ReportWire

Tag: trial and procedure

  • Man shot 9 times by South Carolina deputies files lawsuit alleging ‘reckless’ use of deadly force during wellness check | CNN

    Man shot 9 times by South Carolina deputies files lawsuit alleging ‘reckless’ use of deadly force during wellness check | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A South Carolina man, who survived being shot nine times by York County sheriff’s deputies responding to a “wellness check” call about him being suicidal two years ago, claims in a recent lawsuit that he was talking with his mother in his pickup truck when officers approached them “like cowboys from a John Wayne movie.”

    Trevor Mullinax and his mother, Tammy Beason, allege that deputies immediately drew their weapons and used deadly force without trying to deescalate the situation and are suing York County and the sheriff’s department for gross negligence, among other claims.

    The lawsuit, filed Friday and obtained by CNN, claims, “Sheriff’s deputies were grossly negligent, willful, wanton, careless, and reckless in their use of deadly force towards Plaintiff Mullinax and Plaintiff Beason, the same causing irreparable and permanent physical, mental, and emotional injury to Plaintiffs.”

    Mullinax was charged with pointing and presenting a weapon – by the State Law Enforcement Division in relation to their investigation of the shooting. That charge is still pending.

    However, attorneys for Mullinax said that while he was “lawfully in possession of a hunting shotgun” inside the truck, “at no point prior to, during, or after Sheriff’s deputies began shooting did Plaintiff Mullinax raise, point, or otherwise move with a weapon in such a fashion as would authorized Sheriff’s deputies to use deadly force.”

    In several dash and body camera videos viewed by CNN, there is no mention of seeing a gun before deputies begin firing their weapons at Mullinax’s truck. However, body camera footage shows deputies after the shooting discussing seeing a “shotgun or rifle.” A deputy can be heard saying he found a weapon in the truck.

    CNN obtained bodycam footage showing deputies with their guns drawn, surrounding the pickup truck, and demanding to see Mullinax’s hands before firing. The video also shows Beason standing beside the truck, speaking with her son through the driver’s side window. Attorneys for the family say officers fired nearly 50 shots at close range as he suffered a mental health crisis, claiming their client was contemplating suicide. Beason can be heard screaming and crying as she’s put into handcuffs by deputies. Attorneys for the family also accuse deputies of failing to render immediate medical aid to Mullinax.

    The lawsuit notes that a shocked Beason “dove backward” to avoid the bullets that hit the vehicle.

    Two years after the May 7, 2021, incident, both mother and son are suing for undetermined damages.

    Justin Bamberg, an attorney for Mullinax, said during a news conference on Tuesday that Mullinax had been hit several times by bullets, including directly in the back of his head.

    “Almost 50 shots fired at somebody who was in need of help. A citizen who was in need of help,” said Bamberg.

    Mullinax, who was present at the news conference, acknowledged that the shooting was triggered by a mental health crisis.

    “I can tell you that it’s hard to believe in the police when they destroyed everything I believe in that day,” Tammy Beason said during the news conference. “It’s taken me a very long time to recover from that. I’m still recovering.”

    According to a recording of the 911 call, a friend of Mullinax had called emergency services with another friend on a three-way call to report Mullinax was having a mental health crisis and was potentially suicidal.

    “We’re just trying to get our buddy some help,” the friend said. They told the dispatcher that they suspected the crisis was, in part, sparked by Mullinax’s belief there was a burglary warrant out for his arrest due to an incident the previous night.

    The 911 caller explained to the dispatcher that Mullinax’s mother was out with him, and that their friend “had locked himself in his truck with a knife – and I say that because I don’t want him to hop out and get shot, I don’t know if that’s his plan.” The friends provided cell phone numbers for Mullinax and his mother so law enforcement could contact them.

    However, the complaint alleges that the 911 dispatcher did not provide the responding deputies with the cellphone numbers she was given for Mullinax or his mother.

    The filing said that when deputies arrived on scene, they found Mullinax’s grandfather at the house. Body camera video obtained by CNN shows the grandfather directing deputies to where he thought Mullinax could have been parked.

    The 911 dispatcher relayed information to deputies about Mullinax being suicidal and the warrant, but deputies who arrived at the home seemed focused on the outstanding warrant based on comments recorded on body camera videos.

    “He’s got to go to jail,” a deputy said to Mullinax’s grandfather.

    As they approach the truck in the distance, a deputy can be heard in one dash camera video observing out loud that there is “somebody standing right beside” the truck and that Mullinax can be seen inside.

    Body camera video shows deputies arriving, shouting “hands up” and “hands, hands” before opening fire on the truck, with Beason still standing there, all in less than 10 seconds time.

    Tammy Beason, Mullinax's mother, on May 9, 2023.

    Mullinax was life flighted to a hospital in Charlotte, North Carolina, for his injuries. Dashcam video shows it appears at least 14 minutes went by before aid for Mullinax was provided by emergency services. He was handcuffed and removed from the pickup truck after the shooting.

    Deputies handcuffed Beason immediately after the shooting. She can be seen on body camera video hysterically crying while begging to see her son.

    “I was trying to get him to go in, and he was talking to me finally. He was talking to me. Why did y’all come? I could have done this peacefully. I could have done this peacefully,” sobbed Beason to a deputy, who captured the interaction on his body camera.

    In a news conference on Wednesday, York County Sheriff Kevin Tolson said his agency had not been served with a lawsuit and that he felt “forced” to address the claims.

    “I feel forced to address this suit out of what I consider to be the proper venue and that’s the court,” Tolson said. “I’ve never held a press conference about litigation, litigation that I haven’t even been served with yet.”

    Tolson said that Mullinax had active arrest warrants through the York Police Department for a violent felony and malicious injury to personal property. Sheriff’s deputies’ claim that Mullinax pulled and pointed a weapon at them when they arrived following a request for a wellness check for Mullinax. He said all four deputies fired their weapons at Mullinax

    “Four deputies approached an individual wanted for a violent felony who was armed with a knife and experiencing mental distress. As those deputies approached, this individual pulled a shotgun. Fearing for their safety, these deputies discharged their weapons at the individual,” said Tolson, who also claimed that Mullinax’s mother corroborated the deputies’ claims that her son grabbed a weapon when law enforcement arrived on scene.

    An image taken from video released by the York County Sheriff's Office shows the scene moments before officers opened fire on Mullinax's truck with him inside and his mother, seen in red, standing beside it on May 7, 2021.

    In response to that claim from the sheriff, attorneys for Mullinax and Beason told CNN “on the day of the shooting, Tammy Beason did tell SLED investigators that Trevor grabbed the shotgun but did so when he saw deputies driving down Highway 324, not as officers pulled right up to the front of his truck.”

    Tolson also said the SLED investigation shows upon arriving at the hospital after being by deputies, Mullinax told medical personnel that he wanted to kill himself but then “decided to have the police do it.”

    Tolson denounced criticism against police officers for their handling of situations “that should not be the responsibility of law enforcement” and said more mental health resources are needed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House Republicans allege Biden family members received millions in payments from foreign entities in new bank records report | CNN Politics

    House Republicans allege Biden family members received millions in payments from foreign entities in new bank records report | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    House Oversight Chairman James Comer laid out new details to support allegations that members of Joe Biden’s family including his son Hunter received millions of dollars in payments from foreign entities in China and Romania including when Biden was vice president, according to a memo obtained by CNN.

    New bank records cited in the memo were obtained by the committee through a subpoena and include payments made to companies tied to Hunter Biden. Republicans also alleged that Hunter Biden used his familial connections to help facilitate a meeting in 2016 between a Serbian running for United Nations Secretary-General and then-national security adviser to the vice president Colin Kahl.

    The foreign payments raise questions about Hunter Biden’s business activities while his father was vice president, but the committee does not suggest any illegality about the payments from foreign sources. The bank records by themselves also do not indicate the purpose of the payments that were made.

    The memo marks Comer’s most direct attempt to substantiate his allegations that Biden family members have enriched themselves off the family name. Comer has suggested that Biden may have been improperly influenced by the financial dealings, particularly by his family’s foreign business partners.

    But the latest report does not show any payments made directly to Joe Biden, either as vice president or after leaving office.

    Comer has been publicly teasing information for months about the paper trail committee Republicans have uncovered through subpoenas sent to multiple banks and trips to the Treasury Department to review records.

    Comer and other Republicans on the committee held a press conference Wednesday morning to tout their findings.

    “These people didn’t come to Hunter Biden because he understood world politics or that he was experienced in it, or that he understood Chinese businesses. They wanted him for the access his last name gave him,” Rep. Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican, said during the news conference.

    On Wednesday, Comer was asked about specific policy decisions Biden made while president or vice president that may have been directly influenced by these foreign payments. Comer failed to name any and instead pointed to then-vice president Biden traveling around the world and discussing foreign aid in the last year of the Obama administration, and added they think there are decisions Biden made as president that “put China first and America last.” Comer said the committee “will get into more of those later.”

    Ahead of the memo’s release, White House spokesperson Ian Sams said in a statement to CNN, “Congressman Comer has a history of playing fast and loose with the facts and spreading baseless innuendo while refusing to conduct his so-called ‘investigations’ with legitimacy. He has hidden information from the public to selectively leak and promote his own hand-picked narratives as part of his overall effort to lob personal attacks at the President and his family.”

    Abbe Lowell, counsel for Hunter Biden, said in a statement, “Today’s so-called “revelations” are retread, repackaged misstatements of perfectly proper meetings and business by private citizens. Instead of redoing old investigations that found no evidence of wronging by Mr. Biden, Rep. Comer should do the same examination of the many entities of former President Trump and his family members.”

    The top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Jamie Raskin, said in a statement to CNN, “Chairman Comer has failed to provide factual evidence to support his wild accusations about the President. He continues to bombard the public with innuendo, misrepresentations, and outright lies, recycling baseless claims from stories that were debunked years ago.”

