York Archives - Home Safety Tech Pros

FBI New York Seeking Additional Victims of Brooklyn Man Arrested for Sexual Exploitation of Children

homesafetytechpros — Thu, 01 May 2025 04:22:08 +0000

The New York FBI/NYPD Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking Task Force executed an arrest warrant for Manuel Davila, 28 of Brooklyn.

Source link

The post FBI New York Seeking Additional Victims of Brooklyn Man Arrested for Sexual Exploitation of Children appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

‘Stay out of my shorts,’ other discourteous comments led to censure for New York judge

homesafetytechpros — Sun, 13 Apr 2025 05:16:46 +0000

Judiciary

‘Stay out of my shorts,’ other discourteous comments led to censure for New York judge

By Debra Cassens Weiss

April 10, 2025, 2:11 pm CDT

A New York judge who didn’t want to transition to new case-tracking systems has agreed to a censure for gratuitous and discourteous remarks that he made while expressing his displeasure to colleagues and to officials who transferred him to a new court. (Image from Shutterstock)

Updated: A New York judge who didn’t want to transition to new case-tracking systems has agreed to a censure for gratuitous and discourteous remarks that he made while expressing his displeasure to colleagues and to officials who transferred him to a new court.

The remarks by Judge Daniel L. Seiden of the Binghamton City Court in New York contributed to a hostile work environment, according to an April 8 press release by the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct.

Seiden raised his voice and told the chief clerk and the deputy chief clerk to “stay out of my shorts” when they came to his office in April 2023 to discuss a change to a check-box case-history system, according to a March 28 determination and an agreed statement of facts signed in February.

Seiden said the “stay out of my shorts” comment was intended to convey “stay out of my business as a judge.”

Then when the administrative judge announced that the court was going to implement a new web-based case-filing system, Seiden declared in an email that he will always ask the clerks for physical files when he is on the bench.

Seiden emailed senior court officials in October 2024 after he was told of his reassignment.

“The game that you are playing, using an administrative trick to de facto remove me from my elected position for your own nefarious purposes, is a dangerous one: trying to get in the back door what you will probably never get through the front door, all the while depriving the citizens of Binghamton of their elected official while brazenly violating several state statutes,” he wrote.

He also said the officials’ “arrogance is breathtaking,” they “are utterly out of control and intoxicated by power and privilege,” and they used “administrative sleight of hand.”

During the ethics proceeding, Seiden was “cooperative and contrite,” according to the statement of facts. He has also completed civility training.

Seiden apologized to the clerks and judges for his “unprofessional remarks” and “appreciates that an apology to them at the time would have been appropriate,” the statement of facts said.

Robert H. Tembeckjian, the judicial conduct commission’s administrator, said in a statement judges must be patient, dignified and courteous.

“Petulant quarreling with colleagues is neither productive nor conducive to the administration of justice,” Tembeckjian said.

In a separate action, Seiden sought to be transferred back to the Binghamton City Court. The court to which he was reassigned is 45 miles from his residence, and his transfer there was arbitrary and capricious, he argued in a Jan. 7 mandamus petition that is pending in the Appellate Division’s Third Judicial Department of the New York Supreme Court.

The petition said Seiden’s statement to “stay out of my shorts” was misinterpreted as sexual in nature and may have been used to justify the July 23, 2024, transfer order, which was made without notice and without explanation. The same day that he received the order, he was escorted from the Binghamton City Court premises “in full view” of his colleagues, the petition said.

The petition also referenced “a corrosive culture in Binghamton City Court” because of the marriage of two officials that is “perhaps not technically nepotistic or illegal.”

A Feb. 25 letter indicated that the parties were in settlement negotiations.

Seiden declined the ABA Journal’s request for comment but informed the Journal in an email that he is scheduled to resume regular duties in the Binghamton City Court on April 28, and he is still working in the Cortland City Court in New York.

His judicial term expires in 2034, but he will have to retire at the end of 2028 because he turns 70 years old that year.

Hat tip to the Legal Profession Blog, which noted the censure.

Updated April 11 at 11:04 a.m. after Judge Daniel L. Seiden declined to comment and provided his return-to-office date. Updated April 11 at 2:29 p.m. to include information on Seiden’s mandamus petition.

