Decisions and Verdicts

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Darius Paduch Found Guilty of Sexual Abuse of Patients

      by

      Darius Paduch, who worked at several leading New York hospitals, has been accused of molesting hundreds of patients over 17 years.A urologist who worked at two prominent New York hospitals was found guilty on Wednesday of sexually abusing seven patients, including five who were minors when the abuse began.The doctor, Darius A. Paduch, 56, has been accused of molesting hundreds of young men and boys between 2006 and 2023. Prosecutors arrested Dr. Paduch last year, saying he had persuaded victims to travel to his offices in New York and New Jersey so he could abuse them under the guise of medical care.Dr. Paduch “leveraged his position of trust as a medical doctor for his own perverse gratification,” Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan, said in a statement on Wednesday. “For years, patients seeking needed medical care, many of them children, left his office as victims.”A Manhattan jury found Dr. Paduch, of North Bergen, N.J., guilty of six counts of persuading, inducing, enticing or coercing an individual to travel to engage in unlawful sexual activity and five counts of using an interstate facility to persuade, induce, entice or coerce a minor to engage in unlawful sexual activity.Anthony T. DiPietro, a lawyer representing more than 225 former patients ages 12 to 60 who have filed civil lawsuits, said it was going to take time for many of his clients to process the news. But, he said, “we are all grateful that Darius Paduch will never be able to do this to a single patient in New York State or anyplace else ever again.”He added that it was common that victims of sexual abuse told no one. “They’ve been carrying this burden around with them, in some instances, for five years, 10 years or more,” he said. ”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Georgia Appeals Court to Weigh Whether Trump Prosecutor Should Be Disqualified

      by

      The decision to hear the appeal reopens the possibility that Fani T. Willis, the Fulton County district attorney, could be disqualified from prosecuting Donald Trump and 14 allies over efforts to overturn the 2020 election.The Georgia Court of Appeals will hear an appeal of a ruling that allowed Fani T. Willis, the district attorney in Fulton County, to continue leading the prosecution of former President Donald J. Trump on charges related to election interference, the court announced on Wednesday.The decision to hear the appeal, handed down by a three-judge panel, is likely to further delay the Georgia criminal case against Mr. Trump and 14 of his allies, making it less likely that the case will go to trial before the November election.The terse three-sentence announcement reopens the possibility that Ms. Willis could be disqualified from the biggest case of her career, and one of the most significant state criminal cases in the nation’s history.At issue is a romantic relationship she had with Nathan Wade, a lawyer she hired to handle the prosecution of Mr. Trump. Defense lawyers argued that the relationship amounted to an untenable conflict of interest, and that Ms. Willis and her entire office should be removed from the case.But on March 15, Judge Scott McAfee of Fulton County Superior Court ruled that Ms. Willis could keep the case if Mr. Wade stepped away from it. Mr. Wade resigned a few hours after judge issued his ruling.Steven H. Sadow, the lead counsel for Mr. Trump in Georgia, said in a statement Wednesday that his client “looks forward to presenting interlocutory arguments to the Georgia Court of Appeals as to why the case should be dismissed and Fulton County D.A. Willis should be disqualified for her misconduct in this unjustified, unwarranted political persecution.”A spokesman for Ms. Willis’s office declined to comment on the appeals court’s action. More

    • 75 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      A Land Artist’s Work Evades Demolition

