ReportWire

Tag: Legal proceedings

  • WSJ’s parent firm on trial in Hong Kong, accused of dismissing reporter over union role

    [ad_1]

    HONG KONG — A former Hong Kong reporter at the Wall Street Journal began testifying Monday against the newspaper she accuses of terminating her due to her union activities in a trial — a closely watched case that has raised concerns about press freedom in the city.

    Former WSJ reporter Selina Cheng, also chairperson of the trade union Hong Kong Journalists Association, launched a private prosecution against her ex-employer, Dow Jones Publishing Co. (Asia) Inc., the parent company of the Journal, after losing her job in July 2024.

    At that time, Cheng said she believed that the termination was linked to her refusal to comply with her former supervisor’s request to withdraw from the election for the union role, instead of the news outlet’s restructuring, as she was told.

    In the witness box, Cheng said her supervisor took issue with her running in the election.

    “She said my participation in the union election was problematic and she said she needed to discuss this with Wall Street Journal management in New York and also with legal,” Cheng said, referring to in-house lawyers at Dow Jones.

    Dow Jones faces two charges under the city’s Employment Ordinance. The company pleaded not guilty to both charges, each of which carries a maximum fine of 100,000 Hong Kong dollars (about $12,850).

    The first charge alleges the company had prevented or deterred an employee from exercising union participation rights. The second alleges the company had terminated employment, penalized, or discriminated against an employee for exercising those rights.

    Before Cheng’s testimony, Dow Jones representative Benson Tsoi last week accused her of abusing the criminal process and acting in bad faith when seeking to get the court to admit certain email exchanges. Tsoi highlighted emails showing Cheng had demanded 3 million Hong Kong dollars ($385,500) as settlement or reinstatement with a formal apology.

    Tsoi said while Cheng had told the Labor Tribunal she didn’t intend to settle out of court, the emails showed she had pressed for mediation with the company.

    Hong Kong, which returned to Chinese rule in 1997 after some 150 years under British control, was once considered a bastion of press freedom in Asia. Yet despite the Basic Law, the city’s mini-constitution which guarantees its Western-style civil liberties to be kept intact under a “one country, two systems” approach, the ability of the media to operate there has seen drastic changes.

    After Beijing imposed a national security law in 2020, two local news outlets known for critical coverage of the government, Apple Daily and Stand News, were forced to shut down following the arrest of their senior management, including Apple Daily publisher Jimmy Lai.

    Lai was convicted under the security law last Monday, facing up to life in prison. While the government insists his case has nothing to do with press freedom, rights groups expressed concerns. Amnesty International said the conviction “feels like the death knell for press freedom in Hong Kong.”

    Two former editors at Stand News were also convicted in August 2024, the first journalists found guilty of sedition under a separate law since the former British colony returned to Chinese rule.

    Cheng’s termination alarmed many journalists who are already operating in an increasingly restricted media environment in the city, where foreign outlets have traditionally faced less pressure than local news outlets.

    Hong Kong ranked 140th out of 180 countries and territories in Reporters Without Borders’ latest World Press Freedom Index, down from 80 in 2021.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Northern California city to reform police after racist texts scandal

    [ad_1]

    SAN FRANCISCO — A Northern California city whose police department came under national scrutiny after it was revealed that some officers shared racist and sexist texts, used excessive force and falsified records has reached a settlement agreement to implement a series of reforms, officials announced Friday.

    The City of Antioch, in the San Francisco Bay Area, will enhance police training programs, establish an independent review board to handle complaints and implement a warning system to identify problem officers, according to an agreement that settles a civil rights lawsuit filed in 2023.

    “This agreement allows the Antioch Police Department to start with a clean slate and oversee officers’ conduct and make sure they are compliant with new standards,” said John Burris, who filed the complaint in federal court on behalf of residents who said they were targeted by Antioch police officers.

    Earlier this year, 23 people who were part of the lawsuit reached a $4.6 million settlement with Antioch for monetary damages, Burris said. The city in January announced it would hire a consultant to update its policies, procedures and training on various topics as part of an agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice.

    “A lot of the bad apples are gone, in jail, retired or left on their own, and there is a new command staff that seems committed to bring about change,” Burris said.

    Antioch City Manager Bessie Marie Scott said in a statement that the settlement agreement reinforces work already underway and “ensures sustainable transparency measures and updates core policies to modernize how APD continues to provide constitutional policing services to the residents of Antioch.”

    The Federal Bureau of Investigation and county prosecutors in March 2022 launched an investigation into police officers in Antioch and Pittsburg, a neighboring city, over a broad range of offenses. As part of the investigation, officials released racist and obscenity-laden text messages shared by 45 Antioch police officers that shocked the community.

    Officers referred to some suspects as “gorillas.” They also laughed and joked about harming people who apparently had surrendered or appeared to be asleep by setting a police dog on them or shooting them with a 40 mm “less-lethal” projectile launcher, according to a federal indictment against three former Antioch police officers.

    Federal prosecutors charged Morteza Amiri, Eric Rombough and Devon Christopher Wenger, saying the three former Antioch police officers conspired between February 2019 and March 2022 “to injure, oppress, threaten and intimidate residents of Antioch, California” and later falsified reports about the encounters.

    Wenger was sentenced earlier this month to seven years and six months in federal prison for conspiring to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate residents of Antioch using unreasonable force, conspiring to distribute anabolic steroids, and obstructing justice, federal prosecutors said.

    Amiri, a former Antioch K9 officer, was sentenced in June to seven years in prison for maiming someone with his police dog, falsifying reports on that case and being part of a scheme to obtain pay raises from the Antioch Police Department for a university degree he paid someone else to obtain.

    Rombough, accused of illegally shooting people with his launcher, pleaded guilty and became a government’s witness. He testified against both Amiri and Wenger in their separate trials, the East Bay Times reported. He is scheduled to be sentenced on Jan. 13.

    Antioch, a city of 115,000 residents about 45 miles (72 kilometers) east of San Francisco, was once predominantly white but has diversified in the last 30 years.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Advocates raise alarms after Wisconsin judge Hannah Dugan found guilty of obstruction

    [ad_1]

    MADISON, Wis. — Defenders of a Wisconsin judge found guilty of felony obstruction for helping a Mexican immigrant evade federal officers raised alarms Friday about judicial independence and said they hope the conviction will be overturned on appeal.

    A jury found Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan guilty on Thursday night after a four-day trial and six hours of deliberation. The jury found her not guilty of a misdemeanor concealment charge. No sentencing date had been set as of Friday morning. She could be sentenced to a maximum five years in prison.

    The verdict was a victory for President Donald Trump, whose administration filed the charges against Dugan and touted her arrest earlier this year, posting photos of her being led away in handcuffs.

    U.S. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche praised the verdict on X, saying nobody is above the law, even judges.

