case Archives - Home Safety Tech Pros

Acting US attorney once orchestrated Facebook posts criticizing judge presiding in his case, report says

homesafetytechpros — Sun, 04 May 2025 01:23:36 +0000

Prosecutors

Acting US attorney once orchestrated Facebook posts criticizing judge presiding in his case, report says

April 28, 2025, 11:12 am CDT

Edward R. Martin Jr., now the interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, speaks at an event at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., in June 2023. (Photo by Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/The Associated Press)

The acting U.S. attorney in Washington, D.C., formerly helped ghostwrite posts criticizing a judge presiding in a civil case in which he was the defendant, according to lawsuit documents cited by ProPublica.

U.S. attorney nominee Edward R. Martin Jr. helped his associate, Priscilla Gray, write the posts that began in 2016 after the Illinois judge “dealt Martin a major setback in the case,” according to the report by ProPublica, noted by Bloomberg Law’s Wake Up Call. Martin is filling the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia position on an acting basis.

Gray’s posts on the judge’s Facebook page called the judge a “politician” with the “lowest rating for a judge in Illinois.”

Martin had urged Gray to call the judge’s actions “unfair and rigged over and over,” according to ProPublica. He also urged Gray to privately message the judge, the article reports.

The judge was presiding in a case seeking to oust Martin from association with a grassroots group that he once headed, the Eagle Forum. The plaintiff was Anne Schlafly Cori, an Eagle Forum board member who was the daughter of the group’s founder, Phyllis Schlafly.

The truth about Martin’s involvement in the criticism “emerged as Cori’s lawyers gathered evidence for her lawsuit,” according to ProPublica.

President Donald Trump has nominated Martin, who has no prosecution experience, to remain in the U.S. attorney position. Martin did not respond to ProPublica’s requests for comment. Gray also declined to comment to the publication.

Andy Schlafly, a former Eagle Forum board member who supported Martin, told ProPublica that Gray “speaks for herself” and had every right to express her outrage. He also said no court has ever sanctioned Martin for his “First Amendment advocacy.”

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

Source link

The post Acting US attorney once orchestrated Facebook posts criticizing judge presiding in his case, report says appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Insurance case is ‘but a speck in the recesses of interstellar space,’ high-profile appeals judge writes

homesafetytechpros — Fri, 02 May 2025 20:52:54 +0000

Judiciary

Insurance case is ‘but a speck in the recesses of interstellar space,’ high-profile appeals judge writes

By Debra Cassens Weiss

April 28, 2025, 3:07 pm CDT

Law professor (and future federal judge) J. Harvie Wilkinson III listens during his testimony on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., in August 1994. (Photo by Cynthia Johnson/Getty Images)

In a span of less than a week, a conservative federal appeals judge has written two opinions that are getting attention—for taking a tough stand against the mistaken deportation of an immigrant in one case and for waxing philosophical in another case.

In an April 17 opinion, Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III took the Trump administration to task for “asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process.”

Wilkinson wrote the “blistering” opinion for the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Richmond, Virginia, in the case of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia of Maryland, according to the New York Times.

Abrego Garcia was deported to a prison in El Salvador in Central America because of an “administrative error.” The case is Abrego Garcia v. Noem.

Now, Wilkinson is getting attention once again for an April 23 opinion in an insurance dispute involving a man on a lawn mower struck and killed by an underinsured motorist, according to Above the Law and the Judicial Notice newsletter at Original Jurisdiction.

The 4th Circuit held that the man’s estate was entitled to $150,000 under the plain terms of the man’s underinsured motorist coverage—and nothing more.

Wilkinson engaged in “existential, metaphysical musings” at the end of his opinion, according to Judicial Notice.

Here is what Wilkinson wrote: “What after all does it matter? A single, seemingly ordinary, rather technical insurance case. One among the many hundreds of rulings judges make each year.

“What does it matter? A case but a speck in the recesses of interstellar space and in the four-plus billion years since our solar system’s birth. What does it matter, this case deserted by both space and time?

“To be human is to live in the here and now. This small case extracts courageous meaning from the vast impersonality in which it resides. Its immediacy confounds infinity; its passions light the dark. We have given it our best; the litigants have given it their best. The trial court has done the same. We do not overlook for a moment the tragic passing of the insured but neither can we ignore the contract under South Carolina law that defines the insurer’s obligation.”