    Bank records cited in the committee’s memo show that within five weeks of then-Vice President Biden’s meeting with Romanian President Klaus Iohannis in 2015, a Romanian who Hunter Biden was doing legal consulting for, Gabriel Popoviciu, started sending money to Rob Walker, a business associate of Hunter’s.

    Walker received more than $3 million from November 2015 to May 2017 and wired approximately $1 million in various installments to Hunter Biden, his business associate James Gillian, and Hallie Biden, the widow of the president’s oldest son, Beau Biden who died in May 2015. Hallie Biden and Hunter Biden were romantically involved for a period after Beau’s death.

    It has long been known that Hunter Biden did legal work for Popoviciu, a wealthy Romanian business executive who was convicted in 2016 on corruption charges.

    Comer’s memo raises questions about why Popoviciu was paying a Biden family business associate directly instead of the law firm where Hunter Biden worked at the time or the other firm Hunter reportedly referred Popoviciu to.

    Former President Donald Trump’s former lawyer Rudy Giuliani was also involved with Popoviciu, which Comer’s memo does not mention.

    Committee Republicans obtained the bank records from subpoenas to four different banks.

    The report also alleges that in 2016, Vuk Jeremic, a Serbian politician who was running for UN secretary-general, tried to use his business relationship with Hunter Biden and his associates to get a meeting with Kahl, who was then an aide in Biden’s vice president’s office.

    In a June 2016 email, Jeremic wrote to Hunter Biden and a business associate, Eric Schwerin, asking to “meet with VPOTUS National Security Advisor Colin Kahl” related to the UN secretary-general election.

    Schwerin instructed Hunter Biden to “Think about how you want to respond,” according to the report.

    In a July 2016 email, Jeremic followed up via email saying, “[m]y meeting with Colin did not last very long, but didn’t go too bad, I think. What is suboptimal is that OVP seems to be outside the decision-making loop on the UNSG elections issue. Colin promised to get better informed on what’s going on at the moment,” according to the report.

    Republicans said they intend to pursue more communications related to the matter, but concluded it appears that “a Biden administration official met with Jeremic to discuss the UN Secretary General election at the direction of Hunter Biden and/or his business associates.”

    Kahl did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Jeremic’s attorneys told the committee in a letter last month he would not cooperate with a request for documents and testimony due to separation of powers issues and because House rules limit subpoenas to people “within the United States.”

    The memo also alleges that two Chinese nationals made payments of $100,000 to Hunter Biden’s professional corporation through a Chinese-backed energy company. Republicans claim that at least one of those individuals had ties to the Communist Party of China.

    The memo alleges that those two individuals were connected to CEFC, a Chinese energy conglomerate, had a business relationship with Hunter Biden.

    Committee Republicans claim one of the individuals “used CEFC to bribe and corruptly influence foreign officials.”

    The memo includes a copy of a bank transaction showing that on August 4, 2017, CEFC Infrastructure wired $100,000 to Owasco P.C, Hunter Biden’s professional corporation.

    The memo also includes details from the bank records on how money was moved between companies, including a $100,000 payment to one of Hunter Biden’s companies that was then funded by a Chinese based firm tied to the CEFC, the Chinese energy conglomerate.

    Comer alleges the transaction “disproves President Biden’s claim that his family received no money from China.”

    In the report, the committee acknowledged there “exist legitimate commercial transactions with China-based entities and individuals.”

    “However, the pattern of behavior engaged in by the Bidens and their Chinese counterparties—memorialized in relevant bank records—signals an attempt to layer companies and cloud the source of money,” the committee alleges.

    Comer has previously revealed that members of Biden’s family received just over $1 million indirectly from State Energy HK Limited, a Chinese company.

    Senate Republicans in 2020 first detailed how Walker made wire transfers to companies associated with Hunter Biden and president’s brother, James, after receiving a $3 million wire from the Chinese company.

    The latest GOP memo claims Walker also sent some of that money to Hallie Biden and an unknown bank account identified as “Biden.”

    Committee Republicans said they are continuing to trace bank records and have written to additional witnesses involved in certain transactions to request documents as well as interviews.

    According to the report, Republicans intend to pursue legislative changes – a key step needed to justify their investigation if fights over subpoenas head to court.

    Those changes include laws that require additional reporting about the finances of a president or vice president’s family members, public disclosure of foreign transactions involving the family members of senior elected officials and an expedited law enforcement review of any suspicious bank activity reports related to a president or vice president’s immediately family members.

    Comer left the door open on whether his committee would investigate the foreign business dealings of former President Donald Trump and his family ahead of making any legislative recommendations to address influence peddling. To date however, Comer has not looked into Trump’s financial dealings or pursued an investigation into the classified documents that he had at Mar-a-Lago.

    “We’re going to look at everything when we get ready to introduce the legislation to ban influence peddling” Comer said. “This has been a pattern for a long time. Republicans and Democrats have both complained about Presidents’ families receiving money.”

    On the foreign business dealings of Trump’s son-in law, Jared Kushner, specifically, Comer said, “I’m not saying whether I agreed with what he did or not, but I actually know what his businesses are. What are the Biden businesses?”

    This story has been updated with additional reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Attorneys for Trump and E. Jean Carroll dispute character and evidence in closing arguments of civil rape trial | CNN Politics

    Attorneys for Trump and E. Jean Carroll dispute character and evidence in closing arguments of civil rape trial | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    E. Jean Carroll’s civil battery and defamation trial against Donald Trump neared a close Monday with closing arguments as her attorney told a federal jury in New York that no one is above the law, while Trump’s lawyer said not to hold any negative feelings about the former president against him.

    “In this country, even the most powerful person can be held accountable in court,” said attorney Roberta Kaplan. “No one, not even a former president, is above the law.”

    Trump attorney Joe Tacopina said he knows Trump is a divisive figure, but that shouldn’t matter to jurors when reaching a verdict.

    “People have very strong feelings about Donald Trump. That’s obvious,” Tacopina said. “There’s a time and a secret place to do that: it’s called a ballot box during an election.”

    “They want you to hate him enough to ignore the facts,” Tacopina added. “All objective evidence cuts against her.”

    Trump asked about infamous ‘Access Hollywood’ tape in deposition. See his reaction

    Carroll, a former magazine columnist, alleges Trump raped her in the Bergdorf Goodman department store in the spring of 1996 and then defamed her when he denied her claim, said she wasn’t his type and suggested she made up the story to boost sales of her book. Trump has denied all wrongdoing.

    Attorneys for Carroll and Trump rested their respective cases last Thursday. Carroll’s legal team put on 11 witnesses in her case, including the writer herself, over seven trial days. Trump did not put on a defense and ultimately opted not to testify, as is his right.

    Kaplan pointed out that Trump didn’t attend the trial, even though clips from his deposition were shown.

    “And you only saw him on video. He didn’t even bother to show up here in person,” Kaplan said.

    Carroll’s attorney showed clips of Trump’s video deposition taken last October including a moment where Trump mistook Carroll for his ex-wife. This shows, Kaplan said, that Carroll “was exactly his type.”

    Tacopina stressed that the former president did not need to appear in court to testify in his own defense.

    “How do you prove a negative?” Tacopina asked. “Challenging the story is our defense. There are no witnesses for us to call. There’s no witness for us to call because he was not there, it didn’t happen.”

    Tacopina said Trump did not defame Carroll when he denied her false accusations on social media. Trump’s lawyer told jurors not be confused by the verdict form when they see it. “If there’s no rape, there’s no defamation. There was no sexual assault and there was no defamation, they go hand in hand.”

    The jury again saw the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape and heard Trump describe how he aggressively moves on women without their consent because they let you “when you’re a star.”

    Trump revealed his “playbook” for handling women on the tape when he thought no one was listening, Kaplan said. “Telling you in his very own words how he treats women.”

    According to Kaplan, Trump and his lawyers want the jury to believe Carroll and the other witnesses in her case are a part of a huge “hoax” to take down the former president. “The big lie,” Kaplan called it.

    “There is only one person here who is lying and that person is Donald Trump,” Kaplan said.

    In order to side with Trump’s defense, “You’d need to conclude that Donald Trump, the nonstop liar, is the only person in this room telling the truth.”

    Tacopina responded by criticizing Trump’s language on the tape but said the crude nature still doesn’t make Carroll’s allegations true.

    “They’re trying to take parts of Donald Trump that you dislike or even hate,” Tacopina said. “You can think Donald Trump is a rude and crude person and that her story makes no sense. Both of those things can be true.”

    Carroll’s attorney also showed the jury a chart mapping how allegations from Carroll, Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff reveal a pattern of aggressive behavior. In each woman’s testimony at trial they described how Trump first engaged them in a semipublic place, then allegedly grabbed them suddenly, then later denied the allegations and said “she is too ugly for anyone to assault,” Kaplan said.

    Trump has denied Leeds’ and Stoynoff’s allegations against him.

    “Three different women, decades apart, but one single pattern of behavior. What happened to Ms. Carroll is not unique in that respect. Trump’s physical attacks and verbal attacks are his standard operational procedure,” Kaplan said.

    The jury in this case can award Carroll damages if they believe her account.

    “For E. Jean Carroll this lawsuit is not about the money,” Kaplan said. “It’s about getting her good name back.”

    “I’m not going to stand here and tell you how much you should award E. Jean Carroll in damages. What is the price for decades of living alone without companionship? No one to cook dinner with, no one to walk your dog with, no one to watch TV with. And feeling for decades that you’re dirty and unworthy,” Kaplan said. “I’m not going to put a number on that.”

    Responding in his closing, Tacopina accused Carroll of fabricating her rape allegations to sell her book and make money.

    “She’s abused this system, bringing false claims for, amongst other things, money, status, and political reasons,” Tacopina told the jury. “You cannot let her profit to the tune of millions of dollars for her abuse of this process.”

    District Judge Lewis Kaplan (no relation to Roberta Kaplan) is expected to instruct and charge the jury to begin deliberations on Tuesday.