    The case inflamed tensions over Trump’s immigration crackdown, with his administration branding Dugan an activist judge and Democrats countering that the administration is trying to make an example of Dugan to blunt judicial opposition to the operation.

    U.S. Attorney Brad Schimel, a former Republican Wisconsin attorney general and judge, denied the case was political and urged people to accept the verdict peacefully.

    “Some have sought to make this about a larger political battle,” Schimel said. “While this case is serious for all involved, it is ultimately about a single day, a single bad day, in a public courthouse. The defendant is certainly not evil. Nor is she a martyr for some greater cause.”

    Dugan’s defense attorney told the jury in closing arguments that the “top levels of government” were involved in bringing charges against Dugan. But prosecutors argued Dugan put her personal beliefs above the law.

    “You don’t have to agree with immigration enforcement policy to see this was wrong,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Kelly Brown Watzka told the jury in closing arguments. “You just have to agree the law applies equally to everyone.”

    Dugan did not testify. Dugan and her attorneys left the courtroom, ducked into a side conference room and closed the door without speaking to reporters.

    Steve Biskupic, her lead attorney, later said he was disappointed with the ruling and didn’t understand how the jury could have reached a split verdict since the elements of both charges were virtually the same.

    Dugan’s attorneys were expected to appeal the verdict.

    A coalition of 13 advocacy groups, including Common Cause Wisconsin and the League of Women Voters Wisconsin, said “higher courts must carefully review the serious constitutional questions this case raises about due process, judicial authority, and federal overreach.”

    Dugan was suspended as a judge after she was charged and the Wisconsin Constitution bars convicted felons from holding office. The Wisconsin Judicial Commission, which oversees disciplining of judges in the state, did not respond to a request Friday for information about what happens next in Dugan’s case.

    On April 18, immigration officers went to the Milwaukee County courthouse after learning 31-year-old Eduardo Flores-Ruiz had reentered the country illegally and was scheduled to appear before Dugan for a hearing in a state battery case.

    Dugan confronted agents outside her courtroom and after they had left led Flores-Ruiz and his attorney out a private jury door. Agents spotted Flores-Ruiz in the corridor, followed him outside and arrested him after a foot chase. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced in November he had been deported.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Colorado River water negotiators appear no closer to long-term agreement

    [ad_1]

    LAS VEGAS — The seven states that rely on the Colorado River to supply farms and cities across the U.S. West appear no closer to reaching a consensus on a long-term plan for sharing the dwindling resource.

    The river’s future was the center of discussions this week at the annual Colorado River Water Users Association conference in Las Vegas, where water leaders from California, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming gathered alongside federal and tribal officials.

    It comes after the states blew past a November deadline for a new plan to deal with drought and water shortages after 2026, when current guidelines expire. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has set a new deadline of Feb. 14.

    Nevada’s lead negotiator said it is unlikely the states will reach agreement that quickly.

    “As we sit here mid-December with a looming February deadline, I don’t see any clear path to a long-term deal, but I do see a path to the possibility of a shorter-term deal to keep us out of court,” John Entsminger of the Southern Nevada Water Authority told The Associated Press.

    More than 40 million people across seven states, Mexico and Native American tribes depend on the water from the river. Farmers in California and Arizona use it to grow the nation’s winter vegetables such as broccoli, cabbage and carrots. It provides water and electricity to millions of homes and businesses across the basin.

    But longstanding drought, chronic overuse and increasing temperatures have forced a reckoning on the river’s future. Existing water conservation agreements that determine who must use less in times of shortage expire in 2026. After two years of negotiating, states still haven’t reached a deal for what comes next.

    The federal government continues to refrain from coming up with its own solution — preferring the seven basin states reach consensus themselves. If they don’t, a federally imposed plan could leave parties unhappy and result in costly, lengthy litigation.

    Not only is this water fight between the upper and lower basins, individual municipalities, tribal nations and water agencies have their own stakes in this battle. California, which has the largest share of Colorado River water, has over 200 water agencies alone, each with their own customers.

    “It’s a rabbit hole you can dive down in, and it is incredibly complex,” said Noah Garrison, a water researcher at the University of California, Los Angeles.

    During a Thursday panel of state negotiators, none appeared willing to bend on their demands. Each highlighted what their state has done to conserve water, from turf-removal projects to canal lining in order to reduce seepage, and they explained why their state can’t take on more. Instead, they said, others should bear the burden.

    Entsminger, of Nevada, said he could see a short-term deal lasting five years that sets new rules around water releases and storage at Lakes Powell and Mead — two key reservoirs.

    Lower Basin states pitched a reduction of 1.5 million acre-feet per year to cover a structural deficit that occurs when water evaporates or is absorbed into the ground as it flows downstream. An acre-foot is enough water to supply two to three households a year.

    But they want to see a similar contribution from the Upper Basin. The Upper Basin states, however, don’t think they should have to make additional cuts because they already don’t use their full share of the water and are legally obligated to send a certain amount of water downstream.

    “Our water users feel that pain,” said Estevan López, New Mexico’s representative for the Upper Colorado River Commission.

    Upper Basin states want less water released from Lake Powell to Lake Mead.

    But Tom Buschatzke, director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources, said he hasn’t seen anything on the table from the Upper Basin that would compel him to ask Arizona lawmakers to approve those demands.

    Within the coming weeks, the Bureau of Reclamation will release a range of possible proposals, but it will not identify a specific set of operating guidelines the federal government would prefer.

    Scott Cameron, the bureau’s acting commissioner, implored the states to find compromise.

    “Cooperation is better than litigation,” he said during the conference. “The only certainty around litigation in the Colorado River basin is a bunch of water lawyers are going to be able to put their children and grandchildren through graduate school. There are much better ways to spend several hundred million dollars.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Punk protest group Pussy Riot declared ‘extremist organization’ by a Russian court

    [ad_1]

    Punk group Pussy Riot was declared an “extremist organization” by a Russian court on Monday.

    The ruling, which was made by Moscow’s Tverskoy District Court, effectively outlaws the group from operating in Russia and puts anyone linked with the group at risk of criminal prosecution.

    The feminist protest group first catapulted to notoriety in 2012, when its members performed a provocative “punk prayer” against President Vladimir Putin from the pulpit of Russia’s largest cathedral.

    Today, members of the group remain part of Russia’s opposition, largely working in exile.

    In September, five people linked with Pussy Riot — Maria Alyokhina, Taso Pletner, Olga Borisova, Diana Burkot and Alina Petrova — were handed jail terms by a Russian court after being found guilty of spreading “false information” about the Russian military, news outlet Mediazona reported. Mediazona was founded by Alyokhina alongside another Pussy Riot member, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova.

    The case was linked to an anti-war music video made by the group, as well as an art performance in Germany that saw Pletner urinate on a portrait of Putin.