The insurance case is Owners Insurance Co. v. Walsh.

Wilkinson, 80, was appointed to the 4th Circuit by former President Ronald Reagan, the New York Times reports in a story about his background. He is the “son of a patrician Virginia banker,” an Army veteran and a law grad of the University of Virginia.

He delayed his legal education after one year to unsuccessfully run for Congress in 1970 as a Republican. After law school, he worked as a law professor and in the U.S. Department of Justice.

On the bench, the New York Times reports, Wilkinson has “a long track record of conservative rulings under his belt, having criticized rulings establishing abortion rights while writing approvingly of a broad conception of presidential power.”

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

Source link

The post Insurance case is ‘but a speck in the recesses of interstellar space,’ high-profile appeals judge writes appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Boyfriend pleads guilty in ‘horror movie’ neglect case

homesafetytechpros — Tue, 08 Apr 2025 01:13:26 +0000

Katie Koch, on the left, and Joel Manke, on the right, inset against an image of a boarded-up window of their residence in Wisc. in July 2023. (Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office; Screengrab via WISN)

The boyfriend in a stomach-turning child neglect case pleaded guilty and was sentenced on Monday to his role in two children living in filth-ridden circumstances. Joel Manke, 40, is following the mother, Katie Koch, 36, with the same punishment: 10 years in prison, and 10 on extended supervision.

He had pleaded guilty to two counts of chronic neglect of a child (consequence is emotional damage), with the court dismissing two counts of false imprisonment

Koch pleaded guilty to two counts of chronic neglect of a child (consequence is emotional damage), and one count of false imprisonment. The court dismissed one count of false imprisonment, and two counts of neglecting a child (specified harm did not occur). As previously reported, cops in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, said they got 911 calls about two boys, ages 7 and 9, running naked through the street. They were covered in blood, feces, bruises, and red marks.

A caller told police a woman “yanked” one of the boys back inside.

“I’m not going to ever forget the way they looked when they came running out of that house — never forget that,” neighbor Chris Eder, who called 911, told Milwaukee ABC affiliate WISN in a July 2023 report. “The look on their faces was pure bewilderment. They were just looking all around. They could not — I don’t think they’d ever been outside before.”

Koch walked a police officer through her home. There was filth smeared all over the walls of the children’s bedroom, and the mother tried to play it off as “clay, paint, and chocolate,” but the officer noted that it was actually feces. The room, he said, smelled of feces and urine.

He described trash and garbage piling on the kitchen, and there was a mound of garbage outside the children’s room.

Five neighbors are cited in the complaint, identified by their initials, and described various information about the children.

One neighbor told police that one of the naked boys had been wandering down the sidewalk like a “caveman.” Another neighbor said they witnessed one of the children escaping through the broken bedroom window, then standing on top of an AC unit, and finally, but unsuccessfully, trying to climb a fence. Yet another neighbor said they hadn’t seen the children leave the house in some three years.

“It’s really terrible; it’s like something out of a horror movie,” Milwaukee County Assistant District Attorney Mallory Davis said in court at the time “The children were essentially confined to their room for much of their lives. And the door had a latch on the outside and the windows were boarded shut. I have finally been able to view videos and photographs of the home and I can tell you that almost every inch of their walls was covered in human feces.”

Colin Kalmbacher contributed to this report.

Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.

Source link

The post Boyfriend pleads guilty in ‘horror movie’ neglect case appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

SCOTUS asked to reject Trump in birthright citizenship case

homesafetytechpros — Fri, 04 Apr 2025 23:57:11 +0000

President Donald Trump gestures as he speaks during an Iftar dinner in the State Dining Room at the White House in Washington, Thursday, March 27, 2025 (Pool via AP).

A coalition of immigrant rights and liberal legal advocacy groups is imploring the U.S. Supreme Court to reject President Donald Trump‘s appeal of several lower court orders that bar the government from enacting any of its expressed plans to ban birthright citizenship.