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

Source link

The post ‘Stay out of my shorts,’ other discourteous comments led to censure for New York judge appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Judge says Trump not immune from New York felony prosecution

homesafetytechpros — Tue, 17 Dec 2024 07:42:59 +0000

Donald Trump speaks at the annual Road to Majority conference in Washington, DC, June 22, 2024. (Allison Bailey/NurPhoto via AP)

A state judge in New York is refusing to throw out the criminal hush-money case against Donald Trump, determining that the U.S. Supreme Court’s sweeping ruling regarding presidential immunity was not applicable to the president-elect’s current case before the court because the actions resulting in his conviction related “entirely to unofficial conduct” from his first tenure in office.

The ruling stems from Trump in May 2024 being convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records in the Empire State. The charges resulted from a $130,000 hush-money payment made by Trump’s former personal attorney and fixer, Michael Cohen, to adult content creator Stormy Daniels in October 2016.

The highly anticipated ruling from Acting New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan reasoned that Trump’s actions resulted in “overwhelming evidence of guilt” and were not at odds with the high court’s recent ruling granting immense prosecutorial immunity for the “official actions” of a president.

“The People’s use of these acts as evidence of the decidedly personal acts of falsifying business records poses no danger of intrusion on the authority and function of the Executive Branch,” Merchan wrote in the 41-page ruling.

Following the high court’s July ruling, Trump’s attorneys argued that portions of the evidence presented during the former and soon-to-be president’s criminal trial earlier this year was improperly shown to the jury.

The Supreme Court justices ruled that a sitting president is immune from prosecution for any official acts taken while in office and evidence of a president’s official acts cannot be used against a president in a criminal case, even where the underlying conduct is personal in nature.

Trump also claimed more fundamental problems — that evidence of his official acts as president infected the indictment itself because such evidence was presented during the grand jury process. Specifically, Trump argued that the state improperly used a few references to David Pecker, 72, the onetime CEO of the National Enquirer’s parent company American Media Inc., in laying out its case for grand jurors.

However, the argument did not resonate with Merchan, who reasoned that the evidence presented to jurors related to “entirely unofficial conduct” that was not encompassed by the Supreme Court’s ruling.

“This Court concludes that if error occurred regarding the introduction of the challenged evidence, such error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt,” Merchan wrote. “Even if this Court did find that the disputed evidence constitutes official acts under the auspices of the Trump decision, which it does not, Defendant’s motion is still denied as introduction of the disputed evidence constitutes harmless error and no mode of proceedings error has taken place.”

Source link

The post Judge says Trump not immune from New York felony prosecution appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Texas AG sues New York doctor for mailing abortion pills

homesafetytechpros — Mon, 16 Dec 2024 03:38:31 +0000

Background: Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (KVUE/YouTube). Insets: Dr. Margaret Carpenter and misoprostol, one of the medications she’s accused of sending to Texas (Reproductive Health Access Project/CBS News/YouTube).

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit against an abortion activist doctor in New York for “unlawfully” mailing prescription pills to the Lone Star State that “ended the life of an unborn child” and resulted in “serious complications” for the 20-year-old mother, according to the suit — marking the first cross-state abortion legal battle of its kind, a report says.

Dr. Margaret Carpenter, founder of the Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine, is accused of mailing the “abortion-inducing drugs,” which are illegal to provide in Texas but not New York thanks to abortion “shield” laws, to a Collin County resident between the months of May and July. Paxton’s suit, which was filed on Thursday, claims to outline why and describes what allegedly happened as a result.

“About mid-May 2024, a 20-year-old female resident of Collin County, Texas became pregnant,” Paxton’s complaint says. “The mother of the unborn child did not communicate her pregnancy to the biological father of the unborn child. The mother did not have any life threatening physical condition aggravated by, caused by, or arising from the pregnancy that placed her at risk of death or any serious risk of substantial impairment. The mother proceeded to utilize telemedicine or telehealth services and received, through Carpenter, two abortion-inducing drugs or prescriptions. The first was a box for the drug mifepristone, 200 mg, followed by the ‘#1’ and the directions to take 1 tablet by mouth and to ‘take this medication first.’ The second was a pill bottle of misoprostol 200 mcg with directions to take 4 tablets (i.e., 800 mcg.) after the mifepristone.”