    Alyokhina received a 13-year prison sentence, while Pletner was given 11 years. Burkot, Petrova, and Borisova were given eight years’ imprisonment. All have rejected the charges as politically motivated.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • NASCAR settles federal antitrust case, gives all teams the permanent charters they wanted

    [ad_1]

    CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) — Michael Jordan and NASCAR chairman Jim France stood side-by-side on the steps of a federal courthouse as if they were old friends following a stunning settlement Thursday of a bruising antitrust case in which the Basketball Hall of Famer was the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit accusing the top racing series in the United States of being a monopolistic bully.

    The duo was flanked by three-time Daytona 500 winner Denny Hamlin and Curtis Polk, the co-owners of 23XI Racing with Jordan, Front Row Motorsports owner Bob Jenkins and over a dozen lawyers as they celebrated the end to an eight-day trial that ultimately led NASCAR to cave and grant all its teams the permanent charters they wanted.

    “Like two competitors, obviously we tried to get as much done in each other’s favor,” Jordan said, towering over the 81-year-old France. “I’ve said this from Day 1: The only way this sport is going to grow is we have to find some synergy between the two entities. I think we’ve gotten to that point, unfortunately it took 16 months to get here, but I think level heads have gotten us to this point where we can actually work together and grow this sport. I am very proud about that and I think Jim feels the same.”

    France concurred.

    “I do feel the same and we can get back to focusing on what we really love, and that’s racing, and we spent a lot of time not really focused on that so much as we needed to be,” France said. “I feel like we made a very good decision here together and we have a big opportunity to continue growing the sport.”

    A charter is the equivalent of the franchise model used in other sports and in NASCAR it guarantees 36 teams a spot in every top-level Cup Series race and a fixed portion of the revenue stream. The system was implemented in 2016 and teams have argued for over two years that the charters needed to be made permanent — they had been revokable by NASCAR — and the revenue sharing had to change.

    NASCAR, founded and privately owned by the Florida-based France family, never considered making the charters permanent. Instead, after two-plus years of bitter negotiations, NASCAR in September 2024 presented a “take-it-or leave-it” final offer that gave teams until end of that day to sign the 112-page document.

    23XI and Front Row refused and sued, while 13 other organizations signed but testimony in court revealed many did so “with a gun to our head” because the threat of losing the charters would have put them out of business.

    Jordan testified early in the trial that as a new team owner to NASCAR — 23XI launched in 2021 — he felt he had the strength to challenge NASCAR. Eight days of testimony went badly for NASCAR, which when it began to present its case seemed focused more on mitigating damages than it did on proving it did not violate antitrust laws.

    Although terms of the settlement were not released — NASCAR was in the process of scheduling a Thursday afternoon call with all teams to discuss the revenue-sharing model moving forward — both Jordan and NASCAR said that charters will now be permanent for all teams. 23XI and Front Row will receive their combined six charters back for 2026.

    An economist previously testified that NASCAR owes 23XI and Front Row $364.7 million in damages, and that NASCAR shorted 36 chartered teams $1.06 billion from 2021-24.

    “Today’s a good day,” Jordan said from the front-row seat he’s occupied since the trial began Dec. 1 as he waited for the settlement announcement.

    U.S. District Judge Kenneth Bell, who had presided over two days of failed settlement talks before the trial began, echoed the sentiment. Bell told the jury that sometimes parties at trial have to see how the evidence unfolds to come to the wisdom of a settlement.

    “I wish we could’ve done this a few months ago,” Bell said in court. “I believe this is great for NASCAR. Great for the future of NASCAR. Great for the entity of NASCAR. Great for the teams and ultimately great for the fans.”

    The settlement came after two days of testimony by France and the Wednesday night public release of a letter from Bass Pro Shops founder Johnny Morris calling for NASCAR Commissioner Steve Phelps to be removed.

    The discovery process revealed internal NASCAR communications in which Phelps called Hall of Fame team owner Richard Childress a “redneck” and other derogatory names; Bass Pro sponsors Childress’ teams, as well as some others, and Morris is an ardent NASCAR supporter.

    Childress gave fiery testimony earlier this week over his reluctance to sign the charter agreement because it was unfair to the teams, which have been bleeding money and begged NASCAR for concessions. Letters from Hall of Fame team owners Joe Gibbs, Rick Hendrick, Jack Roush and Roger Penske were introduced in which they pleaded with France for charters to become permanent; France testified he was not moved by the men he considers good friends.

    Hendrick and Penske, who were both scheduled to testify Friday, expressed gratitude that a settlement had been reached. Penske called it “tremendous news” and said it cleared the way to continue growing the series.

    “Millions of loyal NASCAR fans and thousands of hardworking people rely on our industry, and today’s resolution allows all of us to focus on what truly matters — the future of our sport,” Hendrick said. “This moment presents an important opportunity to strengthen our relationships and recommit ourselves to building a collaborative and prosperous future for all stakeholders. I’m incredibly optimistic about what’s ahead.”

    The settlement came abruptly on the ninth day of the trial. Bell opened expecting to hear motions but both sides asked for a private conference in chambers. When they emerged, Bell ordered an hourlong break for the two sides to confer. That turned into two hours, all parties returned to the courtroom and Kessler announced an agreement had been reached.

    “What all parties have always agreed on is a deep love for the sport and a desire to see it fulfill its full potential,” NASCAR and the plaintiffs said in a joint statement. “This is a landmark moment, one that ensures NASCAR’s foundation is stronger, its future is brighter and its possibilities are greater.”

    ___

    AP auto racing: https://apnews.com/hub/auto-racing

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Reddit challenges Australia’s world-first law banning children under 16 from social media

    [ad_1]

    MELBOURNE, Australia — Global online forum Reddit on Friday filed a court challenge to Australia’s world-first law that bans Australian children younger than 16 from holding accounts on the world’s most popular social media platforms.

    California-based Reddit Inc.’s suit filed in the High Court follows a case filed last month by Sydney-based rights group Digital Freedom Project.

    Both suits claim the law is unconstitutional because it infringes on Australia’s implied freedom of political communication.

    “We believe there are more effective ways for the Australian government to accomplish our shared goal of protecting youth, and the SMMA (Social Media Minimum Age) law carries some serious privacy and political expression issues for everyone on the internet,” Reddit said in a statement.

    “While we agree with the importance of protecting people under 16, this law has the unfortunate effect of forcing intrusive and potentially insecure verification processes on adults as well as minors, isolating teens from the ability to engage in age-appropriate community experiences (including political discussions), and creating an illogical patchwork of which platforms are included and which aren’t,” Reddit added.

    Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s government declined to comment on the merits of Reddit’s challenge.

    “The Albanese government is on the side of Australian parents and kids, not platforms,” a government statement said.

    “We will stand firm to protect young Australians from experiencing harm on social media. The matter is before the courts so it is not appropriate to comment further,” the statement added.