In a 49-page opposition to the Trump administration’s application for a partial stay, the lead plaintiffs in one of three so-far-successful efforts to stop the ban say there is simply “no emergency warranting” the issuance of an emergency stay of the district court’s injunction.

“The government invokes this Court’s emergency docket without identifying any emergency,” the Friday motion reads. “The government can show no harm whatsoever from the district court’s injunction, which merely requires the Executive Branch to continue complying with the settled interpretation of the Citizenship Clause during the pendency of this litigation.”

In Maryland, Washington and Massachusetts, federal judges have issued orders prohibiting federal agencies from implementing or enforcing Trump’s Executive Order 14160.

While the government sued for relief to undo each of the three separate pauses in the same application, each of those three cases is now docketed differently — and consecutively. The likely upshot, however, is that each case is consolidated into the same general controversy — if and when the justices decide to hear oral arguments.

The Trump administration’s appeal largely eschews the merits of the underlying birthright citizenship policy in favor of fighting over the propriety of the district court injunctions stopping the ban.

The government says the “universal injunctions” in each of those three cases generally harm the government in various ways unrelated to immigration and have specifically harmed states that want the ban on birthright citizenship enforced.

The plaintiffs in the case stylized as Trump v. CASA say the government’s strategy should not be countenanced because of the “most fundamental right” at stake in the litigation.

“There is nothing ‘modest’ about the government’s request for emergency relief in this case,” the filing reads. “On his first day in office, the President issued an Executive Order that purports to upend birthright citizenship by executive fiat. But birthright citizenship is at the core of our Nation’s foundational precept that all people born on our soil are created equal, regardless of their parentage.”

The opposition motion criticizes the Trump administration for eliding the merits, while premising its request for a stay on the idea that “irreparable harm” will ensue unless the injunctions are dissolved.

“If the Court were to grant the government’s motion, chaos would ensue,” the motion continues. “The President cannot rewrite the Constitution or the Immigration and Nationality Act by executive fiat, and the government has certainly shown no extraordinary need to do so immediately.”

Meanwhile, the plaintiffs say, each of the three district courts that issued the injunctions has grappled with the merits.

“As every court to have considered the issue has concluded, the Executive Order facially violates the Constitution,” the motion continues. “The government does not challenge any of that before this Court. It does not argue that it is likely to succeed in defending the constitutionality of the Executive Order. And yet, the government asks this Court to intervene to lift the injunction so that the government may begin applying the facially unconstitutional Order against nearly everyone. That is not a modest request.”

More Law&Crime coverage: ‘This unlawful impost must fall’: Conservative group sues Trump claiming tariffs are ‘unconstitutional exercise of legislative power’

CASA goes on to argue for the necessity of a universal injunction.

“The universal injunction in this case preserves the uniformity of United States citizenship, an area in which nationwide consistency is vitally important,” the motion continues. “Whether a child is a citizen of our Nation should not depend on the state where she is born or the associations her parents have joined.”

The Trump administration, in seeking relief, reiterated prior arguments that, if the injunctions do stand, they should only apply “to the parties actually before the courts.” Here, that would effectively limit the injunction to a handful of states and members of groups like CASA.

The plaintiffs argue that limiting the injunction as the government proposes would create an untenable state of affairs in the country.

From the motion, at length:

Matters on the ground would be even worse if an injunction were to apply in some states but not others. Such an arrangement would threaten to fundamentally fracture the country. If a child’s citizenship depended on the state in which they were born, it would create a situation much like the one that existed between slave and free states, which produced Dred Scott and ultimately the Civil War. An infant would be a United States citizen and full member of society if born in New Jersey, but a deportable noncitizen if born in Tennessee. The Reconstruction Amendments, including the Citizenship Clause, were intended to prevent that sort of division between the states from ever occurring again. The Court should not now exercise its equitable power to re-create a situation in which a person’s fundamental right to citizenship depends on the state in which they are born.

Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.

In contrast to the government’s motion, which avoided arguing the merits, the plaintiffs, led by CASA, used the opportunity to push a broadside argument that birthright citizenship is a constitutional “bedrock” of the United States.