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump will not testify in E. Jean Carroll battery trial | CNN Politics

    Trump will not testify in E. Jean Carroll battery trial | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump will not testify in the E. Jean Carroll civil battery and defamation trial after his attorney did not inform the court of any change in strategy before a judge-imposed deadline of 5 p.m. Sunday.

    While attorneys for Carroll and Trump rested their respective cases in the trial in Manhattan federal court on Thursday evening, District Judge Lewis Kaplan had left a window for Trump to testify, even as the former president’s attorney said that would be highly unlikely.

    The judge said he had ordered the precautionary measure in light of Trump’s public comments suggesting he would make an appearance in court before the trial ended.

    Carroll, a former magazine columnist, alleges Trump raped her in the Bergdorf Goodman department store in the mid-1990s and then defamed her when he denied her claim, said she wasn’t his type and suggested she made up the story to boost sales of her book. Trump has denied all wrongdoing.

    Closing arguments in the case are set to get underway Monday. The jury will likely get the case on Tuesday.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Hunter Biden’s aggressive new legal strategy initially caused anxiety at White House | CNN Politics

    Hunter Biden’s aggressive new legal strategy initially caused anxiety at White House | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The White House initially reacted with anxiety toward a decision by Hunter Biden’s lawyer to pursue an aggressive legal strategy against increasing Republican attacks on him, sources familiar with the matter told CNN.

    Much of the tension centered around Kevin Morris, the lawyer, bringing on attorney Abbe Lowell, who is known for his aggressive style and litigious nature. Since joining Hunter Biden’s legal team, Lowell has fired off letters demanding investigations into Biden’s opponents, filed a federal lawsuit in his defense and been involved in a child support dispute.

    According to multiple sources, senior White House officials and Democrats held a meeting late last year with Lowell, who was expected to be handling GOP-led congressional investigations into the president’s son but whose portfolio has since expanded.

    While some of the reticence at the White House around the new legal strategy has abated, sources told CNN, the initial anxiety about publicly pushing back against Hunter Biden’s detractors underscores some of the thorny issues that President Joe Biden must contend with as he runs for reelection.

    The president affirmed his support for his son in an interview that aired Friday on MSNBC, saying that the Justice Department’s investigation would not affect his presidency. “First of all, my son has done nothing wrong. I trust him. I have faith in him,” Biden told Stephanie Ruhle. “It impacts my presidency by making me feel proud of him.”

    A source close to Hunter Biden’s legal team said one reason the anxiety has died down is because the strategy has been successful. It’s also been assuaged in part thanks to the more open lines of communication between Lowell, the White House and President Biden’s personal attorney Bob Bauer, according to a person familiar with the matter.

    A senior Biden adviser insisted that the president’s advisers “don’t direct or advise” Hunter Biden’s legal team on what to do. The senior adviser stressed that Hunter Biden is a private citizen who has the right to make his own decisions about how to handle his legal strategy.

    A spokeswoman for Lowell declined to comment.

    Hunter Biden’s legal team also has been weighing the possibility of setting up a legal defense fund to help defray his legal bills, according to a person familiar with the matter. A key hurdle is whether they could create a fund with enough guardrails to protect against ethical conflicts for the Biden family.

    House Republicans have already launched an investigation into the Biden family’s business dealings, and a legal defense fund soliciting outside donations would be yet another target for congressional scrutiny.

    Late last year, shortly after Republicans won control of the House, Hunter Biden made it clear to the White House that he wanted to take a more aggressive approach in responding to attacks against him, according to a source familiar with this legal strategy.

    At the time, Republicans had made clear that the younger Biden was going to be their top target for congressional investigations. Hunter Biden was also still staring down a long-running federal criminal investigation focused on tax- and gun-related issues. And when there appeared to be no movement in the criminal probe for months, his lawyer Morris believed it was time to go on the offensive.

    As Hunter Biden and Morris moved ahead with their approach, a source familiar with the behind-the-scenes conversations described the White House as having a very negative reaction to the more aggressive strategy and surprise that Morris brought on Lowell.

    Multiple sources familiar with the legal strategy said the addition of Lowell caused tension even within the legal team. Josh Levy, one of Hunter Biden’s attorneys who had long been aligned with the Biden White House, resigned as Lowell joined the team.

    Levy declined to comment.

    The federal criminal investigation is ongoing, and Hunter Biden’s attorneys recently met with the Justice Department. Hunter Biden denies any wrongdoing.

    Since coming on board, Lowell has fired off letters calling for investigations into various officials. In one sent to the Office of Congressional Ethics, he requested an independent ethics review of GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s conduct for her public statements that “sound and read like school-yard insults rather than the work of a Member of Congress.”

    Another, sent to the Treasury Department’s inspector general, asked for a review of a former Donald Trump aide who allegedly acquired and published online financial activities of Hunter Biden, known as Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs). Hunter Biden’s legal team also recently filed a lawsuit accusing the aide of harassing Biden’s team.

    Earlier this week, Lowell traveled to Arkansas to represent Biden in a child support dispute that has become a proxy for Republican investigations, underscoring his wide-reaching involvement in his client’s legal troubles.

    Lowell also filed a lawsuit in March that accused a Delaware computer repair shop owner who worked on a laptop of trying to invade Biden’s privacy and wrongfully sharing his personal data for political purposes.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Key moments from the video of Trump’s deposition in E. Jean Carroll trial released to the public | CNN Politics

    Key moments from the video of Trump’s deposition in E. Jean Carroll trial released to the public | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The video deposition of Donald Trump played before the jury in the E. Jean Carroll civil battery and defamation trial was made public Friday, showing the former president discussing the accusations against him, the “Access Hollywood” tape and the Russia “hoax.”

    In the video, Trump confirms that he made the allegedly defamatory statements denying knowing Carroll, calling her allegations that he raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman’s dressing room in the mid-1990s a “hoax,” and saying she is not his type.

    He also tells Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, that she, too, is not his type. And many times during the deposition, he calls Carroll a series of names, including “nut job,” a “whack job” and “mentally sick.”

    The edited deposition runs for nearly an hour. Trump was interviewed in October 2022. He denies all allegations against him.

    Here are key moments from the deposition as reviewed by CNN:

    At one point, Trump is shown a black and white photograph that includes Carroll, but mistakes her for his second wife, Marla Maples. Holding the photo, he points at it and says, “That’s Marla, that’s my wife.”

    After his attorney, Alina Habba, intervenes, Trump says the photo is blurry.

    KAPLAN: You have in front of you a black and white photograph that we’ve marked as DJT 23. And I’m going to ask you, is this the photo that you were just referring to?

    TRUMP: I think so, yes.

    KAPLAN: And do you recall when you first saw this photo?

    TRUMP: At some point during the process, I saw it. That’s I guess her husband, John Johnson, who was an anchor for ABC, nice guy, I thought, I mean, I don’t know him but I thought he was pretty good at what he did. I don’t even know who the woman. Let’s see, I don’t know who – it’s Marla.

    KAPLAN: You’re saying Marla’s in this photo?

    TRUMP: That’s Marla, yeah. That’s, that’s my wife.

    KAPLAN: Which woman are you pointing to?

    TRUMP: Here

    HABBA: No, that’s Carroll.

    TRUMP: [inaudible] Oh I see.

    KAPLAN: The person you just pointed to is E. Jean Carroll.

    TRUMP: Who’s that, who’s this?

    HABBA: [inaudible] That’s your wife.

    KAPLAN: And the person, the woman on the right is your then-wife –.

    TRUMP: I don’t know, this was the picture. I assume that’s John Johnson. Is that –.

    HABBA: That’s Carroll.

    TRUMP: – Carroll, because it’s very blurry.

    Since Carroll came forward in 2019, Trump has repeatedly denied her allegations, often saying that she is “not my type.” Here, Kaplan asks Trump about a June 24, 2019, interview with The Hill, where the president used that phrase.

    KAPLAN: One of the other things that you said about Ms. Carroll at the time appears in your June 24 statement, which is DJT 22. And what you said there is, “I’ll say it with great respect. Number one, she’s not my type.” When you said that Ms. Carroll was not your type, you meant that she was not your type physically, right?

    TRUMP: I saw her in a picture. I didn’t know what she looked like. And I said it, and I say it with as much respect as I can, but she is not my type.

    After more back and forth with Trump repeating the claim, Kaplan ended the exchange:

    KAPLAN: I take it the three women you’ve married are all your type?

    TRUMP: Yeah.

    The former president continued insulting Carroll in denying her allegations.

    TRUMP: I still don’t know this woman. I think she’s a whack job. I have no idea. I don’t know anything about this woman other than what I read in stories and what I hear. I know, I know nothing about her.

    TRUMP: She said that I did something to her that never took place. There was no anything. I know nothing about this nut job.

    Trump appears the most agitated on the video when he denies the rape allegation, saying it is “the worst thing you can do. The worst charge.” He also says that he has a right to defend himself, and asks why, if he is insulted, he can’t insult someone back.

    Kaplan later asked Trump about a Truth Social post from October 12, 2022, where, among other things, he says, “And, while I am not supposed to say it, I will. This woman is not my type!”

    KAPLAN: Okay, then you go on to say in the statement, “And while I’m not supposed to say it, I will.” Why were you not supposed to say it?

    TRUMP: Because it’s not politically correct to say – read the next, go ahead, that she’s not my type. Yeah, because it’s not politically correct to say it, and I know that, but I’ll say it anyway. She’s accusing me of rape. A woman that I have no idea who she is. It came out of the blue. She’s accusing me of rape, of raping her. The worst thing you can do, the worst charge. And, and you know, you know it’s not true too. You’re a political operative also. You’re, you’re a disgrace. But she’s accusing me, and so are you, of rape, and it never took place. And I will tell you, I made that statement. And I said, well, it’s politically incorrect. She’s not my type. And that’s 100% true. She’s not my type.

    trump ireland

    New video shows Trump talking to reporters about E. Jean Carroll trial

    The deposition includes an exchange between Trump and Carroll’s attorneys about his frequent use of the word “hoax.”