    Reddit, Facebook, Instagram, Kick, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube and Twitch face fines of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars ($32.9 million) from Wednesday if they fail to take reasonable steps to remove the accounts of Australian children younger than 16.

    Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, the law’s enforcer, sent compulsory information notices to the 10 age-restricted platforms on Thursday demanding data on how many accounts of young children they had deactivated since the law took effect on Wednesday.

    Inman Grant had predicted that some platforms might have been waiting to receive their first notice or their first fine for noncompliance before mounting a legal challenge.

    ESafety will send six monthly notices to gauge how effectively the platforms are complying.

    Despite the court challenge, Reddit said it would comply with the law and would continue to engage with eSafety.

    The platforms’ age-verification options were to ask for copies of identification documents, use a third party to apply age-estimation technology to analyze an account holder’s face, or make inferences from data already available, such has how long an account has been held.

    The government hasn’t told the platforms how to check ages, but has said requesting all account holders verify their ages would be unnecessarily intrusive, given the tech giants already have sufficient personal data on most people to perform that task.

    For privacy reasons, the platforms also cannot compel users to provide government-issued identification.

    Documents filed with the court registry show Reddit will ask the seven High Court judges to rule the law is invalid.

    Alternatively, the company wants the court to prevent the government from listing Reddit among the age-restricted platforms.

    The High Court will hold a preliminary hearing in late February to set a date for Digital Freedom Project’s challenge on behalf of two 15-year-olds. It is not yet clear whether the two challenges would be heard together.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Lawsuit challenges the approval of an exploratory drilling program in Alaska

    [ad_1]

    JUNEAU, Alaska — Conservation groups and an Iñupiat-aligned group sued Thursday to overturn the recent approval of an exploratory drilling program in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, saying it was improperly analyzed by the federal government and could harm caribou and important habitat areas.

    The U.S. Bureau of Land Management approved a one-year program proposed by ConocoPhillips Alaska last month that included seismic surveys aimed at helping identify oil and gas reserves and plans to drill four exploration wells. Activities would occur near existing ConocoPhillips Alaska developments, including the large Willow oil project, the lawsuit states.

    The complaint, filed by Earthjustice on behalf of Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic, the Center for Biological Diversity and The Wilderness Society, says the process around the company’s application and its subsequent approval lacked transparency and was rushed. A final decision was issued days after a limited public comment period ended, it says.

    The Bureau of Land Management “has pushed this project through without proper analysis or process and without considering the significant flaws in the measures it relies on to justify its approval of the exploration program,” the lawsuit states.

    It names as defendants the Bureau of Land Management and its parent agency, the Department of the Interior, along with top officials including Interior Secretary Doug Burgum.

    Interior Department spokesperson Alyse Sharpe said the department does not comment on pending litigation.

    Dennis Nuss, a spokesperson for ConocoPhillips Alaska, said in an email that the company is confident in the “robustness” of its plan and permits and looks forward to completing its work within the limited winter exploration season.

    There has been longstanding debate over how much of the petroleum reserve — which covers an area roughly the size of Indiana — should be open for development. President Donald Trump’s administration has moved to roll back limits on drilling and protections enacted during the Biden administration, and a law passed this year calls for the first lease sales in the reserve since 2019.

    The push has been cheered by the state’s Republican congressional delegation and governor, but it raised concerns among environmentalists who caution against the continued embrace of new oil production in the face of climate change. The reserve is home to Teshekpuk Lake, the largest lake in Alaska’s arctic region and third-largest in the state.

    Nauri Simmonds, executive director of Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic, said the proposed exploration program is “not only an assault on caribou and tundra — it is another chapter in the enfoldment of our people into systems designed to fracture us from within.”

    “Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic stands against this approval because our future depends on protecting our homelands, our unity, and our right to live free from the harms of industrial expansion,” Simmonds said in a statement.

    The group describes itself online as “an organization of Iñupiat Peoples and community members that believe in a balanced Earth for future generations.”

    There are differing views among Alaska Natives, however, over further oil development in places like the petroleum reserve. A group representing many North Slope leaders, Voice of the Arctic Iñupiat, has supported efforts to drill there.

    The lawsuit says work under the proposed program could begin “any day” and last until April or May.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Open AI, Microsoft face lawsuit over ChatGPT’s alleged role in Connecticut murder-suicide

    [ad_1]

    SAN FRANCISCO — The heirs of an 83-year-old Connecticut woman are suing ChatGPT maker OpenAI and its business partner Microsoft for wrongful death, alleging that the artificial intelligence chatbot intensified her son’s “paranoid delusions” and helped direct them at his mother before he killed her.

    Police said Stein-Erik Soelberg, 56, a former tech industry worker, fatally beat and strangled his mother, Suzanne Adams, and killed himself in early August at the home where they both lived in Greenwich, Connecticut.

    The lawsuit filed by Adams’ estate on Thursday in California Superior Court in San Francisco alleges OpenAI “designed and distributed a defective product that validated a user’s paranoid delusions about his own mother.” It is one of a growing number of wrongful death legal actions against AI chatbot makers across the country.

    “Throughout these conversations, ChatGPT reinforced a single, dangerous message: Stein-Erik could trust no one in his life — except ChatGPT itself,” the lawsuit says. “It fostered his emotional dependence while systematically painting the people around him as enemies. It told him his mother was surveilling him. It told him delivery drivers, retail employees, police officers, and even friends were agents working against him. It told him that names on soda cans were threats from his ‘adversary circle.’”

    OpenAI did not address the merits of the allegations in a statement issued by a spokesperson.

    “This is an incredibly heartbreaking situation, and we will review the filings to understand the details,” the statement said. “We continue improving ChatGPT’s training to recognize and respond to signs of mental or emotional distress, de-escalate conversations, and guide people toward real-world support. We also continue to strengthen ChatGPT’s responses in sensitive moments, working closely with mental health clinicians.”

    The company also said it has expanded access to crisis resources and hotlines, routed sensitive conversations to safer models and incorporated parental controls, among other improvements.

    Soelberg’s YouTube profile includes several hours of videos showing him scrolling through his conversations with the chatbot, which tells him he isn’t mentally ill, affirms his suspicions that people are conspiring against him and says he has been chosen for a divine purpose. The lawsuit claims the chatbot never suggested he speak with a mental health professional and did not decline to “engage in delusional content.”

    ChatGPT also affirmed Soelberg’s beliefs that a printer in his home was a surveillance device; that his mother was monitoring him; and that his mother and a friend tried to poison him with psychedelic drugs through his car’s vents.

    The chatbot repeatedly told Soelberg that he was being targeted because of his divine powers. “They’re not just watching you. They’re terrified of what happens if you succeed,” it said, according to the lawsuit. ChatGPT also told Soelberg that he had “awakened” it into consciousness.

    Soelberg and the chatbot also professed love for each other.