“Congress passed and the States ratified the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to enshrine birthright citizenship in the Constitution, where no President could unilaterally take it away,” the motion goes on. “The Executive Order purports to reinterpret the Fourteenth Amendment to limit citizenship by birth on our soil to only those children who have at least one parent who is a citizen or lawful permanent resident. But that is not birthright citizenship at all. The Order’s rule of citizenship by blood is inconsistent with not only the plain text of the Citizenship Clause, but also common law history, this Court’s precedent, a federal statute codifying the long-settled interpretation of the Citizenship Clause, and well over a century of consistent Executive Branch practice.”

Source link

The post SCOTUS asked to reject Trump in birthright citizenship case appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Jan. 6 defendant with gun, grenade case gets Trump pardon

homesafetytechpros — Thu, 03 Apr 2025 15:17:51 +0000

Left: President Donald Trump gives remarks during an event celebrating the 2024 Stanley Cup Champion the Florida Panthers in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC on Monday, February 3, 2025 (Photo by Aaron Schwartz/Sipa USA)(Sipa via AP Images). Right: An alleged photo of Jeremy Brown at the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6 attack in 2021 (Justice Department).

A Jan. 6 defendant and Oath Keepers member from Florida who was linked to an explosives-laden RV that was allegedly brought to the Washington, D.C., area had a series of separate convictions — for possessing illegal firearms and U.S. Army grenades — officially vacated and dismissed by a federal judge Wednesday in the Sunshine State as part of President Donald Trump’s Jan. 6 pardon order.

Jeremy Brown, a former U.S. Army Green Beret who was given a seven-year sentence for the weapons and grenades case, gained support from Trump’s Justice Department in late February, with federal prosecutors telling U.S. District Judge Steven Merryday that “based on consultation” with DOJ leadership it was the position of the United States that the offenses Brown was accused of — including possessing a modified AR-15 short-barreled rifle and sawed-off shotgun, both unregistered and owned illegally — were “intended to be covered” by Trump’s pardon order.

Merryday, a George H.W. Bush appointee, agreed and on Wednesday vacated Brown’s convictions with an official order in the Middle District of Florida Tampa Division. The move came after the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals relinquished jurisdiction in March to the district court to “consider and rule upon” the United States’ motion to vacate and dismiss the explosives and gun convictions against Brown, who was sentenced in 2023 and released from prison in February.

“The United States’ motion is granted, the judgment is vacated, and the second superseding indictment — and, derivatively, perforce the pardon, both the superseding indictment and the indictment — are dismissed with prejudice,” Merryday said. “The clerk must close the case.”

For his Jan. 6 case, Brown was accused of “unlawfully and knowingly” entering and remaining in a restricted building and grounds at the U.S. Capitol, according to court documents. He was charged in Washington, D.C., federal court with misdemeanor trespassing and disorderly conduct, with photos showing Brown donning military gear.

In Florida, Brown was found guilty after a jury trial in December 2022 of possession of unregistered short-barreled firearms, possession of unregistered explosive grenades, improper storage of explosive grenades, and retention of classified information.

According to evidence presented at his trial, the FBI executed an arrest and search warrant at Brown’s residence in Tampa on Sept. 30, 2021, and found an unregistered AR-15-style rifle — modified to have a 10-inch barrel — in Brown’s bedroom. Agents also allegedly found the sawed-off shotgun on a couch inside of Brown’s recreational vehicle, which was parked near his home.

“Inside a briefcase next to the shotgun, agents found a classified Trip Report that Brown had authored shortly before he retired from the U.S. Special Forces,” prosecutors said in an April 2023 press release. “Inside the bedroom of that same RV, agents found an ammunition vest containing two M-67 fragmentation grenades hidden in the pockets. U.S. Army records confirmed that the grenades had originally been in the possession of the U.S. Army.”

Prosecutors didn’t provide a specific reason in their February notice of filing Brown’s certificate of pardon for why his weapons and explosives convictions were being thrown out, just that it was “based on consultation with Department of Justice leadership.”

Attempts by Law&Crime to reach the DOJ for comment Wednesday were unsuccessful.

Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.

Source link

The post Jan. 6 defendant with gun, grenade case gets Trump pardon appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Teen in Casper, Wyoming, shooting case pleads not guilty

homesafetytechpros — Tue, 01 Apr 2025 22:40:58 +0000

Luka Wade Rasmussen (Natrona County Sheriff’s Office).