    KAPLAN: Now, in your Truth Social statement on October 12, you use the word hoax. Specifically, you say, “It is a hoax and a lie just like all the other hoaxes that have been played on me for the past seven years.” Do you see that?

    TRUMP: Yeah.

    KAPLAN: Recall making that statement? And I take it what you’re saying there is Ms. Carroll fabricated her claim that you sexually assaulted her, correct?

    TRUMP: Yes, totally. 100%.

    KAPLAN: Fair to say, you’d agree with me, would you not, that you use the term hoax quite a lot?

    TRUMP: Yes, I do.

    KAPLAN: CNN reported that you used it more than 250 times in 2020. Does that sound right?

    TRUMP: Could be. I’ve had a lot of hoaxes played on me. This is one of them.

    KAPLAN: And how would, how would you define the word hoax?

    TRUMP: A fake story. A false story. A made up story.

    KAPLAN: Something that’s not true.

    TRUMP: Something that’s not true. Yes.

    KAPLAN: Sitting here today can you recall what else you have referred to as a hoax?

    TRUMP: Sure. The Russia Russia Russia hoax, it’s been proven to be a hoax. Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine hoax. The Mueller situation for two and a half years hoax – ended and no collusion. It was a whole big hoax. The lying to the FISA court hoax; the lying to Congress many times hoax by all these people, this scum that we have in our country; lying to Congress hoax; the spying on my campaign hoax. They spied on my campaign and now they admitted that was another hoax, and I could get a whole list of them. And this is a hoax too.

    KAPLAN: This, when you say this and that –.

    TRUMP: This ridiculous situation that we’re doing right now, it’s a big fat hoax. She’s a liar and she’s a sick person in my opinion, really sick. Something wrong with her.

    As the exchange continues, Kaplan asks Trump about his having called voting by mail a “hoax.” Trump acknowledges both that he said that and has, in fact, voted by mail himself.

    KAPLAN: Okay, in addition to the Russia Russia Russia hoax, the Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine hoax, the Mueller the Mueller or Mueller hoax, the lying to FISA hoax, the lying to Congress hoax, and the spying on your campaign hoax. Isn’t it true that you also referred to the use of mail in ballots as a hoax?

    TRUMP: Yeah, I do. I do. I think they’re very dishonest, mail in ballots, very dishonest.

    KAPLAN: And isn’t it true that you yourself have voted by mail?

    TRUMP: I do. I do. Sometimes I do. But I don’t know what happens to it once you, once you give it, I have no idea.

    Trump was also asked to react to the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape.

    He repeated his admonition that the exchange with Billy Bush captured on the videotape was “locker room talk,” and said it was historically something that stars – including himself – could get away with “fortunately or unfortunately.”

    KAPLAN: And you say – and again this has become very famous – in this video, ‘“I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the p*ssy. You can do anything.” That’s what you said. Correct?

    TRUMP: Well, historically, that’s true with stars.

    KAPLAN: It’s true with stars that they can grab women by the p*ssy?

    TRUMP: Well, that’s what, if you look over the last million years I guess that’s been largely true. Not always, but largely true. Unfortunately or fortunately.

    KAPLAN: And you consider yourself to be a star?

    TRUMP: I think you can say that. Yeah.

    KAPLAN: And now you said before, a couple of minutes ago, that this was just locker room talk.

    TRUMP: It’s locker room talk.

    KAPLAN: And so does that mean that you didn’t really mean it?

    TRUMP: No, it’s locker room talk. I don’t know. It’s just the way people talk.

    Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff both testified during the trial about times they say they were sexually assaulted by Trump, who has denied the accounts. Neither woman is a party to the Carroll litigation.

    Stoynoff said Trump forcibly kissed her on December 27, 2005, during a photoshoot and interview session at Mar-a-Lago for People magazine. A story on the Trumps was eventually published in 2006, and Stoynoff went public with her allegations during the 2016 presidential campaign.

    Trump addressed the claims during his deposition.

    KAPLAN: Okay, now, are you familiar with someone by the name of Natasha Stoynoff?

    TRUMP: No. You’ll have to give me a little bit of a background.

    KAPLAN: Do you remember she wrote about you a lot when she worked at People Magazine?

    TRUMP: Oh I do remember there was some woman that wrote and then she, a long time later, I think she wrote a wonderful story. And then a long time later, as I remember it, a long time later, she said that I was aggressive with her. But she wrote the most beautiful story. And then all of a sudden, like, is it a year or two years later, she comes out with this phony story. That I was aggress-, I said, well, why would she have written such a good story for People Magazine, she wrote a really nice piece. And then all of a sudden, like, you know, years or months, many months later, she came up with this phony charge.

    Leeds, a woman who has claimed Trump sexually assaulted her while sitting in first class on an airplane in the late 1970s, also testified. Trump again denied the claims in his deposition.

    TRUMP: This woman made up a story, just like your client made it up. Just made up a story having to do with sitting me and sitting next to me in an airplane. And I mean, I’ll have to read this again, but that story was so false, also. But this was, I guess, making out as opposed to what your client said. This story was so false. This is a disgrace also.

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Adidas sued by shareholders over its failed Ye partnership | CNN Business

    Adidas sued by shareholders over its failed Ye partnership | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Adidas shareholders filed a class-action lawsuit against the brand, accusing it of failing to warn investors about the antisemitism and “extreme behavior” exhibited by the rapper formerly known as Kanye West, before their partnership ended last year.

    In the lawsuit, filed Friday in a federal court, shareholders allege that Adidas “routinely ignored” his behavior as early as 2018. They claim that senior executives “ignored serious issues” affecting the Yeezy partnership, namely his antisemitic remarks and troubling public comments about slavery.

    In a report from that year, Adidas was “generally alluding” to the risks “rather than stating that the company had actually considered ending the partnership as a result of West’s personal behavior,” according to the lawsuit. During that time, Ye said that slavery was a “choice” in a TMZ interview.

    The lawsuit said that Adidas was aware of his behavior and that the company “failed to take meaningful precautionary measures to limit negative financial exposure” if the partnership ended.

    The lawsuit doesn’t name the rapper, who now goes by Ye. Adidas’ Chief Financial Officer Harm Ohlmeyer and former CEO Kasper Rørsted are named as defendants. The suit covers anyone who bought an Adidas share from May 3, 2018 (when Ye made the slavery remark) until 2023.

    “We outright reject these unfounded claims and will take all necessary measures to vigorously defend ourselves against them,” Adidas said in a comment to CNN.

    Adidas

    (ADDDF)
    ended its almost decade-long partnership in October 2022 after Ye wore a “White Lives Matter” T-shirt in public. The Anti-Defamation League categorizes the phrase as a hate slogan used by White supremacist groups, including the Ku Klux Klan. Days later, Ye said “I can say antisemitic s*** and Adidas

    (ADDDF)
    cannot drop me” during a podcast taping.

    Adidas said that its partnership with Ye ended because it “does not tolerate antisemitism and any other sort of hate speech” and said his comments were “unacceptable, hateful and dangerous.” It also said they violated the company’s “values of diversity and inclusion, mutual respect and fairness.”

    The company said in February that it was expected to lose $1.3 billion in revenue this year because it’s unable to sell the designer’s Yeezy clothing and shoes. In a statement, Adidas said its financial guidance for 2023 “accounts for the significant adverse impact from not selling the existing stock.” If the company can’t repurpose any of the remaining Ye clothing, Adidas said that could cost the company $534 million in operating profit this year.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jordan subpoenas CDC, other federal agencies over censorship concerns | CNN Politics

    Jordan subpoenas CDC, other federal agencies over censorship concerns | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The House Judiciary Committee has sent subpoenas to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, and the Global Engagement Center for documents as it continues to investigate whether the federal government pressured social media companies to censor certain viewpoints.

    The subpoenas mark an escalation in the panel’s inquiry, as House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan described the agencies responses to previous voluntary request in March as “inadequate” in the subpoena cover letter and said that none of the agencies have produced any documents responding to previous requests to date.

    Jordan, a Republican, has long claimed that the federal government and big tech companies have been “weaponized” against conservatives, and leads a subcommittee on that topic.

    The subpoena letters do not list any specific allegations the committee is investigating but raises the concern over censorship more broadly. The subpoenas set a document deadline of May 22 for a broad request of information and communications.

    Through the subpoenas to the CDC, CISA (which is a part of the Department of Homeland Security) and the Global Engagement Center, under the Department of State’s purview, the Judiciary panel claims to be seeking information about the extent to which the Executive Branch “pressured and colluded” with social media and other tech companies and others to “censor certain viewpoints on social and other media in ways that undermine First Amendment principles.”

    Conservative critics have said that correspondence released by Twitter owner and CEO Elon Musk late last year demonstrates a willingness by social media publishers to act on requests by government officials to suppress certain points of view. Federal officials, however, have rejected this accusation.

    “The Department of Homeland Security does not censor speech and does not request that content be taken down by social media companies,” a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson told CNN. “Instead of working with the Department, as numerous committees have done this Congress, the House Judiciary Committee has unnecessarily escalated to a subpoena. DHS will continue cooperating appropriately with Congressional oversight requests, all while faithfully working to protect our nation from terrorism and targeted violence, secure our borders, respond to natural disasters, defend against cyberattacks, and more.”

    The Judiciary panel “made no effort to work with DHS through traditional channels” a source familiar with the backchanneling between the committee and DHS said.

    Outlining the scope of the agency, the source added that CISA provides guidance on foreign influence operations, disinformation tactics and issues of election security and shares that information with state and local election officials. In the 2018 and 2020 election cycles, CISA shared potential election security related disinformation identified by local authorities with social media companies, but did not do so in the 2022 election cycle. The source emphasized, “platforms make their own decisions according to their policies and terms of service.”

    CNN has reached out to the other agencies for comment as well.