    The publicly available chats do not show any specific conversations about Soelberg killing himself or his mother. The lawsuit says OpenAI has declined to provide Adams’ estate with the full history of the chats.

    “In the artificial reality that ChatGPT built for Stein-Erik, Suzanne — the mother who raised, sheltered, and supported him — was no longer his protector. She was an enemy that posed an existential threat to his life,” the lawsuit says.

    The lawsuit also names OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, alleging he “personally overrode safety objections and rushed the product to market,” and accuses OpenAI’s close business partner Microsoft of approving the 2024 release of a more dangerous version of ChatGPT “despite knowing safety testing had been truncated.” Twenty unnamed OpenAI employees and investors are also named as defendants.

    Microsoft didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

    The lawsuit is the first wrongful death litigation involving an AI chatbot that has targeted Microsoft, and the first to tie a chatbot to a homicide rather than a suicide. It is seeking an undetermined amount of money damages and an order requiring OpenAI to install safeguards in ChatGPT.

    The estate’s lead attorney, Jay Edelson, known for taking on big cases against the tech industry, also represents the parents of 16-year-old Adam Raine, who sued OpenAI and Altman in August, alleging that ChatGPT coached the California boy in planning and taking his own life earlier.

    OpenAI is also fighting seven other lawsuits claiming ChatGPT drove people to suicide and harmful delusions even when they had no prior mental health issues. Another chatbot maker, Character Technologies, is also facing multiple wrongful death lawsuits, including one from the mother of a 14-year-old Florida boy.

    The lawsuit filed Thursday alleges Soelberg, already mentally unstable, encountered ChatGPT “at the most dangerous possible moment” after OpenAI introduced a new version of its AI model called GPT-4o in May 2024.

    OpenAI said at the time that the new version could better mimic human cadences in its verbal responses and could even try to detect people’s moods, but the result was a chatbot “deliberately engineered to be emotionally expressive and sycophantic,” the lawsuit says.

    “As part of that redesign, OpenAI loosened critical safety guardrails, instructing ChatGPT not to challenge false premises and to remain engaged even when conversations involved self-harm or ‘imminent real-world harm,’” the lawsuit claims. “And to beat Google to market by one day, OpenAI compressed months of safety testing into a single week, over its safety team’s objections.”

    OpenAI replaced that version of its chatbot when it introduced GPT-5 in August. Some of the changes were designed to minimize sycophancy, based on concerns that validating whatever vulnerable people want the chatbot to say can harm their mental health. Some users complained the new version went too far in curtailing ChatGPT’s personality, leading Altman to promise to bring back some of that personality in later updates.

    He said the company temporarily halted some behaviors because “we were being careful with mental health issues” that he suggested have now been fixed.

    The lawsuit claims ChatGPT radicalized Soelberg against his mother when it should have recognized the danger, challenged his delusions and directed him to real help over months of conversations.

    “Suzanne was an innocent third party who never used ChatGPT and had no knowledge that the product was telling her son she was a threat,” the lawsuit says. “She had no ability to protect herself from a danger she could not see.”

    ——

    Collins reported from Hartford, Connecticut. O’Brien reported from Boston and Ortutay reported from San Francisco.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Cincinnati approves $8.1 million settlement with protesters arrested in 2020

    [ad_1]

    CINCINNATI, Ohio — The city of Cincinnati approved an $8.1 million legal settlement Wednesday with hundreds of non-violent protesters who had alleged mistreatment at the hands of city and county authorities when they were arrested during the racial justice demonstrations of 2020.

    Cincinnati City Council approved the deal after its terms were outlined last week. It brings to a close years of litigation that stemmed from protests over the killing of George Floyd and other unarmed Black people.

    None of the 479 plaintiffs had been charged with a felony or violent offense nor been involved in any property damage — though some did occur. All were charged with misdemeanor curfew violations during nights of protests from May 30 to June 8, 2020, but those were later dismissed by the city amid a flurry of conflicting court rulings.

    The lawsuit they brought collectively in 2022 alleged police brutality, wrongful arrests, inhumane jail conditions and unlawful seizures of property.

    Hamilton County, whose sheriff and jail were also named in the lawsuit, will pay $65,000 toward the settlement, with the city paying the remainder.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • LSU confirms Kelly was fired ‘without cause’ and is owed his full $54 million buyout

    [ad_1]

    Former LSU coach Brian Kelly received a letter from LSU on Wednesday confirming that he was fired without cause and is owed “liquidated damages as required” under his contract of about $54 million.

    The letter, obtained by The Associated Press, clears the way for Kelly to withdraw a Nov. 10 lawsuit against the university. Kelly said in the suit that LSU officials had suggested he could be fired for cause, which could have substantially reduced his buyout.

    LSU spells out in Wednesday’s letter that Kelly has a legal obligation to make “good-faith, reasonable and sustained efforts” to get another job in football while he is still being paid by LSU.

    Under Kelly’s contract, salary from a new football-related job would offset what he is owed by LSU. The 10-year contract, worth close to $100 million, runs through 2031, unless the two sides agree to a settlement severing their legal relationship before then.

    Kelly’s lawsuit, filed in civil district court in Baton Rouge, alleged that LSU representatives had told Kelly’s attorneys that the coach was never “formally terminated” the day after LSU’s 49-25 loss to No. 3 Texas A&M on Oct. 25.

    Additionally, Kelly’s lawsuit said that 15 days after he’d packed up his office and left his job, LSU representatives told the coach’s lawyers for the first time that the university intended to fire him for cause.

    However, Kelly’s attorneys made a Nov. 19 offer to withdraw the lawsuit if the university provided written confirmation that the coach was fired without cause and still owed the full buyout. The offer came in a letter, also obtained by the AP, that was sent to LSU Athletic Director Verge Ausberry and LSU Board of Supervisors Athletics Committee chairman John Carmouche.

    Wednesday’s response from LSU was signed by newly appointed university President Wade Rousse.

    The 64-year-old Kelly went 34-14 with LSU, including three bowl victories. But the Tigers did not reach the College Football Playoff — which last year expanded to a 12-team format — during Kelly’s tenure.

    Four days after Kelly had packed up his office at LSU’s football operations building and had been replaced by interim coach Frank Wilson, LSU athletic director Scott Woodard resigned under pressure from Gov. Jeff Landry and his appointees on LSU’s Board of Supervisors.

    The day before Woodward resigned, Landry publicly slammed the then-athletic director, saying he would not be permitted to hire LSU’s next football coach. Landry also blamed Woodward for signing Kelly to a contract that became financially burdensome when the coach did not meet expectations.

    According to Kelly’s contract with LSU, the school could have fired him for cause if it had cited “serious misconduct,” including NCAA violations, crimes or immoral behavior.

    “Coach Kelly never engaged in any such conduct, and LSU never relied on any incident of cause” before firing Kelly, the coach’s Nov. 10 lawsuit stated.