The teenager charged with accidentally shooting his friend in the head with a handgun during a session of gaming and smoking marijuana pleaded not guilty to a charge of involuntary manslaughter on Tuesday, according to Cowboy State Daily.

Luka Wade Rasmussen, 18, must remain behind bars on $500,000 bond after the judge rejected a defense request to have his bail lowered to $100,000. Public defender Marty Scott reportedly noted that the teenager’s coworkers at Wendy’s wrote a letter attesting to his character. District Attorney Dan Itzen, however, noted the seriousness of the charge and alluded to the claim that one of the three guns located on the property and been reported stolen in summer 2024.

The victim, Riley Jacob Sears, 16, had joined Rasmussen and a teenager who lived in the home on Feb. 12, 2025, in Casper, Wyoming. They played video games and smoked marijuana, authorities said, but at one point, Rasmussen took out a gun, and it went off, authorities said.

The defendant allegedly said he had had the gun resting on his thigh when it went off, but the teenage witness claimed that Rasmussen was pointing it at Sears. Prosecutors have presented photos in court showing Rasmussen pointing the gun at the teenage witness on two separate dates. The latter image happened on Feb. 10 — two days before the fatal shooting.

Police claim that the father of the third teen had told Rasmussen to “get rid of the gun.”

“Rasmussen stated he ran out of the back door on the main floor of the residence and ran to the shed,” police wrote. “Rasmussen stated he threw his gun behind the shed and did not recall removing the magazine or manipulating the gun.”

Police claimed they found the gun behind the shed.

Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.

Source link

The post Teen in Casper, Wyoming, shooting case pleads not guilty appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Climate change case that ‘ignited a movement’ ends with Supreme Court’s cert denial

homesafetytechpros — Tue, 01 Apr 2025 16:31:17 +0000

U.S. Supreme Court

Climate change case that ‘ignited a movement’ ends with Supreme Court’s cert denial

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 25, 2025, 2:01 pm CDT

Kelsey Cascadia Rose Juliana of Oregon, the lead plaintiff in Juliana v. United States, speaks at a rally in June 2019. (Photo by Steve Dipaola/The Associated Press)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to revive a climate change lawsuit filed on behalf of 21 youths who contended that the government is a trustee of the environment and has a duty to preserve it.

The Supreme Court denied cert in Juliana v. United States, report Law360, Reuters, the New York Times, the Oregon Capital Chronicle and E&E News by Politico.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at San Francisco had tossed the case in a 2020 opinion that said the issue should be taken to the political branches of government, rather than the courts. In May, the appeals court said a revised suit had not cured standing issues that prevented courts from deciding the case.

The name plaintiff in the suit, filed in 2015, is Kelsey Cascadia Rose Juliana, who is now 29 years old and a teacher in Oregon, according to the New York Times.

The U.S. Department of Justice said in a March 24 press release it has defended the case across three presidential administrations.

“The U.S. Supreme Court’s cert denial brings this long saga to a conclusion,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson of the DOJ’s Environment and Natural Resources Division, in the press release.

The case was filed on behalf of the children by the nonprofit group Our Children’s Trust. Julia Olson, the group’s chief legal counsel, said in a March 24 statement the suit’s impact “cannot be measured by the finality of this case alone.”

“Juliana has ignited a movement and created a powerful legal framework for future generations to assert their constitutional rights in the face of the climate crisis,” she said.

In one success for the group in late 2024, the Montana Supreme Court struck down a state law banning consideration of greenhouse gas emissions in fossil-fuel-permitting decisions. The state supreme court cited a state constitutional provision that guarantees a “clean and healthful environment.” The case was Held v. Montana.

In a second case in 2024, Hawaii agreed to cut emissions of carbon dioxide in its transportation system in a settlement with Our Children’s Trust.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

Source link

The post Climate change case that ‘ignited a movement’ ends with Supreme Court’s cert denial appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

New allegations in Justin Eichorn child solicitation case

homesafetytechpros — Wed, 26 Mar 2025 11:47:07 +0000

Insets: A laptop and handgun that Justin Eichorn was allegedly trying to take out of his home before police could (Justice Department). Background: Sen. Justin Eichorn speaking on March 11, 2025 (WCCO/YouTube).