On July 16, the complaint claims the mother asked the biological father if he’d take her to the hospital due to a “hemorrhage or severe bleeding.” Health professionals at a hospital in Collin County, Texas, told the father what was going on and noted that she “had been” nine weeks pregnant. The woman went on to allegedly lose the child.

“The biological father of the unborn child, upon learning this information, concluded that the biological mother of the unborn child had intentionally withheld information from him regarding her pregnancy, and he further suspected that the biological mother had in fact done something to contribute to the miscarriage or abortion of the unborn child,” the complaint says. “The biological father, upon returning to the residence in Collin County, discovered the two above-referenced medications from Carpenter.”

According to Paxton, Carpenter violated Texas law by providing “abortion-inducing drugs” to the pregnant Collin County woman, “which caused an adverse event or abortion complication and resulted in a medical abortion,” his complaint says.

“Carpenter’s conduct violates the Texas Health and Safety Code’s prohibition on prescribing abortion-inducing drugs via telemedicine,” the document notes. “Carpenter’s knowing and continuing violations of Texas law places women and unborn children in Texas at risk. Carpenter sees Texas patients via telehealth and prescribes them abortion inducing medication.”

So what happens when abortion laws and offenders in states like New York and Texas collide in court? Legal experts tell The Texas Tribune it’s complicated.

“Regardless of what the courts in Texas do, the real question is whether the courts in New York recognize it,” Greer Donley, University of Pittsburgh professor, told the newspaper.

“Slavery is probably the best historical parallel to what we’re seeing now,” said Kermit Roosevelt, a law professor at Penn Carey Law at the University of Pennsylvania, back in February as Paxton was going after abortion activists and demanding medical records from out-of-state clinics that provide gender-affirming care to minors.

“Obviously, that didn’t end well,” Roosevelt told the Tribune. “Well, it did, because we abolished slavery federally, but it was a tough road.”

Texas has been threatening to take legal action such as the Carpenter suit for quite some time, according to the Tribune, but the Paxton filing against Carpenter marks the first known instance of a lawsuit actually being file, the paper reports.

John Seago, the president of Texas Right to Life, told The New York Times in February that pro-lifers were waiting for the “right case” to strike.

“We can definitely promise that in a pro-life state like Texas with committed elected officials and an attorney general and district attorneys who want to uphold our prolife laws, this is not something that’s going to be ignored for long,” Seago said.

In his suit, Paxton is asking a Collin County court to block Carpenter from violating Texas law and demands that she cough up $100,000 for each and every violation that she commits from here on out, regardless of what the New York law says.

“Unless Carpenter is restrained by this Court, with relief that is enforceable by a contempt order, Carpenter will continue to defiantly violate Texas Law,” Paxton’s complaint says. “Carpenter’s continued violation of our Texas statutes as stated herein is probable and imminent. The State is not required to establish that it will prevail at trial to obtain a temporary injunction as it only needs to plead a cause of action and show a probable right to the relief sought.”

States like New York that have “shield laws” — there’s currently 22 of them — are supposed to protect healthcare workers from cross-state court challenges and investigations. They can do this in several different ways, one being through a denial of extradition.

“If Texas wants to arrest someone who’s in Washington State [shield law state], one of their residents, Washington doesn’t have to arrest that person and extradite them back to Texas,” Darryl Brown, a law professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, told the Tribune in February.

“Maybe a state like Wyoming prosecutes someone who bought marijuana in Colorado and came back to Wyoming, but it doesn’t set off a battle where Wyoming is trying to get someone back from Colorado or get evidence from Colorado,” Brown said. “States just haven’t disagreed with each other so sharply that they have come to loggerheads about this.”

In 1974, the Supreme Court ruled in Bigelow v. Virginia that a “state does not acquire power or supervision over the internal affairs of another State merely because the welfare and health of its own citizens may be affected when they travel to that State.” However, that ruling stemmed from the 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, which is no longer in effect.

“The current U.S. Supreme Court, now that it has eviscerated Roe, could revisit Bigelow’s anti-extraterritoriality principle,” wrote legal scholars David Cohen, Greer Donley and Rachel Rebouché in a 2023 Columbia Law Review.