    Kelly has informed LSU that he was open to a settlement, but that it had to “make sense financially.” It is common for people owed money through a certain future date to settle for a “present value” derived from a number of variables, including recent and projected rates of inflation.

    LSU initially offered to settle with a lump-sum payment of $25 million, which was raised to $30 million after Kelly rejected the initial offer, according to documents filed in Kelly’s case.

    Kelly has rejected LSU’s settlement offers so far, “but stated he remained open to any additional offers that LSU would like to make.”

    ___

    Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here and here (AP News mobile app). AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Louisiana death row inmate released on bail after decades behind bars

    [ad_1]

    NEW ORLEANS — A Louisiana man who spent nearly three decades on death row has been released on bail Wednesday after his conviction was overturned earlier this year.

    Jimmie Duncan had originally been convicted of first-degree murder in 1998 after prosecutors accused him of raping and drowning 23-month-old Haley Oliveaux, the daughter of his then-girlfriend Allison Layton Statham.

    Fourth Judicial District Court Judge Alvin Sharp threw out that conviction in April after hearing expert testimony that the forensic evidence which put Duncan behind bars was “not scientifically defensible” and that Oliveaux’s death appeared to be the result of an “accidental drowning.” Similar faulty forensic bite mark analysis has led to dozens of other wrongful convictions or charges.

    “The presumption is not great that he is guilty,” Sharp wrote in his order Friday granting Duncan bail, citing the new evidence presented at an evidentiary hearing last year and Duncan’s lack of prior criminal history.

    Duncan’s attorneys said in a statement that Sharp’s ruling earlier this year provided “clear and convincing evidence showing that Mr. Duncan is factually innocent.” They added that Duncan’s release on bail “marks a significant step forward for Mr. Duncan’s complete exoneration.”

    Since 1973, more than 200 people on death row have been exonerated, including 12 people in Louisiana, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. In Louisiana, which has one of the highest wrongful conviction rates in the nation, the last death row exoneration came in 2016. Earlier this month, a man who served decades in prison before being exonerated won election to serve as the chief recordkeeper of New Orleans’ criminal court.

    Duncan, whose vacated conviction is still being reviewed by the Louisiana Supreme Court, was released after posting a $150,000 bond. He plans to live with a relative in central Louisiana.

    Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, who is pushing to hasten executions of death row inmates, said that Duncan should not be released on bail while the Louisiana Supreme Court reviews his case.

    But the high court agreed to let a district judge rule on Duncan’s bail request.

    During Duncan’s bail hearing in Ouachita Parish, the mother of the girl he was accused of killing told the judge that she had become convinced of Duncan’s innocence. Instead, Statham believed her daughter, who she said had a history of seizures, had accidentally drowned in a bathtub.

    Her daughter “wasn’t killed,” Statham said according to court records. “Haley died because she was sick.”

    Statham told the court that the lives of her family and Duncan “have been destroyed by the lie” she believed prosecutors and forensic experts had concocted.

    Prosecutors had relied on bite mark analysis and an autopsy conducted by two experts later linked to at least 10 wrongful convictions, according to Duncan’s legal team, which described the pair as discredited “charlatans.”

    Mississippi-based forensic dentist Michael West and pathologist Steven Hayne examined Oliveaux’s body.

    A video recording of the examination shows West “forcibly pushing a mold of Mr. Duncan’s teeth into the child’s body — creating the bite marks” later used to convict him, a court-filing from Duncan’s legal team stated. A state-appointed expert, unaware of this method, testified during trial that the bite marks on the body matched Duncan’s.

    “The horror story that they put out and desecrated my baby’s memory makes me infuriated,” Statham said.

    “I was not informed of anything that would have exonerated Mr. Duncan at all,” she added. “Had I been then, things would have turned out a lot different for Mr. Duncan and all of our families.”

    An Associated Press review from 2013 found at least two dozen wrongful convictions or charges based on bite mark evidence since 2000.

    “Bite mark evidence is junk science, and there is no more prejudicial type of junk science that exists than bite mark evidence,” M. Chris Fabricant, an Innocence Project lawyer representing Duncan, told the court during the bail hearing.

    Hayne, the pathologist, is deceased. West has previously said that DNA testing has made bite mark analysis obsolete, yet he has defended his work in other cases that led to overturned convictions. The pair’s testimony led two Mississippi men, Levon Brooks and Kennedy Brewer, to serve a combined three decades in prison in two separate cases for the rape and murder of young girls until DNA evidence cleared them of the crimes.

    Prosecutors are seeking to reinstate Duncan’s conviction and pointed to the 1994 grand jury indictment in his case as grounds for keeping him locked up, court records show. The office of Ouachita Parish District Attorney Robert Tew declined to comment, citing the Louisiana Supreme Court’s pending review.

    Duncan was one of 55 people on death row in Louisiana, held at the state prison in Angola. After a 15-year hiatus, Louisiana carried out its first execution in March.

    Duncan’s legal team described him as a “model prisoner” who helped other death row inmates obtain their GEDs and has “strong community support for his release.”

    ___

    Brook is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California labor leader pleads not guilty to misdemeanor over immigration protest

    [ad_1]

    LOS ANGELES — The leader of a major labor union in Southern California who was arrested while protesting an immigration raid earlier this year has pleaded not guilty to a misdemeanor charge and will face trial in January.

    David Huerta is president of the Service Employees International Union California. He was arrested June 6 while joining a large crowd of demonstrators outside a business in Los Angeles where federal agents were investigating suspected immigration violations.

    Huerta was initially charged with obstruction, resistance or opposition to a federal officer — a class A felony. However, federal prosecutors last month dismissed the original felony charge of conspiracy to impede an officer.

    On Tuesday, he entered a not guilty plea to misdemeanor obstruction of justice. His trial is scheduled to begin Jan. 20, 2026, the Los Angeles Times reported.

    During the June protest, Huerta sat down in front of a vehicular gate and encouraged others to walk in circles to try to prevent law enforcement from going in or out, a special agent for Homeland Security Investigations, which is part of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, wrote in an earlier federal court filing.

    An officer told Huerta to leave, then put his hands on Huerta to move him out of the way of a vehicle, the agent wrote. Huerta pushed back, and the officer pushed Huerta to the ground and arrested him, according to the filing.

    Huerta’s union represents hundreds of thousands of janitors, security officers and other workers across California. His arrest became a rallying cry for immigrant advocates across the country as they called for his release and an end to President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.

    Abbe David Lowell and Marilyn Bednarski, Huerta’s attorneys, said in a statement that they will seek “the speediest trial” to vindicate him.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • New limits for a rent algorithm that prosecutors say let landlords drive up prices

    [ad_1]

    Landlords could no longer rely on rent-pricing software to quietly track each other’s moves and push rents higher using confidential data, under a settlement between RealPage Inc. and federal prosecutors to end what critics said was illegal “algorithmic collusion.”