    Jordan claims that the subpoenas will help his panel determine if legislation is needed to create “new statutory limits on the Executive Branch’s ability to work with social media platforms and other companies to restrict the circulation of content and deplatform users.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Woman pleads guilty to 1990 murder of a Florida mother while dressed as a clown but still denies committing the crime | CNN

    Woman pleads guilty to 1990 murder of a Florida mother while dressed as a clown but still denies committing the crime | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Three decades after a woman in Florida was fatally shot by a person dressed as a clown, the longtime suspect – who went on to marry the victim’s widower – has pleaded guilty even as her lawyers maintain she is innocent.

    Sheila Keen-Warren, 59, withdrew her earlier plea of not guilty and entered a guilty plea on Tuesday as part of a plea deal with prosecutors just weeks before the case was set to go to trial.

    She pleaded guilty to second-degree murder in the May 1990 killing of Marlene Warren, who was shot and killed at her home near West Palm Beach, Florida, as her son and his friends were eating breakfast inside.

    On the morning of the killing, Warren answered her door to find someone dressed as clown and clutching two balloons and a flower arrangement. The costumed person handed Warren the gifts and then pulled out a gun and shot her in the face, authorities said.

    Warren died in a hospital two days later.

    Twenty-seven years after the killing, Keen-Warren, who had since married Marlene Warren’s widowed husband, was arrested and charged with the crime in 2017.

    As part of her plea deal, Warren will be sentenced to 12 years in prison, with credit for the time she has been serving since her arrest.

    The victim’s son approved the plea terms, prosecutor Reid Scott said in court.

    “After years of professing her innocence, Sheila Keen Warren has finally been forced to admit that she was the one who dressed as a clown and took the life of an innocent victim,” State Attorney for Palm Beach County Dave Aronberg said in statement.

    Keen-Warren’s attorney, however, told CNN that she maintains her innocence but is happy with the plea terms.

    “This woman should never have been arrested or prosecuted,” her attorney Greg Rosenfeld said, “She was looking forward to her day in court.”

    Ultimately, Rosenfeld said, the plea deal was the best available option to Keen-Warren. “You never know what could happen in trial,” he said.

    If the case had gone to trial, Scott said in part in court, evidence submitted by prosecutors “would lead a jury to find her guilty of the crime.”

    When asked by the judge if she agreed with the prosecutor’s statements, Keen-Warren replied, “Yes, sir.”

    When detectives were first investigating the case, they heard rumors that the victim’s husband, Michael Warren, was having an affair with Sheila Keen, but the pair denied being in a relationship at the time, authorities said in 2017.

    Twelve years after his late wife’s killing, Michael Warren married Sheila Keen, now Keen-Warren, authorities said.

    Though Keen-Warren had long been a suspect in the case, evidence available in 1990 was just not strong enough to secure a conviction, investigators said at the time of her arrest.

    A major break didn’t come until 2014, when the the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office cold case unit reopened the investigation and were able to use advancements in DNA technology to strengthen their evidence, the office said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jordan subpoenas FBI human resources official | CNN Politics

    Jordan subpoenas FBI human resources official | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan has issued a subpoena to Jennifer Leigh Moore, executive assistant director of human resources at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, demanding she answer questions from the select subcommittee on the so-called weaponization of the federal government.

    Russell Dye, Jordan’s spokesperson, claimed in a statement Monday that Moore “refused to answer questions” about the FBI’s alleged retaliation against conservatives during a previous transcribed interview with the panel.

    CNN has reached out to the FBI for comment.

    Jordan and his fellow Republicans say they have heard from “whistleblowers” who disclosed that the FBI is attempting to “purge” employees with conservative views.

    “We have received protected whistleblower disclosures that the FBI is engaging in a ‘purge’ of employees with conservative views by revoking their security clearances and indefinitely suspending these employees. Many of the formal notices for these adverse personnel actions have been signed by you,” Jordan, an Ohio Republican, wrote in his September letter to Moore.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tucker Carlson out at Fox News | CNN Business

    Tucker Carlson out at Fox News | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Fox News and Tucker Carlson, the right-wing extremist who hosted the network’s highly rated 8pm hour, have severed ties, the network said in a stunning announcement Monday.

    The announcement came one week after Fox News settled a monster defamation lawsuit with Dominion Voting Systems for $787.5 million over the network’s dissemination of election lies. Fox News said that Carlson’s last show was Friday, April 21.

    Carlson was a top promoter of conspiracy theories and radical rhetoric at the network. Not only did he repeatedly sow doubt about the legitimacy of the 2020 election, but he also promoted conspiracy theories about the Covid-19 vaccines and elevated white nationalist talking points.

    Jonathan Greenblatt, the head of the Anti-Defamation League, praised Fox News’ decision, saying it is “about time” and that “for far too long, Tucker Carlson has used his primetime show to spew antisemitic, racist, xenophobic and anti-LGBTQ hate to millions.”

    Tucker Carlson was a key figure in Dominion Voting Systems’ mammoth defamation lawsuit against Fox News, which the parties settled last week on the brink of trial for a historic $787 million.

    In some ways, Carlson played an outsized role in the litigation: Only one of the 20 allegedly defamatory Fox broadcasts mentioned in the lawsuit came from Carlson’s top-rated show. But, as CNN exclusively reported, he was set to be one of Dominion’s first witnesses to testify at trial. And his private text messages, which became public as part of the suit, reverberated nationwide.

    Dominion got its hands on Carlson’s group chat with fellow Fox primetime stars Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham, and a trove of other messages from around the 2020 presidential election.

    These communications revealed that Carlson told confidants that he “passionately” hated former President Donald Trump and that Trump’s tenure in the White House was a “disaster.” He also used misogynistic terms to criticize pro-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell and reject her conspiracies about the 2020 election – even as those wild theories got airtime on Fox News.

    The lawsuit exposed how Carlson privately held a wholly different view than his on-air persona. A Dominion spokesperson did not comment on Carlson’s departure from Fox.

    Carlson was also one of the biggest promoters of conspiracy theories in right-wing media, sowing doubt about the 2020 presidential election, the January 6 insurrection, and Covid-19 vaccines.

    In the two years since the attack on the US Capitol, the Fox primetime host used his huge platform to amplify paper-thin theories that the attack was a false-flag operation orchestrated by the FBI and government agents because they loathed Trump, and that the criminal rioters were themselves the victims.

    The baseless theory originated from a right-wing website, and Carlson catapulted it into the mainstream by repeatedly featuring it on his show. He routinely suggested that Capitol rioter and Trump supporter Ray Epps was actually an FBI provocateur who sparked the deadly riot.

    In a “60 Minutes” interview that aired Sunday night, Epps had this to say about Carlson’s lies: “He’s obsessed with me. He’s going to any means possible to destroy my life and our lives.”

    Carlson’s disinformation campaign about January 6 reached its apex just a few months ago, with an assist from the newly installed House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, a California Republican.

    The top-rated Fox host obtained and aired never-before-seen footage from Capitol security cameras, but the clips were cherry-picked and selectively edited. He said on his program that he ran the tapes by the US Capitol Police before airing the material, but they disputed his claim.

    Abby Grossberg, the ex-Fox News producer who has since disavowed the network, claimed in recent lawsuits that there was rampant sexism and misogyny among Tucker Carlson’s show team.

    Grossberg, who joined Carlson’s team after the 2020 election, said in her lawsuit that after her first day on the job that “it became apparent how pervasive the misogyny and drive to embarrass and objectify women was among the male staff at TCT,” referring to “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”

    Fox News is aggressively fighting two lawsuits from Grossberg. A Fox spokesperson previously said the lawsuits were “riddled with false allegations against the network and our employees.”

    In a lawsuit filed last month, Grossberg said Carlson “was very capable of using such disgusting language about women in the workplace.” She cited some of Carlson’s private texts, where he used the phrase “c-nt” to refer to Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, a top 2020 election denier.

    Her lawsuits also describe seeing sexually suggestive posters that were visible in the workplace, facing “uncomfortable sexual questions” about her former Fox News boss Maria Bartiromo, and witnessing internal debates on which women politicians were “more f–kable.”

    In a TV interview, she said the sexual harassment was so bad that she considered suicide.

    Carlson’s departure at Fox News comes after the network also severed ties with right-wing bomb thrower Dan Bongino, who had been a regular fixture on the network’s programming, in addition to hosting a weekend show.

    “Folks, regretfully, last week was my last show on Fox News on the Fox News Channel,” Bongino said on Rumble, chalking up the exit to a contract dispute.

    “So the show ending last week was tough. And I want you to know it’s not some big conspiracy. I promise you. There’s not, there’s no acrimony. This wasn’t some, like, WWE brawl that happened. We just couldn’t come to terms on an extension. And that’s really it.”

    Fox News responded in a statement, “We thank Dan for his contributions and wish him success in his future endeavors.”

    Shares of Fox Corp.

    (FOXA)
    fell 5% on the news. The stock had been up slightly before the announcement. Carlson did not immediately respond to a CNN request for comment.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • NAACP files lawsuit after Mississippi governor signs legislation expanding state control over Jackson’s judicial system and policing | CNN

    NAACP files lawsuit after Mississippi governor signs legislation expanding state control over Jackson’s judicial system and policing | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The NAACP filed a lawsuit Friday to challenge new legislation signed by Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves that expands the state’s law enforcement reach in the city of Jackson and implements major changes to its judicial system.

    The laws signed Friday “represent a state takeover of Jackson” and strip residents of their right to democratically elect leaders, the NAACP said in a statement.

    One of the laws, SB 2343, will expand the state-controlled Capitol Police jurisdiction from its current boundaries around state buildings to a substantially larger portion of the city. The other, HB 1020, will establish a new court system within the boundaries of a state-created district.

    The legislation will strengthen public safety in Mississippi’s capital city amid a spike in crime, Reeves said in a statement, and Capitol Police officers will provide “additional bandwidth” for Jackson’s officers to patrol other parts of the city.

    “This legislation won’t solve the entire problem, but if we can stop one shooting, if we can respond to one more 911 call – then we’re one step closer to a better Jackson,” Reeves said.

    Critics have strongly opposed the two bills as they went through the state legislature, saying such changes would put mostly White, conservative state officials in control over much of a Democratic city where more than 80% of residents are Black.