“Complicating this picture even further is how these rules apply to medication abortion,” the group said. “Abortion pills did not exist at the time of Bigelow and were not widely used at the time of Nixon. These medications can be legally obtained in one jurisdiction, one or both of the drugs can be taken elsewhere, and the pregnancy can end somewhere else entirely. In the immediate aftermath of Roe’s demise, abortion providers and lawyers reviewing medication abortion protocols are struggling to answer what had been a simple question with procedural abortion: Where does the abortion occur?”

Source link

The post Texas AG sues New York doctor for mailing abortion pills appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Trump threatens to sue New York Times, Penguin Random House

homesafetytechpros — Mon, 18 Nov 2024 03:23:02 +0000

Insets: New York Times and Penguin Random House buildings (YouTube/Fox News/Penguin Random House). Background: President-elect Donald Trump speaks at an election night watch party, Wednesday, Nov. 6, 2024, in West Palm Beach, Fla. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon).

President-elect Donald Trump has reportedly sent a $10 billion warning shot across the legal bows of Penguin Random House and the New York Times — threatening to sue the print giants for eleven figures — over allegedly “false and defamatory statements” that were published about him in articles before the election, the companies say.

“There was a time, long ago, when the New York Times was considered the ‘newspaper of record,’” a letter reads from Trump’s attorney, Edward Andrew Paltzik, to Penguin Random House and the Times, which was reviewed and first reported by Columbia Journalism Review on Thursday.

“Those halcyon days have passed,” the letter says, blasting the Times as a “full-throated mouthpiece of the Democratic Party” that employs “industrial-scale libel against political opponents,” per CJR.

The newspaper reportedly had “every intention of defaming and disparaging the world-renowned Trump brand that consumers have long associated with excellence, luxury, and success in entertainment, hospitality, and real estate, among many other industries, as well as falsely and maliciously defaming and disparaging him as a candidate for the highest office in the United States,” the letter asserts.

When CJR reported the legal threat on Thursday, it said the letter was received a week before the 2024 election. The ten-page warning names writers Peter Baker, Michael S. Schmidt, Susanne Craig and Russ Buettner as being behind “false and defamatory statements” published by the Times and Penguin Press, which is a publishing company within the Penguin Random House Group.

Some of the “defamatory” comments cited in Trump’s letter, per CJR, are about the future and former president’s alleged financial dealings, with there being references to Buettner and Craig’s recently released book, “Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created the Illusion of Success,” which was spurred on by a 2018 expose by the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporters and former Times journalist David Barstow, who disputed Trump’s claims of being a self-made billionaire.

“Drawing on over twenty years’ worth of Trump’s confidential tax information, including the tax returns he tried to conceal, alongside business records and interviews with Trump insiders, New York Times investigative reporters Russ Buettner and Susanne Craig track Trump’s financial rise and fall, and rise and fall again,” a description reads from Penguin Press.

Some other writings cited by Trump’s lawyer come from an October 20 article written by Baker for the Times — titled, “For Trump, a Lifetime of Scandals Heads Toward a Moment of Judgment” — in which he declared that “no major party presidential candidate, much less president, in American history” had been “accused of wrongdoing” as many times as Trump has. Publishers Weekly referred to “Lucky Loser” as a “scrupulous takedown of Trump’s competence and character” in its September review.

“Given the long list of well-known and historic business achievements by President Trump and his family, President Trump’s remarkable business, literary, media, and real estate achievements, and the fact that President Trump — and his life story — are the epitome of the American Dream and what it means to be an American patriot, as well as his lifelong support for America’s men and women in uniform, these defamatory statements are all the more despicable in their falsity,” Trump’s letter said.

The document claims that “harm” has been done to the value of Trump Media, per CJR, and reportedly demands $10 billion in damages. Trump is seeking this same amount in a lawsuit against CBS News over an October “60 Minutes” interview it aired with Vice President Kamala Harris, with his attorneys claiming the aired footage was “doctored” to “confuse, deceive, and mislead the public” to “tip the scales” in favor of Democrats before the election. Trump’s camp has blasted the move as “election and voter interference.” The complaint for that case was filed on Oct. 31 in the Northern District of Texas Amarillo Division, where U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk — a Trump appointee — is the lone federal judge.