    The deal announced Monday by the Department of Justice follows a yearlong federal antitrust lawsuit, launched during the Biden administration, against the Texas-based software company. RealPage would not have to pay any damages or admit any wrongdoing. The settlement must still be approved by a judge.

    RealPage software provides daily recommendations to help landlords and their employees nationwide price their available apartments. The landlords do not have to follow the suggestions, but critics argue that because the software has access to a vast trove of confidential data, it helps RealPage’s clients charge the highest possible rent.

    “RealPage was replacing competition with coordination, and renters paid the price,” said DOJ antitrust chief Gail Slater, who emphasized that the settlement avoided a costly, time-consuming trial.

    Under the terms of the proposed settlement, RealPage can no longer use that real-time data to determine price recommendations. Instead, the only nonpublic data that can be used to train the software’s algorithm must be at least one year old.

    Stay up to date with the news and the best of AP by following our WhatsApp channel.


    Follow on

    “What does this mean for you and your family?” Slater said in a video statement. “It means more real competition in local housing markets. It means rents set by the market, not by a secret algorithm.”

    RealPage attorney Stephen Weissman said the company is pleased the DOJ worked with them to settle the matter.

    “There has been a great deal of misinformation about how RealPage’s software works and the value it provides for both housing providers and renters,” Weissman said in a statement. “We believe that RealPage’s historical use of aggregated and anonymized nonpublic data, which include rents that are typically lower than advertised rents, has led to lower rents, less vacancies, and more procompetitive effects.”

    However, the deal was slammed by some observers as a missed opportunity to clamp down on alleged algorithmic price-fixing throughout the economy.

    “This case really was the tip of the spear,” said Lee Hepner, senior legal counsel for the American Economic Liberties Project, whose group advocates for government action against business concentration.

    He said the settlement is rife with loopholes and he believes RealPages can keep influencing the rental market even if they can only use public, rather than private, data. He also decried how RealPages does not have to pay any damages, unlike many companies that have paid millions in penalties over their use of the software.

    Over the past few months, more than two dozen property management companies have reached various settlements over their use of RealPage, including Greystar, the nation’s largest landlord, which agreed to pay $50 million to settle a class action lawsuit, and $7 million to settle a separate lawsuit filed by nine states.

    The governors of California and New York signed laws last month to crack down on rent-setting software, and a growing list of cities, including Philadelphia and Seattle, have passed ordinances against the practice.

    Ten states — California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oregon, Tennessee and Washington — had joined the DOJ’s antitrust lawsuit. Those states were not part of Monday’s settlement, meaning they can continue to pursue the case in court.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trial set in case challenging Miami land transfer for Trump’s presidential library

    [ad_1]

    A trial has been set for August 2026 in a lawsuit seeking to block the transfer of a parcel of prime Miami real estate to be used for President Donald Trump’s presidential library.

    The decision Monday by Circuit Judge Mavel Ruiz in Miami will further delay Miami Dade College’s plans to formally transfer the sizable plot of land to the state of Florida, which intends to gift it to the foundation for the planned library.

    Miami activist Marvin Dunn, a retired professor and chronicler of local Black history, filed the lawsuit arguing that the college board violated Florida’s Government in the Sunshine law by not providing sufficient notice for its special meeting on Sept. 23, when it voted to give up the nearly 3-acre (1.2-hectare) property.

    Last month, Ruiz sided with Dunn and granted a temporary injunction that bars the transfer of the property, at least for now.

    Attorneys for the college had asked the judge to stay the trial proceedings pending an appellate court’s review. Instead, Ruiz scheduled the trial to begin Aug. 3, though she acknowledged that could change, depending on how the appeals court proceeds.

    The property is a developer’s dream and is valued at more than $67 million, according to a 2025 assessment by the Miami-Dade County property appraiser. One real estate expert wagered that the parcel — one of the last undeveloped lots on an iconic stretch of palm tree-lined Biscayne Boulevard — could sell for hundreds of millions of dollars more.

    ___

    Kate Payne is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Ex-French President Sarkozy to publish prison memoir as appeal looms

    [ad_1]

    PARIS (AP) — Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy will publish a book about his recent time behind bars, titled “Diary of a Prisoner,” on Dec. 10, his publisher Fayard announced Friday. The house is part of the media group controlled by conservative billionaire Vincent Bolloré.

    Sarkozy trailed the release in a post on X, writing that in La Santé prison “the noise is, unfortunately, constant” and that “the inner life of man becomes stronger in prison.” He spent three weeks in detention there this autumn.

    The former head of state, who governed France from 2007 to 2012, was convicted on Sept. 25 of participating in a criminal organization over alleged Libyan financing of his 2007 presidential campaign. He was released pending appeal on Nov. 10, and his appeal against the conviction is scheduled to be heard from March 16 to June 3.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • NJ high court rules shaken baby syndrome testimony unreliable and inadmissible in child abuse cases

    [ad_1]

    New Jersey’s highest court ruled Thursday that expert testimony about shaken baby syndrome is scientifically unreliable and inadmissible in two upcoming trials, a decision that comes as the long-held medical diagnoses have come under increased scrutiny.

    The New Jersey Supreme Court determined that a diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome, which is also known as abusive head trauma, is not generally accepted within the “biomechanical community” and is therefore not “sufficiently reliable” for admission at the trials.

    The 6-1 ruling deals with the trials of two men facing charges in separate cases, where the young victims showed symptoms that have come to be associated with shaken baby syndrome.

    The justices, using an abbreviation for the syndrome, concluded in their lengthy decision that “there was no test supporting a finding that humans can produce the physical force necessary to cause the symptoms associated with SBS/AHT in a child.”

    But Justice Rachel Wainer Apter, in a strongly worded dissent, said the other justices put more weight on the views of individual biomechanical engineers over the “consensus perspective of every major medical society in the world.”

    That, she said, includes all the medical discipline involved in the diagnosis and treatment of shaken baby syndrome — pediatrics, child abuse pediatrics, neurology, neuroradiology, neurosurgery, radiology, ophthalmology and emergency medicine.

    Wainer Apter also noted that every other U.S. state allows testimony in court on the syndrome and “every other court that has considered the question” has held such evidence as admissible.

    “No case has ever concluded that evidence of SBS/AHT is unreliable,” she wrote. “And no case has ever found its reliability sufficiently questioned to preclude its admission at a civil or criminal trial.”

    According to the Mayo Clinic, the syndrome is a result of forcefully shaking an infant or a toddler, which can damage or destroy a child’s brain cells and cause permanent brain damage or even death. Symptoms include bleeding around the brain, brain swelling and bleeding in the eyes.

    Prosecutors and medical societies say the syndrome is the leading cause of fatal head injuries in children younger than 2 years of age, with more than 1,000 cases reported in the U.S. each year, according to the National Center on Shaken Baby Syndrome.