      by

      A federal judge granted a temporary restraining order protecting a work by Mary Miss. A Des Moines museum wanted to destroy it, citing safety concerns.A work of environmental art by Mary Miss has evaded demolition — for now. A judge in the U.S. District Court in Des Moines on Friday granted her request for a temporary restraining order that would bar the Des Moines Art Center, the museum that commissioned the land art installation, from dismantling it. The museum maintains it has become a safety hazard and that the resources to repair it are not available.The decision, the Art Center said in a statement, amounts to “a court-ordered stalemate.”While the judge, Stephen H. Locher, found that destroying the work, “Greenwood Pond: Double Site” (1989-1996), would violate the Art Center’s contract with the artist, he also said that Miss could not force the museum to restore it to its original condition. He wrote, “The end result is therefore an unsatisfying status quo: the artwork will remain standing (for now) despite being in a condition that no one likes but that the court cannot order anyone to change.”The lawsuit is the latest twist in a fight over the fate of “Greenwood Pond,” which has highlighted the difficulty of preserving large-scale public artworks, especially for smaller institutions. Located on the grounds of a city-owned park next to the museum, the installation is a collection of sloping walkways, wooden sitting areas, huts and towers that encourage visitors to engage with the landscape. Over the years, the wood has degraded substantially, and the Art Center estimates that it would cost between $2 million and $2.6 million to restore it. (Miss contests that, but has not provided another figure.)In an interview on Tuesday, Miss said, “I don’t know why the museum wouldn’t come to me at this point and try to work this out instead of spending more money on legal fees.”Having visited “Greenwood Pond: Double Site” while in Des Moines to testify, she said she felt a newfound appreciation for the work. “I just can’t imagine this whole thing going south at this point,” she said.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Prosecutors Ask Judge to Hold Trump in Contempt for a Second Time

      by

      Two days after former President Donald J. Trump was held in contempt and fined for violating the gag order placed on him in his criminal trial in Manhattan, the judge overseeing the case conducted a hearing to determine if Mr. Trump had broken the rules again.Justice Juan M. Merchan did not reach a decision on the question during the 40-minute proceeding that took place on Thursday in Manhattan Criminal Court, where Mr. Trump is being tried on charges of falsifying business records to cover up a hush-money payment to a porn star on the eve of the 2016 election.But during the hearing — the second in the past two weeks concerning violations of the gag order — Justice Merchan heard arguments from prosecutors and Mr. Trump’s lawyers about whether the former president should be sanctioned again for ignoring the protective measure four more times. The allegations stem from Mr. Trump’s recent remarks in interviews and news conferences, including one that took place outside the same courtroom where his trial is being held.On Tuesday, Justice Merchan fined Mr. Trump $9,000 for nine earlier violations. In that ruling, the judge bemoaned the fact that he lacked the authority to issue steeper fines and warned the former president that continued disobedience could land him in jail.The two contempt hearings were the latest reminder of the extraordinary measures that judges have taken to keep Mr. Trump from lashing out at participants in the wide array of legal matters in which he is embroiled.Christopher Conroy, a prosecutor, opened Thursday’s hearing by asking Justice Merchan to fine Mr. Trump $1,000 for each of the four new violations of the gag order that he said took place in recent days as the jury heard evidence.Mr. Conroy reminded the judge that he had imposed the gag order to begin with “because of the defendant’s persistent and escalating rhetoric,” adding that Mr. Trump’s “statements are corrosive to this proceeding and the fair administration of justice.”Mr. Conroy went on to say that Mr. Trump had violated the gag order not only repeatedly, but also willfully.“The defendant thinks the rules should be different for him,” he said.Todd Blanche, a lawyer for Mr. Trump, reprised arguments he made last week. He sought to persuade Justice Merchan that his client’s statements had been made merely in response to political attacks from others — including President Biden.Referring to the rows of reporters behind him in the courtroom, Mr. Blanche said that in a case that has attracted such immense publicity, it was unfair that Mr. Trump was constrained from reacting to verbal assaults.While Justice Merchan seemed open to the idea that Mr. Trump should not be defenseless against attacks from enemies or rivals, he pointed out that the gag order did not bar him from saying whatever he wished about Mr. Biden.The judge also noted that no one has forced Mr. Trump to speak daily to reporters who gather in a courtroom hallway at every break in the proceeding.“The former president of the United States is on trial, and he’s the leading candidate of the Republican Party,” Justice Merchan said. “It’s not surprising we have press in the courtroom.”The first incident the judge was asked to consider took place on April 22 as testimony began. Mr. Trump went after one of the state’s main witnesses, Michael D. Cohen, describing him as a liar to reporters outside the courtroom. Mr. Cohen, who was once a lawyer and fixer for Mr. Trump, is expected to take the stand in the coming weeks and describe how he paid $130,000 to the porn star, Stormy Daniels, on his boss’s behalf to keep her from going public with her story of a sexual encounter with him.Later that same day, Mr. Trump made disparaging remarks about jurors during a telephone interview with a right-wing media outlet, Real America’s Voice. The jury, he said, was “mostly all Democrat,” adding, “It’s a very unfair situation.”The next morning — just before he was scheduled to appear in court for a hearing on his previous violations of the gag order — Mr. Trump attacked Mr. Cohen again during a television interview with an ABC affiliate in Pennsylvania.“Michael Cohen is a convicted liar,” Mr. Trump said, “and he’s got no credibility whatsoever.”Another incident took place on April 25 when Mr. Trump, appearing at a news conference in midtown Manhattan, made a comment to reporters about David Pecker, the former publisher of The National Enquirer. Later that morning, Mr. Pecker would continue his testimony about deals he had reached with the former president to “catch and kill” negative stories about him.“He’s been very nice,” Mr. Trump said. “I mean, he’s been — David’s been very nice. A nice guy.” More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Arizona Rancher Accused of Killing Migrant Won’t Be Retried After Mistrial