On Nov. 5, Trump’s legal media crusade continued as he sent a four-page letter on behalf of campaign manager Chris LaCivita to the Daily Beast, per CJR, demanding that the outlet issue a correction and retraction for articles published about his co-chief, including one on Nov. 2 that is now titled, “Trump Raged at Daily Beast Revelation That Campaign Boss’ LLC Got $19.2 Million.”

The Daily Beast initially claimed that LaCivita “raked in” $22 million to help Trump win the 2024 election. An editor’s note has been added to the Nov. 2 story to clarify that it was actually $19.2 million in wake of Trump’s letter.

“Editor’s Note: The original version of this article mistakenly reported that LaCivita’s firm had received a total of $22 million from Trump’s campaign and affiliated PACs,” the Daily Beast says. “Based on a further review of FEC records, the correct total is $19.2 million. The Beast regrets the error. The article has also been updated to make clear that payments were to LaCivita’s LLC not to LaCivita personally.”

Trump’s crusade may have kicked off before the election, but it’s gained even more steam with his win and recent comments he’s made, with free speech advocacy watchdog group PEN America touching upon this in a press release on Friday.

“President-elect Donald Trump’s legal threats mark an ominous start to his transition to the White House, signaling his intent to escalate attacks on journalism and publishing,” said Tim Richardson, program director for Journalism and Disinformation at PEN America, in response to CJR’s reporting. “While The New York Times and Penguin Random House may have the resources to defend themselves against these clearly frivolous claims, smaller news outlets and publishers do not and may be forced to censor themselves rather than risk critical coverage of Trump. That is the point.”

According to Richardson, legal threats and lawsuits like the ones being hurled at CBS and the Times “aren’t about stopping false reporting or even winning cases” brought against them. “They’re about intimidating journalists, writers, and publishers into self-censorship,” Richardson charged. “The worrisome results will be less accountability for our elected leaders and a less informed public.”

Speaking in the press release, PEN America condemned the threats from Trump as being part of a “broader pattern by the President-elect targeting media organizations.” It cited the Times and Random House letter in the release, as well as the CBS lawsuit, the Daily Beast editor’s note and a recent Federal Election Commission complaint against the Washington Post.

“PEN America stands at the intersection of literature and human rights to protect free expression in the United States and worldwide,” the group says in a description. “We champion the freedom to write, recognizing the power of the word to transform the world. Our mission is to unite writers and their allies to celebrate creative expression and defend the liberties that make it possible.”

An insider tells CJR that Penguin Random House responded to Trump’s legal warning with a statement, saying it stood by everything it published. It’s unclear whether Trump’s lawyer has replied.

The Daily Beast, meanwhile, was unable to get off the hook with its editor’s note as Trump’s team sent a follow-up letter on Nov. 12 saying the move “does not remedy the overall messaging of the story — which depicts Mr. LaCivita as deceptively pocketing campaign money for his own personal gain and that he was and is on the verge of being ‘fired’ because of it,” Politico reports.

“This entire narrative is completely false and a result of malicious and irresponsible reporting by the Daily Beast,” the letter said. “Specifically, the now ‘corrected’ reporting has adjusted the $22 million figure to $19.2 million instead. While not all Daily Beast articles on this subject have yet incorporated the ‘corrected’ figure, some have been ‘updated’ with an editor’s note which stating that ‘This article was updated to clarify that the $22m went to LaCivita’s LLC and not to him personally.’ The remainder of the reporting has remained substantially the same, and despite the addition of the editor’s notes and corrections, it continues to falsely imply that Mr. LaCivita personally pocketed $19.2 million allegedly paid by the Trump campaign for campaign advertising.”

CBS has said that Trump’s lawsuit against the outlet is “completely without merit,” adding that it will “vigorously defend” itself against it. The Committee to Protect Journalists, another watchdog group, has blasted Trump’s legal attacks as being a “clear and direct danger to media freedom.”

“The hostile media climate fostered during Donald Trump’s first presidency — expected to continue in his forthcoming second term — poses great risks to media inside and outside the country,” the group said in a Nov. 6 statement.