    Jackson Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba has previously called the legislation to create an unelected court system “an attack on Black leadership.”

    NAACP officials say the state can instead do more elsewhere to alleviate problems in Jackson.

    “If elected officials in Mississippi want to help address the results of their negligence and improve the lives of Jackson residents, they should start with completing improvements to Jackson’s water system, not undermining the constitutional rights of their citizens,” NAACP President and CEO Derrick Johnson said in a statement.

    The new court system established will be within the boundaries of a state-created district known as the Capitol Complex Improvement District – an area that includes the state Capitol building, downtown, Jackson State University, and nearby neighborhoods and businesses.

    That judge will be appointed, not elected, by the Republican state chief justice with prosecuting attorneys appointed by the Republican state attorney general to help with low-level cases.

    Republican lawmakers who pushed the legislation say it’s needed to address huge court backlogs and to stem violence that spiked in the city in recent years – much to the disagreement of the laws’ critics.

    The laws “represent a disturbing regression, rolling back decades of progress by stripping Jackson residents of their fundamental right to democratically elect leaders, undermining the authority of those they have elected, and severely restricting their first amendment right to freedom of speech,” said former US Attorney General Eric Holder, who is senior counsel at the law firm that filed the NAACP’s suit.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell ordered to follow through with $5 million payment to expert who debunked his false election data | CNN Politics

    My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell ordered to follow through with $5 million payment to expert who debunked his false election data | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell has been ordered to shell out $5 million to an expert who debunked his data related to the 2020 election, according to a decision by the arbitration panel obtained by CNN.

    Lindell, a purveyor of election conspiracies, vowed to award the multimillion-dollar sum to any cyber security expert who could disprove his data. An arbitration panel awarded Robert Zeidman, who has decades in software development experience, a $5 million payout on Wednesday after he sued Lindell over the sum.

    CNN has obtained arbitration documents and video depositions, including a deposition of Lindell, related to the dispute.

    “Based on the foregoing analysis, Mr. Zeidman performed under the contract,” the arbitration panel wrote in its decision. “He proved the data Lindell LLC provided, and represented reflected information from the November 2020 election, unequivocally did not reflect November 2020 election data. Failure to pay Mr. Zeidman the $5 million prized was a breach of the contract, entitling him to recover.”

    The decision marks yet another blow to the MyPillow CEO’s credibility after he publicly touted unproven claims of widespread fraud in the 2020 presidential election. Lindell has also faced defamation suits related to his election claims.

    “The lawsuit and verdict mark another important moment in the ongoing proof that the 2020 election was legal and valid, and the role of cybersecurity in ensuring that integrity,” said Brian Glasser, founder of Bailey & Glasser, LLP, who represented Zeidman. “Lindell’s claim to have 2020 election data has been definitively disproved.”

    In a brief phone interview with CNN, Lindell said “this will end up in court” and slammed the media and professed the need to get rid of electronic voting machines.

    Zeidman told CNN’s Erin Burnett on “OutFront” Thursday he was relieved by the judgment, adding that he sued not for the money, but to disprove election lies.

    “I have some friends who I hope will still be friends because I am a conservative Republican,” Zeidman said. “But I thought the truth needed to come out.”

    Lindell convened a so-called “cyber symposium” in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, in 2021, designed to showcase the data he claimed to have obtained related to the 2020 election. He invited journalists, politicians and cybersecurity experts to attend.

    “The symposium was to get the big audience and have all the media there and then they – the cyber guys – saying yes this data is from the 2020 election and you better look at how they intruded into our machines, our computers, and that was the whole purpose,” Lindell said in a deposition obtained by CNN.

    He also announced a “Prove Mike Wrong Challenge” – in which anyone who could prove his data was unrelated to the 2020 election could win the multimillion payout – to get more traction in the media for his election fraud claims.

    “I thought, well what if I put up a $5 million challenge out there, then it would get news, which it did,” Lindell said in the deposition. “So, then you got some attention.”

    Zeidman signed up for the challenge, agreed to its contractual terms and discovered Lindell’s data to be largely nonsensical.

    “Normally data analysis could take weeks or months and I had three days,” Zeidman told CNN. “But the data was so obviously fake that I spent a few hours before I could show it was fake.”

    While Lindell has made a variety of outlandish and unproven claims about the 2020 election, such as insisting foreign governments infiltrated voting machines, the arbitration panel made clear its judgment was solely focused on whether the data Lindell provided to experts was related to the 2020 election.

    “The Contest did not require participants to disprove election interference. Thus, the contestants’ task was to prove the data presented to them was not valid data from the November 2020 election,” the arbitration panel wrote.

    “The Panel was not asked to decide whether China interfered in the 2020 election. Nor was the Panel asked to decide whether Lindell LLC possessed data that proved such interference, or even whether Lindell LLC had election data in its possession,” according to the arbitration panel. “The focus of the decision is on the 11 files provided to Mr. Zeidman in the context of the Contest rules.”

    The panel’s decision ticked through each of the data files provided Zeidman, determining repeatedly that the data was unrelated to the 2020 election.

    It’s unclear when or if Zeidman will ever be able to collect his payout. Lindell recently told right-wing podcaster and former Trump administration official Steve Bannon that his company took out nearly $10 million in loans as he battles defamation suits related to his false election claims.

    “I’m afraid he’s going to be out of money before I ever see my five million,” Zeidman told Burnett.

    During his deposition, Lindell said he was never concerned someone might actually win the challenge.

    “No, because they have to show it wasn’t from 2020 and it was,” Lindell said, chuckling.

    This story has been updated with additional information.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Supreme Court clears way for Texas death row inmate Rodney Reed to try to use DNA to prove innocence | CNN Politics

    Supreme Court clears way for Texas death row inmate Rodney Reed to try to use DNA to prove innocence | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Supreme Court cleared the way on Wednesday for Texas death row inmate Rodney Reed to seek post-conviction DNA evidence to try to prove his innocence.

    Reed claims an all-White jury wrongly convicted him of killing of Stacey Stites, a 19-year-old White woman, in Texas in 1998.

    Texas had argued that he had waited too long to bring his challenge to the state’s DNA procedures in federal court, but the Supreme Court disagreed. Now, he can go to a federal court to make his claim.

    The ruling was 6-3. Justice Brett Kavanaugh delivered the opinion of the court and was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

    Since Reed’s conviction, Texas courts had rejected his various appeals. Celebrities such as Kim Kardashian and Rihanna have expressed support, signing a petition asking the state to halt his eventual execution.

    The case puts a new focus on the testing of DNA crime-scene evidence and when an inmate can make a claim to access the technology in a plea of innocence. To date, 375 people in the United States have been exonerated by DNA testing, including 21 who served time on death row, according to the Innocence Project, a group that represents Reed and other clients seeking post-conviction DNA testing to prove their innocence.

    Kavanaugh, in his opinion Wednesday, said that the court agreed to hear the case because federal appeals courts have disagreed about when inmates can make such claims without running afoul of the statute of limitations. Kavanaugh said Reed could make the claim after the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ultimately denied his request for rehearing, rejecting an earlier date set out by the appeals court.

    “Significant systemic benefits ensue from starting the statute of limitations clock when the state litigation in DNA testing cases like Reed’s has concluded,” Kavanaugh said.

    He noted that if any problems with a defendant’s right to due process “lurk in the DNA testing law” the case can proceed through the appellate process, which could ultimately render a federal lawsuit unnecessary.

    Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented.

    Alito, joined by Gorsuch in his dissent, said Reed should have acted more quickly to bring his appeal. “Instead,” Alito wrote, “he waited until an execution date was set.”

    Alito charged Reed with making the “basic mistake of missing a statute of limitations.”

    Reed has been on death row for the murder of Stites.

    A passerby found Stites’ body near a shirt and a torn piece of belt. Investigators targeted Reed because his sperm was found inside her. Reed acknowledged the two were having an affair, but says that her fiancé, a local police officer named Jimmy Fennell, was the last to see her alive.

    Reed claims that over the last two decades he has discovered a “considerable body of evidence” demonstrating his innocence. Reed claims that the DNA testing would point to Fennell as the murder suspect. Fennell was later jailed for sexually assaulting a woman in his custody and Reed claims that numerous witnesses said he had threatened to strangle Stites with a belt if he ever caught her cheating on him. Reed seeks to test the belt found at the scene that was used to strangle Stites.

    The Texas law at issue allows a convicted person to obtain post-conviction DNA testing of biological material if the court finds that certain conditions are met. Reed was denied. He came to the Supreme Court in 2018 and was denied again. Now he is challenging the constitutionality of the Texas law arguing that the denial of the DNA testing violates his due process rights. 

    But the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals held that he waited too long to bring the claim. “An injury accrues when a plaintiff first becomes aware, or should have become aware, that his right had been violated.” The court said that he became aware of that in 2014 and that his current claim is “time barred.” 

    Reed’s lawyers argued that he could only bring the claim once the state appeals court had ruled, at the end of state court litigation. In court, Parker Rider-Longmaid said that the “clock doesn’t start ticking” until state court proceedings come to an end. He said Texas’ reading of the law would mean that other procedures in the appellate process are “irrelevant.”

    This story has been updated with additional developments.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘Difficult to say with a straight face’: Tapper reacts to Fox News’ statement on settlement | CNN Politics

    ‘Difficult to say with a straight face’: Tapper reacts to Fox News’ statement on settlement | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

    ‘Difficult to say with a straight face’: Tapper reacts to Fox News’ statement on settlement

    A settlement has been reached in Dominion Voting Systems’ defamation case against Fox News, the judge for the case announced. The network will pay more than $787 million to Dominion, a lawyer for the company said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Two Russians claiming to be former Wagner commanders admit killing children and civilians in Ukraine | CNN

    Two Russians claiming to be former Wagner commanders admit killing children and civilians in Ukraine | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Two Russian men who claim to be former Wagner Group commanders have told a human rights activist that they killed children and civilians during their time in Ukraine.