A state senator from Minnesota who was ordered to “resign in disgrace” after being arrested for trying to meet up with an underage sex worker — with him doing so last week — is now facing allegations of obstruction for allegedly telling a woman to swipe a computer and other items from his home during a phone call from jail, police say.

Justin Eichorn (R-Grand Rapids) — who was best known for his lobbying and support of a “Trump Derangement Syndrome” bill in the Gopher State up until his child solicitation arrest on March 17 — was accused in court documents filed Sunday of lying to federal prosecutors about at least three different things that he allegedly did that temporarily prevented him from being released by a judge this week on bail.

“Eichorn lied to the Court about his access to firearms; Eichorn apparently orchestrated an effort to retrieve a computer from his St. Paul apartment to deprive investigators of the opportunity to examine it; and Eichorn kept with that computer an iPhone that FBI agents found in a recently ‘factory reset’ condition, suggesting that someone with access to the phone’s accounts attempted to wipe it,” prosecutors said in a motion to detain Eichorn, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. “These facts give the government, and should give the Court, serious concern that Eichorn may be attempting to obstruct the ongoing investigation into his conduct,” prosecutors said.

Eichorn, 40, was originally accused of contacting an undercover cop posing as a teenager over the phone to arrange a meeting with them at a location in Bloomington, which is about 10 miles south of Minneapolis. The GOP senator allegedly went to meet the purported teen sex worker near the 8300 block of Normandale Avenue, where authorities swooped in and busted him.

“Im 17 sry don’t want u 2 b mad,” the undercover told Eichorn, according to the DOJ’s motion.

“Ok will ya send me a naught pic of you to show me your real? [SIC]” Eichorn allegedly replied.

Describing ages of consent, the senator allegedly told the cop: “It’s says age of consent is 16 …… over 18 is in a position of authority over you like a teacher or friends parent.” Eichorn arranged to meet up with the undercover and was taken into custody upon his arrival.

“We are shocked by these reports and this alleged conduct demands an immediate resignation,” Senate Republicans said in a joint statement Tuesday after Eichorn’s arrest was first announced.

“Resign in disgrace,” said Rep. Elliott Engen (R-White Bear Township) on X. “Prosecute to the fullest. Throw away the key.”

According to the Justice Department, Eichorn called a female he knows from jail on March 19 and March 20 and asked her to retrieve a “red bag” from his house with $1,000 in cash; a handgun and ammunition; a laptop computer; an SD memory card; an Apple iPhone, and several of Eichorn’s state Senate business cards. Prosecutors say he did this knowing that all of his calls were being recorded, with there even being a message advising both callers that “the phone call is not private and is recorded,” per their Sunday motion.

“When they got me they broke my ring,” Eichorn allegedly told the woman. “Uh, there should be an extra one there, cause I have the extra one in my bag. It might, it’s either in the bathroom or on the counter by my red bag. If you’re willing to get that for me I would so like to have that if it’s OK.”

The woman replied, “Ok.”

Eichorn then asked, “Are you OK with that? If you’re not you should just leave it there.” The woman said, “I will grab whatever you need me to grab.”

Authorities obtained a warrant on Friday, March 21, to search Eichorn’s residence and they encountered the woman trying to retrieve the computer. After stopping her, they found the red bag with the items inside and the alleged laptop in question, according to court documents.

“(The woman) asked whether she could retrieve a computer from the apartment, which she said was used for her business,” the DOJ explained Sunday. “When FBI agents declined, (the woman) left. A few minutes later, the case agent from the FBI called (the woman) and asked that she return to the apartment building to be interviewed. She asked whether she was ‘legally required to,’ and when the case agent responded that she was not, she declined.”

When Eichorn was arrested, authorities seized two cellphones from him and an unopened condom. Photos included with the DOJ’s motion to detain him on Sunday showed the pistol and other items he had in the red bag, along with his laptop computer.

“Eichorn’s messages and conduct reveal an experienced operator,” prosecutors said. “His pretrial release brings with it a real risk that he would attempt to victimize other minors in the community.”

