Conroy said.

    Sorokin, 31, has been in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody since March 2021, after spending more than three years behind bars for swindling banks, hotels and friends to bankroll a posh lifestyle.

    Immigration authorities say she’s overstayed her visa and must be returned to Germany.

    Sorokin’s lawyer, Duncan Levin, said they are “extremely gratified” by the decision to release her to home confinement.

    “The judge rightfully recognized that Anna is not a danger to the community,” Levin said in a written statement. “While there are still a few hurdles to jump through on her release conditions, Anna is thrilled to be getting out so she can focus on appealing her wrongful conviction.”

    A message seeking comment was left with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

    Sorokin, whose scheme inspired the Netflix series “Inventing Anna,” was convicted in 2019 on multiple counts of larceny and theft. She was sentenced to four to 12 years in prison, credited with more than 500 days time served while her case was pending and released on good behavior in February 2021.

    Immigration authorities picked her up a few weeks later.

    Using the name Anna Delvey, Sorokin maneuvered her way into elite New York social circles by passing herself off as a socialite with a $67 million (68 million euros) fortune overseas, prosecutors said. She falsely claimed to be the daughter of a diplomat or an oil baron.

    Prosecutors said Sorokin falsified records and lied to get banks to lend, luxury hotels to let her stay and well-heeled Manhattanites to cover plane tickets and other expenses for her, stealing $275,000 in all.

    [ad_2]

    Source link