“The threats against, and lies about, the media that have characterized much of the Republican Party’s presidential campaign represent a clear and direct danger to media freedom,” added CPJ CEO Jodie Ginsberg. “CPJ will continue to defend a free and independent press in the United States as we do around the world and to take all measures to keep reporters safe.”

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Source link

The post Trump threatens to sue New York Times, Penguin Random House appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Judge tosses lawyer’s dueling lawsuit against Willkie partner in spat over New York Post story

homesafetytechpros — Wed, 09 Oct 2024 01:54:23 +0000

Trials & Litigation

Judge tosses lawyer’s dueling lawsuit against Willkie partner in spat over New York Post story

By Debra Cassens Weiss

October 1, 2024, 10:54 am CDT

A Connecticut judge has ruled that a solo practitioner accused of facilitating a negative story about a BigLaw partner in the New York Post can’t sue for a declaratory judgment that his actions were protected by the First Amendment. (Image from Shutterstock)

A solo practitioner accused of facilitating a negative story about a BigLaw partner in the New York Post can’t sue for a declaratory judgment that his actions were protected by the First Amendment, a Connecticut judge has ruled.

Judge Edward Krumeich II of Connecticut tossed a lawsuit filed by Eric Grayson of Grayson & Associates as a strategic suit against public participation that is barred by a state anti-SLAPP law, Law360 reports.

Grayson’s First Amendment retaliation suit had alleged abuse of process and vexatious litigation by A. Mark Getachew, a partner at Willkie Farr & Gallagher, and his wife, DeNora Getachew.

The New York Post story had alleged that the Getachews stiffed their landlords on rent of $11,000 per month for a mansion in Greenwich, Connecticut; they contended that their repair costs for a pool, a hot tub and a waterfall that weren’t functioning had eclipsed their rental costs and their lease had been breached.

The landlords, who were Grayson’s former clients, were former Disney chief financial officer Lawrence Rutkowski and his company L&S Investments.

The Getachews were the first to sue for alleged abuse of process. They had alleged that Grayson and his then-clients had filed a court affidavit in their rental dispute, so that it could be used in the New York Post article, published in October 2020.

The Getachews filed a federal suit in October 2023 after first trying to add the abuse-of-process claim in their state court suit for breach of the rental lease.

A federal judge refused to dismiss the Getachews’ suit against Grayson and his landlord clients in April.

Krumeich said Grayson couldn’t sue because the underlying matter is about a case of public concern. Grayson’s suit admits that the New York Post article concerned a case of “public interest,” Krumeich said, because of similar situations in which wealthy tenants were accused of “squatting” in mansions to take advantage of eviction moratoriums during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Krumeich also said a declaratory judgment in Grayson’s suit would amount to a declaration that the Getachews’ pending federal suit is invalid, which amounts to an improper advisory opinion.

Grayson and his attorney, Proloy K. Das, did not immediately respond to ABA Journal emails seeking comment. Douglas J. Varga, a lawyer for the Getachews, also did not immediately respond to a Journal email requesting comment.

Source link

The post Judge tosses lawyer’s dueling lawsuit against Willkie partner in spat over New York Post story appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Trump readies second bite at recusal apple in New York cases

homesafetytechpros — Tue, 02 Apr 2024 06:01:58 +0000

Former U.S. President Donald Trump. (GDA via AP Images)

Former President Donald Trump plans to file a second motion to recuse the judge in charge of his New York City hush money case.

Several references to “recusal” are mentioned in a 13-page opposition brief filed by Trump’s attorneys late Monday. The brief itself largely aims to refute claims made by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg that Trump has violated a limited gag order issued in the case by New York Supreme Court Justice Juan M. Merchan in late March.

“Along with this opposition brief, President Trump is simultaneously submitting a pre-motion letter seeking leave to file a recusal motion based on changed circumstances and newly discovered evidence,” a footnote appended to the first instance of “recusal” explains.

The 45th president’s attorneys must seek leave from Merchan to challenge the judge’s authority to oversee the case due to an earlier court ruling intended to tamp down on the number of docket entries. In that order, Merchan expressed disdain for defense efforts to increasingly delay the proceedings. In turn, he instructed both the defense and the state to file a one-page letter explaining why they needed to file any given motion before filing any additional motions.