    The claims were made in video interviews with Gulagu.net, a human rights organization targeting corruption and torture in Russia.

    In the video interviews posted online, former Russian convicts Azamat Uldarov and Alexey Savichev – who were both pardoned by Russian presidential decrees last year, according to Gulagu.net – described their actions in Ukraine, during Russia’s invasion.

    CNN cannot independently verify their claims or identities in the videos but has obtained Russian penal documents showing they were released on presidential pardon in September and August of 2022.

    Uldarov, who appears to have been drinking, details how he shot and killed a five- or six-year-old girl.

    “(It was) a management decision. I wasn’t allowed to let anyone out alive, because my command was to kill anything in my way,” he said.

    According to Gulagu.net, the testimonies were given to founder and Russian dissident Vladimir Osechkin over the span of a week. It said Uldarov and Savichev were in Russia when they spoke.

    “I want Russia and other nations to know the truth. I don’t want war and bloodshed. You see I’m holding a cigarette in this hand. I followed orders with this hand and killed children,” Uldarov said, describing his motivation for the interview.

    The Wagner Group is a Russian private mercenary organization fighting in Ukraine, headed by Russian oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin.

    It has recruited tens of thousands of fighters from Russian jails, offering freedom and cash after a six-month tour. It’s estimated by Western intelligence officials and prison advocacy groups that between 40,000 and 50,000 men were recruited.

    Uldarov said in the eastern Ukrainian cities of Soledar and Bakhmut – which have seen some of the fiercest fighting – Wagner mercenaries “were given the command to annihilate everyone.”

    “There is a superior over all the commanders – it’s Prigozhin, who told us not to let anyone get out of there and annihilate everyone,” he added. CNN has previously reported on former Wagner fighters making similar claims.

    Uldarov has since appeared to recant his account in a video call with Prigozhin-linked Russian news agency RIA-FAN.

    At one point in the interview, Savichev described how they “got the order to execute any men who were 15 years or older.”

    He also talked about getting orders to ‘sweep’ a house. “It doesn’t matter whether there is a civilian there or not. The house needs to be swept. I didn’t give a f**k who was inside,” he said.

    “Whether a hut or a house, the point was to make sure that there wasn’t a single living person left inside,” he said. “You can condemn me for this. I will not object. It’s your right. But I wanted to live, too.”

    Savichev said Wagner fighters who did not follow orders were killed.

    Wagner Group chief Prigozhin confirmed on his Telegram channel that he had watched parts of the video, and threatened retribution against the two former Wagner fighters. “As for what (Osechkin) filmed, I looked at the pieces of video I managed to see,” he said. “I can say the following: if at least one of these accusations against me is confirmed, I am ready to be held accountable according to any laws.”

    But Prigozhin said that “if none is confirmed, I will send a list of 30-40 people who are spitting at me like Osechkin (there is a whole list of them, including the scum that fled Russia) that the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine is obligated to hand over to me for a ‘fair trial,’ so to speak.”

    “They will not be “civilians” for us, and especially not children, whom we have never touched and do not touch. This is a flagrant lie. These people (spreading the lies) are our enemies, and we will deal with them in a special way.”

    Earlier, Prigozhin said on Telegram: “Regarding the execution of children, of course, no one ever shoots civilians or children, absolutely no one needs this. We came there to save them from the regime they were under.”

    Andriy Yermak, head of the Ukrainian president’s office, said in a tweet Monday that the group must be held accountable.

    “Russian terrorists confessed to numerous murders of Ukrainian children in Bakhmut and Soledar. Confession is not enough. There must be a punishment. Tough and fair. And it will definitely be. How many more crimes like these have been committed?” he said.

    In February, CNN spoke to two former Wagner fighters who described how recruited Wagner convicts are pushed to the front lines in a human wave, reminiscent of World War I charges. Deserters, or those who refuse orders are killed and there was no evacuation of the wounded, they said.

    In January, US Treasury Department designated Wagner Group as a significant transnational criminal organization, and imposed a slew of fresh sanctions on a transnational network that supports it.

    The US Department of State concurrently announced a number of sanctions meant to “target a range of Wagner’s key infrastructure – including an aviation firm used by Wagner, a Wagner propaganda organization, and Wagner front companies,” according to US Secretary of State Antony Blinken.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Supreme Court seems sympathetic to postal worker who didn’t work Sundays in dispute over religious accommodations | CNN Politics

    Supreme Court seems sympathetic to postal worker who didn’t work Sundays in dispute over religious accommodations | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The Supreme Court seemed to side with a former mail carrier, an evangelical Christian, who says the US Postal Service failed to accommodate his request to not work on Sundays.

    A lower court had ruled against the worker, Gerald Groff, holding that his request would cause an “undue burden” on the USPS and lead to low morale at the workplace when other employees had to pick up his shifts.

    But during oral arguments on Tuesday, there appeared to be consensus, after almost two hours of oral arguments, that the appeals court had been too quick to rule against Groff.

    There seemed to be, as Justice Elena Kagan put it, some level of “kumbaya-ing” between the justices on the bench at times.

    But as justices sought to land on a test that lower courts could use to clarify how far employers must go to accommodate their employees’ religious beliefs, differences arose when a lawyer for Groff suggested that the court overturn decades-old precedent. Conservative Justice Samuel Alito seemed open to the prospect.

    Critically, however, Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh were sympathetic to arguments made by the Postal Service that granting Groff’s request might cause morale to plummet among the other employees. Kavanaugh noted that “morale” among employers is critical to the success of any business. And several justices nodded to the financial difficulties the USPS has faced over the years.

    Groff, who lives in Pennsylvania, served in 2012 as a rural carrier associate at the United States Postal Service, a position that provides coverage for absent career employees who have earned the ability to take off weekends. Rural carrier associates are told they need flexibility.

    In 2013, Groff’s life changed when the USPS contracted with Amazon to deliver packages on Sundays. Groff’s Christian religious beliefs bar him from working on Sundays.

    The post office contemplated some accommodations to Groff such as offering to adjust his schedule so he could come to work after religious services, or telling him he should see if other workers could pick up his shifts. At some point, the postmaster himself did the deliveries because it was difficult to find employees willing to work on Sunday. Finally, the USPS suggested Groff choose a different day to observe the Sabbath.

    The atmosphere with his co-workers was tense and Groff said he faced progressive discipline. In response, he filed complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which is charged with enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against an employee because of religion.

    Groff ultimately left in 2019. In a resignation letter, he said he had been unable to find an “accommodating employment atmosphere with the USPS that would honor his religious beliefs.”

    Groff sued arguing that the USPS violated Title VII – a federal law that makes it unlawful to discriminate against an employee based on his religion. To make a claim under the law, an employee must show that he holds a sincere religious belief that conflicts with a job requirement, he must inform his employer and has to have been disciplined for failing to comply.

    Under the law, the burden then shifts to the employer. The employer must show that they made a good faith effort to “reasonably accommodate” the employee’s belief or demonstrate that such an accommodation would cause an “undue hardship” upon the employer.

    District Judge Jeffrey Schmehl, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, ruled against Groff, holding that that his request to not work on Sundays would cause an “undue hardship” for the USPS.

    The 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling in a 2-1 opinion.

    “Exempting Groff from working on Sundays caused more than a de minimis cost on USPS because it actually imposed on his coworkers, disrupted the workplace and workflow, and diminished employee morale,” the 3rd Circuit wrote in its opinion last year.

    “The accommodation Groff sought (exemption from Sunday work)” the court added, “would cause an undue hardship on USPS.”

    A dissenting judge, Thomas Hardiman, offered a road map for justices seeking to rule in favor of Groff. The main thrust of his dissent was that the law requires the USPS to show how the proposed accommodation would harm “business” – not Groff’s coworkers.

    “Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stayed Gerald Groff from the completion of his appointed rounds,” wrote Hardiman, a George W. Bush nominee who was on a shortlist for the Supreme Court nomination that went to Justice Neil Gorsuch in 2017. “But his sincerely held religious belief precluded him from working on Sundays.”

    Groff’s lawyer, Aaron Streett, told the high court that the USPS could have done more and was wrong to claim that “respecting Groff’s belief was too onerous.” He urged the justices to cut back or invalidate precedent and allow an accommodation that would allow the worker to “serve both his employer and his God.”

    “Sunday’s a day where we get together and almost taste heaven,” Groff told The New York Times recently. “We come together as believers. We celebrate who we are, together. We worship God. And so to be asked to deliver Amazon parcels and give all that up, it’s just really kind of sad.”

    The Biden administration has urged the high court to simply clarify the law to make clear that an employer is not required to accommodate an employee’s Sabbath observance by “operating shorthanded or regularly paying overtime to secure replacement workers.”

    Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar acknowledged, however, that employer could still be required to bear other costs such as administrative expenses associated with rearranging schedules.

    This story has been updated with additional details.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Family of victim and survivors of Indianapolis FedEx mass shooting file lawsuit against gun magazine manufacturer and distributors | CNN

    Family of victim and survivors of Indianapolis FedEx mass shooting file lawsuit against gun magazine manufacturer and distributors | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The family of a victim and several survivors of a mass shooting at a FedEx facility in Indianapolis filed a lawsuit against companies involved in the manufacturing, marketing and sale of the high capacity magazine used by the gunman who killed 8 people and injured several others in 2021.

    The federal lawsuit, filed in US District Court in the Western District of New York, targets a gun distributor and magazine manufacturers, and alleges the companies recklessly marketed and sold their products to impulsive young men at risk of violence.

    The gunman in the April 15, 2021, attack, Brandon Hole, 19, was previously employed at the facility and opened fire on his former coworkers before killing himself. About a year before the attack, Hole browsed White supremacist websites, CNN previously reported. His mother contacted the police in March 2020 because she was worried about his behavior and threatening statements he’d made after he purchased a gun, according to police.

    The lawsuit was filed Thursday on behalf of the estate of Jaswinder Singh, who was killed during the shooting, Harpreet Singh, who was injured, and his wife Dilpreet Kaur, and Lakhwinder Kaur, who was also injured in the attack. They are each seeking at least $75,000 from the lawsuit and are asking for a jury trial, according to the complaint.