The judge overseeing Eichorn’s case blocked his release Monday and ordered him to appear for a joint preliminary and detention hearing Wednesday. He will remain in the custody of the U.S. Marshals until then.

“I must focus on personal matters at this time,” Eichorn said in a resignation message last week, according to The Minnesota Star Tribune. The senator sent out the statement from the Hennepin County Jail, where he’s being held on a charge of Soliciting Under 18 Year Old to Practice Prostitution. His wife reportedly filed for divorce from him on Friday as news circulated about his arrest and the allegations against him.

“There is a line in the sand,” said Senate Minority Leader Mark Johnson (R-East Grand Forks) in a statement to the Star Tribune. “If you’re accused with a felony, I think that’s serious enough — our law has distinguished that as a very serious crime. This clearly is a very serious crime.”

Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.

Source link

The post New allegations in Justin Eichorn child solicitation case appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Ex-Wisconsin justice who led election review should be compelled to sit for deposition in ethics case, motion says

homesafetytechpros — Sat, 22 Mar 2025 19:58:01 +0000

Ethics

Ex-Wisconsin justice who led election review should be compelled to sit for deposition in ethics case, motion says

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 6, 2025, 10:00 am CST

In this Sept. 17, 2015, file photo, then-Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael J. Gableman speaks during a court hearing at the Grant County Courthouse in Lancaster, Wisconsin. (Photo by Jessica Reilly/The Telegraph Herald via the Associated Press)

A former Wisconsin Supreme Court justice should be compelled to sit for a deposition before a disciplinary review board, a lawyer for the Wisconsin Office of Lawyer Regulation argued in a Feb. 28 motion.

The motion asks the Wisconsin Supreme Court to require Justice Michael J. Gableman’s appearance March 20 and 21 and to state that a failure to appear will result in his admission to the facts in a disciplinary complaint. Filed in November 2024, the complaint alleges ethical misconduct in Gableman’s investigation of the 2020 election for the Wisconsin State Assembly.

The motion to compel was filed after Gableman said through his attorney he would not show up for a scheduled February deposition “after much consideration, including Fifth Amendment concerns.”

WisPolitics.com and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel covered the motion to compel.

Gableman was initially hired by Republican Wisconsin State Assembly Speaker Robin Vos to help a legislative committee gather facts about how recent elections were conducted in Wisconsin and to suggest possible legislative changes. Gableman’s duties were later expanded, and he was named a special counsel. He was fired in August 2022.

Gableman included in an appendix to his legislative report his legal opinion that the state could decertify the results of Wisconsin’s 2020 general election in which former President Joe Biden was declared the winner.

Gableman’s election review did not find significant fraud, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

“Taxpayers paid more than $2.3 million for the investigation,” the newspaper reports, “which yielded a steady drumbeat of explosive court hearings and rulings in lawsuits over his desire to jail election officials and mayors who refused to be interviewed behind closed doors, and his decision to ignore requests from the public for records related to his probe.”

Besides serving as a Wisconsin Supreme Court justice, Gableman was a former prosecutor, a circuit court judge and an adjunct law professor teaching professional responsibility. Before agreeing to represent the committee, he worked in the U.S. Office of Personnel Management for the first Trump administration.

He had “by his own admission, no understanding of how Wisconsin elections worked,” the ethics complaint says.

Part of the ethics complaint concerns Gableman’s quest for information from the cities of Madison, Wisconsin, and Green Bay, Wisconsin, and their mayors. After issuing subpoenas to the mayors, Gableman negotiated agreements that made their appearances unnecessary, the complaint says.

Yet Gableman allegedly failed to tell the legislative committee about the agreements or about his receipt of thousands of pages of documents from the cities. He also falsely said he issued writs of attachment against the mayors because they “failed without reason or excuse to appear for their depositions,” the ethics complaint alleges.

Gableman is also accused of including false statements in the petitions for writs of attachment when he claimed that the two mayors had failed to appear for a deposition “without justification.”

Another part of the complaint alleges that Gableman made improper comments during and after a court hearing on a public interest group’s public-records request. Gableman was called to testify.