When Trump’s defense motion for recusal is filed, the effort appears likely to be a reprise in both form and substance of a June 2023 attempt to have Merchan tossed from the case due to his daughter’s activities as a Democratic Party-affiliated political consultant.

In May 2023, an Empire State court ethics panel found Merchan’s “impartiality cannot reasonably be questioned” because of his daughter’s “business and/or political activities” and that he was “not ethically required to disclose them.” The judge issued his own ruling in August 2023, finding that “recusal would not be in the public interest” and that he was “certain in [his] ability to be fair and impartial.”

In court filings Friday and Monday, Bragg’s office argued Trump had violated the gag order by attacking Merchan’s daughter on social media. And, in the alternative, the state argued the gag order should be explicitly expanded to prohibit attacks on the judge’s family.

Trump attorney Todd Blanche rubbished those notions as entirely off-base and unsupported by both the text and subtext of the gag order.

“The March 26, 2024 opinion indicates that the Court was aware of prior public statements by President Trump relating to Your Honor’s daughter, as relevant to the recusal issue, but the Court did not extend the gag order as the People suggest,” the defense filing reads. “No violation has occurred, much less a violation of a clearly expressed and unequivocal mandate. Therefore, there is no basis for the disingenuous contempt warning proposed by the People.”

On Friday, Bragg suggested sanctions for Trump under an Empire State law that calls for a $1,000 fine and/or up to 30 days in jail. On Monday, Bragg referenced numerous Truth Social media posts.

Trump has trained his sights on Merchan’s daughter due, in part, to her documented support for the Democratic Party. While the district attorney’s office calls this alleged motivating factor a “false claim,” Merchan’s daughter is, in fact, a Democratic Party-aligned consultant who heads Authentic Campaigns. The company has previously worked for prominent Democrats, including President Joe Biden.

Bragg’s filing also references the confusion over an X (formerly Twitter) account that recently used an image of Trump behind bars as its profile picture — but which changed its profile picture after being identified and attacked by Trump. The defendant alleges that the account belongs to Merchan’s daughter; the New York court system claims that the account no longer belongs to her; the district attorney’s office claims the entire episode was “a fraudulent impersonation.”

In their motion previewing the recusal motion — which is technically intended to respond to the state’s gag order violation arguments — the defense sticks to their position that Merchan’s daughter, at the very least, deserves some scrutiny over the X account profile picture flap.

“President Trump’s social media posts amplified defense arguments regarding the need for recusal that have been, and will continue to be, the subject of motion practice,” the defense filing continues. “The posts also addressed specific political opponents who are clients of Authentic, where Your Honor’s daughter is a partner and executive, and responded to media reports regarding a social media account attributed to Your Honor’s daughter.”

Trump’s response argues the issues involving the judge, his daughter, and the soon-to-be-relaunched recusal efforts are all intertwined.

“President Trump’s comments concerning Your Honor’s daughter are, properly understood, a criticism of the Court’s prior decision not to recuse itself,” the defense argues. “The People’s attempted distinction between criticisms of Your Honor — which are fully protected by the First and Sixth Amendments, as explained by the D.C. Circuit, and not covered by the gag order — and references to family members of the Court is thus illusory, because one legitimate and constitutionally protected criticism of the Court relates to the Court’s failure to recuse notwithstanding one member of the Court’s immediate family having a financial interest in all ongoing attacks on President Trump, including this case, by virtue of her senior role at Authentic. Thus, extending the gag order to the Court’s family would necessarily extend the gag order to cover the Court itself.”

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Source link

The post Trump readies second bite at recusal apple in New York cases appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

New York AG wins major victory against NRA, top leadership

homesafetytechpros — Sun, 25 Feb 2024 14:24:24 +0000

Wayne LaPierre, CEO of the National Rifle Association, leaves New York State Supreme Court as a jury continues deliberations during a trial, Wednesday, Feb. 21, 2024, in New York. (AP Photo/Frank Franklin II)

New York Attorney General Letitia James did not mince words after securing a landmark courtroom victory over the National Rifle Association (NRA) and three current and former senior leaders.