    The lawsuit targets American Tactical Inc., an American firearms importer, manufacturer and seller, along with the company’s president and the director of marketing and purchasing. Schmeisser GmbH, a German firearms manufacturer; and 365 Plus d.o.o., a Slovenian company that designs, produces and distributes firearms accessories and other tactical equipment are also listed as defendants.

    The three companies were involved in the manufacturing, marketing and sale of the 60-round high-capacity magazines that “have been used repeatedly to slaughter and terrorize Americans in horrific mass shootings since long before April 2021,” the lawsuit says.

    The lawsuit claims these companies made these magazines easily accessible to Hole and targeted their marketing campaign to “a consumer base filled with impulsive young men who feel they need to harm others in order to prove their strength and who have militaristic delusions of fighting in a war or a video game.”

    “This case is about what happens when companies recklessly design, market, sell, and distribute these accessories to the general public—indiscriminately—and without adherence to reasonable safeguards,” the lawsuit reads.

    American Tactical declined to comment to CNN about the lawsuit. Lawyers for the other defendants did not immediately respond to requests.

    Schmeisser GmbH manufactured the magazine used in the mass shooting and distributed it in the US through American Tactical and 365 Plus, the lawsuit claims.

    “The high capacity of the magazine emboldened the shooter to commit the attack, knowing he had the ability to fire 60 rounds continuously without the need to pause to reload,” the lawsuit says.

    The complaint says American Tactical promoted marketing videos that show men dressed in tactical vests similar to what Hole wore during the 2021 attack as they fire “a constant stream of bullets at unseen targets in various offensive, tactical operations.”

    The lawsuit alleges the firearm companies placed an “unreasonably dangerous product on the market without sufficient safeguards to prevent its foreseeable unlawful use.”

    The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, the gun control advocacy organization that employs two of several lawyers representing the plaintiffs, wrote in a statement to CNN the nonprofit is “trying to achieve justice for these survivors and their family, and hold American Tactical, Inc. accountable for their irresponsible marketing and sales practices.”

    “If you decide to sell such highly lethal products to the general public anyway, you need to be very careful about who you’re selling them to. As we allege in our complaint, defendants here have instead taken a hard turn and specifically marketed their highly lethal products to a dangerous class of individuals,” said Philip Bangle, the Brady Center’s senior litigation council.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fox News-Dominion trial abruptly delayed on eve of opening statements | CNN Business

    Fox News-Dominion trial abruptly delayed on eve of opening statements | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Wilmington, Delaware
    CNN
     — 

    Dominion Voting Systems’ high-stakes defamation trial against Fox News, which was supposed to begin Monday, was abruptly delayed on Sunday evening, in a stunning eleventh-hour twist that threw into question whether a settlement was in the works.

    Opening statements were expected on Monday, but the Delaware Superior Court said in a surprise announcement that “the start of the trial” will now be Tuesday.

    The judge’s statement did not provide an explanation for the delay.

    “The Court has decided to continue the start of the trial, including jury selection, until Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. I will make such an announcement tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 7E,” using the legal term “continue,” which means delay or postpone.

    But the announcement came as The Wall Street Journal, which is owned by Fox Corporation Chairman Rupert Murdoch, reported on Sunday evening that “Fox has made a late push to settle the dispute out of court,” citing people familiar with the matter.

    Neither Dominion nor Fox commented on the delay Sunday.

    “Dominion has seemed quite motivated, throughout this case, to play it out on a public stage and correct the larger record on election denialism,” said RonNell Anderson Jones, a First Amendment expert and professor of law at the University of Utah.

    “But Fox may be far more incentivized to move closer to whatever Dominion might be asking, after a very rough week of pretrial hearings last week and, especially, in light of the recent revelations from the ex-employee who is now in Dominion’s camp.”

    Dominion had sued Fox News for defamation seeking damages of $1.6 billion. It says it was defamed by the right-wing network when Fox hosts and guests claimed in 2020 that its voting systems illegally rigged the election against Donald Trump.

    Fox News has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, maintained it is “proud” of its 2020 election coverage, and argued that Dominion’s lawsuit represents a threat to the First Amendment. The network says the $1.6 billion figure is wildly inflated.

    As the case has progressed through the court system and more damning material has emerged, legal experts have expressed surprise that Fox has not settled the case. A settlement would avert what promises to be an excruciating and embarrassing several weeks for Fox.

    Some of the company’s highest-ranking executives and highest-profile hosts are scheduled to otherwise testify during the trial about the election lies promoted by the network in the wake of the 2020 election.

    If a panel of jurors side with Dominion during trial and award a sum of money near what the voting technology company is asking for, it would represent one of the largest defamation defeats ever for a US media outlet.

    Regardless of whether a case goes to trial, the evidence that has emerged from the case has battered Fox News’ credibility and reputation, exposing the network as a dishonest organization willing to push lies to its audience.

    Private text messages and emails released as part of the case have already revealed top personnel at the right-wing talk network didn’t believe the conspiracy theories that were being put on the air and spread to viewers.

    Prominent hosts such as Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity knew Trump’s lies about the election were detached from reality, the communications revealed, but they leaned into the voter fraud theories anyway on their shows.

    — CNN’s Jon Passantino contributed reporting

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What to know ahead of the Fox News and Dominion trial | CNN Business

    What to know ahead of the Fox News and Dominion trial | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    A trial in a defamation suit brought against Fox News by Dominion Voting Systems is set to begin this week. It could have significant ramifications for the right-wing cable channel.

    Dominion is an election technology company. After former president Donald Trump lost the 2020 presidential election to Joe Biden, Dominion alleged Fox pushed various pro-Trump conspiracy theories, including false and potentially damaging information about the company’s voting technology, because “the lies were good for Fox’s business.” Fox is arguing that it was merely reporting the claims made by the Trump administration and Donald Trump’s associates.

    It filed a defamation lawsuit in 2021. The trial is set to begin Monday in Delaware.

    Here are 5 things to know ahead of the trial.

    Dominion wants the network’s star hosts and top executives to appear on the witness stand during trial, it said in a court filing in March.

    Here’s who could appear as witnesses, if Dominion gets its way:

    • Suzanne Scott, Fox News CEO

    • Jay Wallace, Fox News president

    • Hosts Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Maria Bartiromo, Laura Ingraham and Bret Baier

    Abby Grossberg, a former Fox News producer who alleged that the network’s lawyers coerced her into providing misleading testimony in a lawsuit filed March

    • In April, Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis said Dominion could compel Fox Corporation Chairman Rupert Murdoch and his son, CEO Lachlan Murdoch, to testify, in a big blow to Fox.

    “Both parties have made these witnesses very relevant,” Davis said, regarding the Murdochs. Fox was trying to block Dominion from having the Murdochs on the witness stand.

    Dominion is asking for $1.6 billion in damages and additional punitive damages.

    That could be a major financial hit to Fox. Fox Corporation, the right-wing news outlet’s owner, has an estimated $4 billion in cash on hand, according to its latest earnings statement. It’s also unclear how much insurance the company has, or what any insurance policy would cover.

    Punitive damages are, however, uncapped in Delaware, with no legal maximum limit.

    The network claims that number is a wildly overblown amount designed to grab attention in headlines.

    Fox argued in a statement the case is about protecting “the rights of the free press” and a verdict in favor of Dominion would have “grave consequences” for the fourth estate.

    “Dominion’s lawsuit is a political crusade in search of a financial windfall, but the real cost would be cherished First Amendment rights,” a Fox spokesperson said in a statement.

    Defamation cases are hard to win in the United States, because of the Supreme Court’s ruling in New York Times v. Sullivan in 1964. Defamation has to meet a high standard. An entity can’t have just lied, it must have known (or at least strongly suspected) it was lying at the time, and it has to have been done with “actual malice.” The court has already ruled on the first two, saying that Fox aired lies and knew they were lies, so instead of a question of truth, it’s about whether Fox did so maliciously.

    Though major figures at Fox privately acknowledged reality – that former President Donald Trump had lost to President Joe Biden in 2020 – Fox continued to air conspiracies and lies in order to keep its large audience engaged.

    A cache of private messages, emails and depositions revealed that Fox may not have upheld the journalistic responsibility to report the truth to audiences. The judge has rejected several of Fox’s First Amendment defenses and in pretrial rulings barred the network from arguing its guests’ alleged defamatory statements were “newsworthy” and deserving of coverage.

    Legal filings made public a trove of private text messages, emails and deposition transcripts, revealing how Fox hosts, producers, and executives really felt about Trump.

    The damning behind-the-scenes communications were included in roughly 10,000 pages of court documents that have been made public as part of the lawsuit, many of which are likely to be shown in the trial.

    For example, host Tucker Carlson said in one text message he “passionately” hates Trump. In one November 2020 exchange, Tucker Carlson said Trump’s decision to snub Joe Biden’s inauguration was “so destructive,” adding that Trump’s post-election behavior was “disgusting” and that he was “trying to look away.”

    Murdoch emailed New York Post’s Col Allan, describing Trump’s election lies as “bulls**t and “damaging.”

    Murdoch’s private messages revealed how his own thoughts contradicted what Fox espoused. “Maybe Sean [Hannity] and Laura [Ingraham] went too far,” Murdoch wrote in an email Fox News chief executive Suzanne Scott, apparently referencing election denialism after Trump’s loss to President Joe Biden.

    The trial will begin Monday in Delaware at 9 am ET, with expected opening statements at some point during the day. Jury selection is also expected to wrap up Monday morning, ending with a panel of 12 jurors and 12 alternates. It’s anticipated that opening statements will begin immediately after the jury is seated. The trial is expected to last five to six weeks.

    Dominion will need to convince the jury that Fox acted with “actual malice” — showing the right-wing network’s hosts and executives knew what was being said on-air was false but broadcast it anyway, or acted with such a reckless disregard for the truth that they should be held liable.

    [ad_2]

    Source link