      by

      George Alan Kelly was accused of murdering Gabriel Cuen-Buitimea, an unarmed migrant from Mexico, on his 170-acre ranch in Kino Springs, Ariz., last year.Prosecutors in Arizona said on Monday that they would not retry a rancher who was charged with murdering an unarmed migrant on his property last year after a mistrial was declared last week.Jurors were not able to reach a unanimous verdict in the case against George Kelly, 75, who fatally shot at Gabriel Cuen-Buitimea, 48, on his 170-acre ranch in Kino Springs, Ariz., after Mr. Cuen-Buitimea crossed the U.S.-Mexico border in January 2023. Judge Thomas Fink of Santa Cruz County Superior Court declared a mistrial on April 22.The Santa Cruz District Attorney’s Office said in a statement on Monday that “because of the unique circumstances and challenges surrounding” the case, Mr. Kelly would not be retried.“However, our office’s decision in this case should not be construed as a position on future cases of this type,” the office said. “Our office is mandated by statute to prosecute criminal acts, and we take that statutory mandate seriously.”Brenna Larkin, a lawyer for Mr. Kelly, did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Monday.Ms. Larkin said last week that there had been a hung jury in the case, and that the final count had been 7-1 in favor of finding Mr. Kelly not guilty.Mr. Cuen-Buitimea was part of a group of undocumented migrants who were crossing the high desert in Kino Springs, Ariz., near the border with Mexico on Jan. 30, 2023, when they were spotted by Border Patrol and fled, according to the authorities. Mr. Cuen-Buitimea and another man, Daniel Ramirez, ran onto Mr. Kelly’s ranch, which is when Mr. Kelly fired an AK-47-style rifle at them, the authorities said.Mr. Cuen-Buitimea was struck in the back and died, law enforcement officials said.Mr. Kelly was charged in February 2023 with one count of second-degree murder and two counts of aggravated assault.The case emboldened immigration critics and conservative ranchers, who said that Mr. Kelly had been a victim, while others were horrified by the shooting.Ms. Larkin said in court documents that Mr. Kelly had been eating lunch the day of the shooting when he and his wife saw several men armed with rifles near his home.“Mr. Kelly responded by firing several warning shots over the heads of the group,” she wrote in court documents.Michael Jette, a deputy Santa Cruz County attorney, said during closing arguments on April 18 that Mr. Kelly had fired his gun “without verbal warning, without a shout, without any indication,” The Associated Press reported.Before the case went to trial in March, Mr. Kelly rejected a plea agreement that would have reduced the charges to one count of negligent homicide. More