“This verdict is a major victory for the people of New York and our efforts to stop the corruption and greed at the NRA,” James said after the verdict. “For years, Wayne LaPierre used charitable dollars to fund his lavish lifestyle, spending millions on luxury travel, expensive clothes, insider contracts, and other perks for himself and his family. LaPierre and senior leaders at the NRA blatantly abused their positions and broke the law.”

The conservative pro-gun organization was found liable for improperly administering charitable funds, for ignoring whistleblower complaints, and for making false statements on regulatory filings.

The brunt of the jury’s verdict after the six-week-long trial, however, was reserved for LaPierre and two of his top lieutenants.

The group’s high-profile former leader, who stepped down from his long-held position just days before the trial began, was found liable for financial misconduct and corruption — along with the NRA’s former treasurer and CFO Wilson “Woody” Phillips.

Additionally, Phillips and one of the group’s current top lawyers, John Frazer — who also still serves as the NRA’s corporate secretary — were found liable for failing to uphold certain duties nonprofit executives owe to their organizations under Empire State law.

LaPierre, who was the NRA’s CEO and executive vice president from 1991 until earlier this year, was found liable for $5.4 million in damages to the New York-based organization. He had earlier paid roughly $1 million back to the group and is still on the hook for some $4.35 million, according to the attorney general’s office.

Phillips and Frazer were found liable to the tune of $2 million each.

“[T]oday, after years of rampant corruption and self-dealing, Wayne LaPierre and the NRA are finally being held accountable,” James’ statement continued. “We will not hesitate to pursue justice against any individual or organization that violates our laws or our trust, no matter how powerful they are.”

In August 2020, the attorney general’s office sued the NRAA, LaPierre and the other defendants. The lawsuit sought dissolution of the group and alleged years of rampant fraud — including the use of the organization’s funds to sustain LaPierre’s lavish lifestyle.

In one such allegation that James’ office suggested was an example of the group’s endemic corruption, executives allegedly took helicopter trips to NASCAR races to avoid car traffic.

The NRA fought back to have the lawsuit dismissed, paused, or transferred. In January 2021, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Joel Cohen shot down those efforts — paving the way for the eventual trial years down the line. Cohen put the kibosh on a similar request in September 2022. An effort by the NRA to countersue James’ office also failed. As did last-ditch efforts by the group to file for bankruptcy and attempt a corporate reorganization in seemingly friendlier Texas.

Aside from the money judgments in the case, a separate hearing before Cohen will now determine whether the attorney general’s office is entitled to non-monetary relief. James has pushed for an independent monitor to oversee the administration of the NRA’s assets, an overhauling of the group’s rules and bylaws relevant to their assets, and for LaPierre to be permanently banned from the NRA or from serving in any other executive role for a New York-based nonprofit.

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Source link

The post New York AG wins major victory against NRA, top leadership appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.

Trump will show in New York but miss Fani hearing in Georgia

homesafetytechpros — Tue, 13 Feb 2024 16:15:30 +0000

Left: Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis speaks in the Fulton County Government Center during a news conference, Monday, Aug. 14, 2023, in Atlanta. (AP Photo/John Bazemore, File). Center:FILE – Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump arrives to speak at a primary election night party in Nashua, N.H., Tuesday, Jan. 23, 2024, with Eric and Lara Trump. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File). Right: NDZ/STAR MAX/IPx 2024 2/8/24 Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, Jr. makes a law enforcement-related announcement at the Manhattan DA Offices on February 8, 2024, in New York City.

Donald Trump indicated on Tuesday that he will attend a largely procedural hearing for his criminal hush-money case in New York instead of an arguably more significant hearing in Georgia where the very prosecutor he has steadily railed against for more than a year could potentially be thrown off the case.

The development was first reported by Politico. Trump’s attorney in the Georgia election interference indictment, Steve Sadow, made the disclosure Tuesday.

Notably, Trump’s hearing in his criminal case in New York will not be televised, whereas the hearing in Georgia will likely be livestreamed from Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee’s courtroom.

The decision to forgo the spotlight in Georgia comes during a slog of a legal week for the Republican Party’s presumptive 2024 presidential nominee. The hearing in New York is expected to determine whether Trump’s trial will get underway starting March 25. It could be the first criminal trial he faces this year.

Source link

The post Trump will show in New York but miss Fani hearing in Georgia appeared first on Home Safety Tech Pros.