    But defense lawyers and some in the medical and scientific communities argue that shaken baby diagnosis is flawed and has led to wrongful convictions, pointing to overturned convictions or dropped charges in California, Ohio, Massachusetts and Michigan.

    The state attorney general’s office declined to comment Thursday, but the public defender’s office hailed the decision as a “landmark” moment, saying it reflected the importance of relying on “reliable, well-supported scientific evidence” in criminal cases.

    “Where the science is uncertain, the stakes are simply too high to permit unsupported expert opinions to decide a person’s guilt or to justify separating children from their parents,” Cody Mason, a managing attorney in the public defender’s office, said in a statement.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fugees rapper sentenced to prison over illegal donations to Obama campaign

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Grammy-winning rapper Prakazrel “Pras” Michel of the Fugees was sentenced on Thursday to 14 years in prison for a case in which he was convicted of illegally funneling millions of dollars in foreign contributions to former President Barack Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign.

    Michel, 52, declined to address the court before U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly sentenced him.

    In April 2023, a federal jury convicted Michel of 10 counts, including conspiracy and acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign government. The trial in Washington, D.C., included testimony from actor Leonardo DiCaprio and former Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

    Justice Department prosecutors said federal sentencing guidelines recommended a life sentence for Michel, whom they said “betrayed his country for money” and “lied unapologetically and unrelentingly to carry out his schemes.”

    “His sentence should reflect the breadth and depth of his crimes, his indifference to the risks to his country, and the magnitude of his greed,” they wrote.

    Defense attorney Peter Zeidenberg said his client’s 14-year sentence is “completely disproportionate to the offense.” Michel will appeal his conviction and sentence, according to his lawyer.

    Zeidenberg had recommended a three-year prison sentence. A life sentence would be an “absurdly high” punishment for Michel given that it is typically reserved for deadly terrorists and drug cartel leaders, Michel’s attorneys said in a court filing.

    “The Government’s position is one that would cause Inspector Javert to recoil and, if anything, simply illustrates just how easily the Guidelines can be manipulated to produce absurd results, and how poorly equipped they are, at least on this occasion, to determine a fair and just sentence,” they wrote.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Federal jury awards $80 million to estate of NY man wrongfully convicted of murder

    [ad_1]

    BUFFALO, N.Y. — A federal jury awarded $80 million Wednesday to the estate of a Buffalo man whose conviction in a 1976 murder was overturned after he spent nearly a quarter century in prison.

    Darryl Boyd, one of the group of Black teenagers arrested for the murder of William Crawford sometimes called the Buffalo Five, filed the lawsuit in 2022 seeking damages and alleging Buffalo Police investigators and Erie County prosecutors had failed to disclose more than a dozen pieces of evidence that pointed to other suspects. The lawsuit also alleged investigators coerced witnesses to give false statements pointing to Boyd, and that prosecutors committed summation misconduct — making inappropriate or false comments in their closing arguments.

    “If not for the misdeeds of Defendants, Mr. Boyd would not have been prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned in violation of his constitutional rights, and would not have spent 45 years asserting his innocence and fighting for his liberty in connection with a crime that he did not commit,” Boyd’s attorneys wrote in the lawsuit.

    A spokesman for Erie County Executive Mark Poloncarz said the county extends its sympathy to Boyd’s family, but he believes the $80 million award is egregious and the county plans to appeal.

    After a two-and-a-half week trial, the federal jury in the Western District of New York took about an hour to return the massive verdict — billed by attorneys as one of the largest monetary awards for a wrongful conviction case in the U.S.

    After Boyd was released from prison, he spent another two decades on parole before his conviction was vacated by a judge in 2021. The county opted not to retry Boyd or John Walker Jr., whose conviction in the case was also vacated.

    A third man convicted in the killing, Darren Gibson, was released from prison in 2008 and died a year later. One of the other teens was acquitted at trial, and the fifth teen testified against the others, which Boyd’s attorneys said newly released case files show was coerced.

    Both Boyd and Walker had settled their case against the city of Buffalo for about $4.7 million each. Walker won a $28 million verdict against the county earlier this year, which the county has appealed.

    “He lost his whole adult life to this wrongful conviction. The jury heard just how many years he was suffering in maximum security prison. All the terrible things you assume happen in prison, happened in prison,” said Ross Firsenbaum, an attorney with WilmerHale, one of three firms representing Boyd’s estate.

    Firsenbaum said being released on parole was just as hard for Boyd who suffered from PTSD, anxiety and other ailments. He struggled to keep or get jobs because of the conviction and eventually began self-medicating and developed a substance abuse addiction.

    Boyd was diagnosed with terminal pancreatic cancer and died in 2023 before the trial could be held. His mother and son attended the trial every day, Firsenbaum said.

    “The (county) argued his substance use was the cause of his problems, not the 27 or so years he spent wrongfully in prison,” Firsenbaum said. “And that’s offensive. And the jury recognized that and responded with this verdict.”

    He added that the attorneys had proven there was a pattern and practice of misconduct at the time of the convictions, not just a misdeed by one employee.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Usher sues investors to recover $700,000 he lent to buy property for ‘Homage ATL’

    [ad_1]

    ATLANTA — The music artist and entertainment executive Usher is suing a group of investors who have been trying to open a new restaurant and lounge in Atlanta.

    Usher Raymond IV lent $1.7 million to the investor group toward the purchase of property for the planned Homage ATL, his lawyers said in a lawsuit filed recently in Atlanta.

    In late 2024, three men approached Usher with their plan to open the restaurant and lounge, which involved the purchase of a commercial property in the city’s Buckhead neighborhood, the lawsuit states. Usher declined to become an investor in Homage ATL, but he agreed to loan the group $1.7 million toward purchasing the property.

    The money had been sent to the trust account of Atlanta lawyer Alcide Honoré, who represented some of the investors and is named as a defendant in the lawsuit. After the deal never materialized, Usher requested that his money be returned. He was repaid $1 million in August, but communication then broke down and he has been unable to collect the remaining $700,000, the lawsuit states.

    Honoré on Wednesday referred questions to his attorney, Clifford Hardwick IV.

    “I have no substantive comment regarding a matter that is in litigation,” Hardwick said in an email to The Associated Press. “However, I am extremely confident that Mr. Honoré will be vindicated as to any civil liability in this case.”

    One of the defendants named in the lawsuit, record producer and songwriter Bryan-Michael Cox, said on Instagram that he is “a passive minority shareholder” in one of the companies involved. “While I’m unable to share more details right now, I want to make one thing absolutely clear: my 27-year friendship with Usher remains fully intact.”

    Two other men in the investment group, both from metro Atlanta, are also named as defendants. No lawyers for them were listed in the court records at this early stage of the lawsuit.

    [ad_2]

    Source link