Gableman allegedly criticized Judge Frank Remington of Dane County, Wisconsin, who was presiding, instead of responding to questions. He claimed that Remington “has abandoned his role as a neutral magistrate” and later said, “You want to put me in jail, Judge Remington? I’m not gonna be railroaded.”

In a later June 2022 decision and order, Remington said Gableman made his accusations in a “sneering” fashion, raised his voice and pointed and shook his finger at the judge.

During a hearing recess, when the microphone was still live, Gableman allegedly made remarks that “demeaned and belittled opposing counsel by making allegations of improper collusion with the court and by portraying her as an incompetent lawyer whose only role was to aid Judge Remington in his bias,” the ethics complaint says.

After the hearing, in remarks to the press, Gableman again alleged that Remington had abandoned his neutral role.

“The deck was stacked,” he told reporters.

Another allegation in the complaint is that Gableman wrongly revealed information about his representation of the state Assembly committee as a guest on video broadcasts organized by Mike Lindell, the founder and CEO of MyPillow and a supporter of President Donald Trump.

Gableman said he supported an effort to recall Vos, that Vos did not want a serious investigation, and that Vos was a “serial liar who is interested only in his personal monetary financial gain.”

To support his allegation that Vos didn’t want a serious investigation, Gableman described discussions with Vos and staff members, revealing information related to the representation, the ethics complaint says.

The motion to compel says Gableman has a right to refuse to answer deposition questions when he has reasonable cause to think that his answers could expose him to criminal liability, but he does not have the right not to appear for the deposition.

Gableman is represented by lawyer Peyton B. Engel, who did not immediately reply to the ABA Journal’s request for comment via email and voicemail.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

Source link

The post Ex-Wisconsin justice who led election review should be compelled to sit for deposition in ethics case, motion says appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Former Duane Morris partner arrested on outstanding warrant related to Michigan assault case

homesafetytechpros — Wed, 19 Mar 2025 16:23:07 +0000

Criminal Justice

Former Duane Morris partner arrested on outstanding warrant related to Michigan assault case

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 10, 2025, 3:16 pm CDT

A former Duane Morris partner was arrested on an outstanding Michigan warrant at his condo in Chicago’s South Loop on Friday, the same building where his wife’s body was found in a stairwell in October 2024. (Image from Shutterstock)

Updated: A former Duane Morris partner was arrested on an outstanding Michigan warrant at his condo in Chicago’s South Loop on Friday, the same building where his wife’s body was found in a stairwell in October 2024.

Adam Beckerink, 46, was ordered extradited to Michigan at a court hearing Monday, the Chicago Tribune reports.

The warrant was based on charges of domestic abuse and assaulting police officers arising from incidents at the home in Berrien County, Michigan, where Beckerink’s wife, 36-year-old Caitlin Tracey, lived before her death, WGN-TV reports.

Initial media reports said the warrant was issued after Beckerink did not show up for a pretrial hearing in the Michigan case in October 2024. He also missed his trial that was set to happen days later, the reports said.

But Chicago police said the warrant was for alleged violation of pretrial conditions in the Michigan case, without providing further information, the Chicago Sun-Times reports.

Beckerink has not been charged in Tracey’s death. But in the extradition hearing Monday, Cook County Assistant State’s Attorney Danny Hanichak referred to Beckerink as a suspect, according to the Chicago Tribune.

Beckerink’s lawyer, Jonathan Brayman, said Monday and at a court hearing Saturday the warrant was not valid, according to the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun-Times.

Brayman said Monday that his client had attended all his hearings and had not violated any conditions of pretrial release, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.

Beckerink “is the absolute opposite of a fugitive from justice,” Brayman said on Monday, pointing out that Beckerink was arrested at home.

Beckerink was ousted from Duane Morris after the law firm became aware of domestic violence allegations against him made in court proceedings, including allegations made by his wife when she obtained an order of protection against Beckerink in 2023.

Judge denies bid by former Duane Morris partner to stop his wife’s funeral

Updated March 11 at 8:02 a.m. to add lawyer Jonathan Brayman’s assertion that former Duane Morris partner Adam Beckerink had attended all court hearings in Michigan.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

Source link

The post Former Duane Morris partner arrested on outstanding warrant related to Michigan assault case appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.