    • 163 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      How a New Trial for Harvey Weinstein Could Again Test the Legal System

      by

      A new jury would hear from only one or both of the women whom he was convicted of assaulting, in what analysts say will be a much narrower and weaker case.As one of Harvey Weinstein’s key accusers took the witness stand during his trial in New York, she broke down in tears, sobbing uncontrollably. After a brief break, she still could not compose herself. The trial was adjourned for the day. Hyperventilating, the woman was ushered out and her piercing screams bellowed out from a back room.The episode was one of many tense moments in the highly publicized, weekslong trial of the former Hollywood titan in 2020. Now, they may happen all over again.On Thursday, New York’s highest court ruled that the trial judge who presided over the sex crimes case in Manhattan erred when he let several women testify that Mr. Weinstein had assaulted them, even though their accusations were not part of the charges brought against the producer. The appeals court ordered a new trial.But the original trial in 2020 against Mr. Weinstein was about much more than one man’s guilt. It had morphed into something more, as his accusers sparked the global #MeToo movement: Prosecutors were trying to prove not only that Mr. Weinstein was a sexual predator, but also that the justice system was both willing and able to hold powerful men accountable for their treatment of women.The new ruling may do little to change the public’s perception of Mr. Weinstein, who is still notorious and behind bars and was sentenced to 16 years in prison for sex crimes in California.For some, however, it raised new doubts about the legal system’s ability to hold influential people like him responsible.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      The Offense That Harvey Weinstein Can Never Be Convicted Of

      by

      The movie producer won his appeal in New York on Thursday. But his story, at its core, is about work, and it can’t be measured by a criminal court.For the first time in years, there is a chance that Harvey Weinstein could walk free.His New York conviction for sex crimes was overturned on Thursday. Manhattan’s district attorney says he wants to retry Mr. Weinstein, but that seems, at most, a maybe. The former film producer still has a long sentence to serve in Los Angeles, though next month he is expected to appeal that conviction on grounds similar to those that were successful in New York. His lawyer is the same one who got Bill Cosby’s conviction tossed out.Many of Mr. Weinstein’s accusers say they are horrified. Even some of the seven judges who participated in the decision were outraged. The majority — ruling that his trial was unfair because it introduced witnesses separate from the central charges — prevailed by a single vote, 4 to 3. The dissenting judges described that decision as “oblivious,” “naïve” and “endangering decades of progress.” They have joined a roiling debate about what the standard of evidence in sex crimes trials should be.But criminal convictions have never seemed like the ultimate measure of Mr. Weinstein’s behavior. Whether he remains a felon or not, he can never be tried for the most overarching offense he is accused of.That is because, at its core, the Weinstein story — along with its greatest impact — is all about work.“A lot of these stories are about what’s been lost career-wise, and there’s no criminal remedy that is going to get at that,” Deborah Tuerkheimer, a law professor at Northwestern, said in an interview.Back when Mr. Weinstein was at the height of his power, he had many gifts as a producer. But where he stood above others was in his ability to make careers. He hired and molded Matt Damon, Michelle Williams, Jennifer Lawrence, Quentin Tarantino and some of the most successful producers working today. He invented the Oscar campaign as we know it. At those awards, he was thanked more often than God.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Jury Deadlocks on Murder Count Against Ex-Deputy in Killing of Colorado Man

      by

      A jury convicted the former deputy of reckless endangerment in the fatal shooting of a man who called 911 for help, but said it was unable to reach a verdict on charges of murder and official misconduct.A former sheriff’s deputy who fatally shot a 22-year-old man who had called 911 for help in June 2022 was found guilty on Friday of reckless endangerment, though a Colorado jury said it was unable to reach a verdict on charges of murder and official misconduct.The judge in the case, which drew scrutiny over how the police handle crisis intervention, scheduled a hearing for Monday afternoon to discuss sentencing on the reckless endangerment charge and the jury’s inability to reach a verdict on the other two counts after three days of deliberations.The former deputy, Andrew Buen, was charged in November 2022 with second-degree murder, official misconduct and reckless endangerment in the fatal shooting of Christian Glass, who called the police for help after his S.U.V. got stuck on an embankment on a mountain road near Silver Plume, Colo., about 45 miles west of Denver.Prosecutors and a lawyer for Mr. Buen did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Friday.“This is small step toward justice,” Siddhartha Rathod, a lawyer for the Glass family, said in a brief interview on Friday. After Mr. Glass called 911 for help on June 10, 2022, about a half-dozen officers, including Mr. Buen, arrived and spent more than an hour trying to persuade him to get out of his S.U.V.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More