More stories

  • in

    The Menendez Brothers Are a Test for Society and the Courts

    Recently, a Los Angeles judge delayed a hearing for Erik and Lyle Menendez in their bid to be resentenced for the murder of their parents 35 years ago. Renewed interest in the brothers’ case, fueled by Netflix’s recent docudrama series and documentary on the brothers, has drawn celebrity advocates to call for their release, alongside an army of TikTok accounts. Unfortunately for the brothers, social advocacy rarely corresponds to judicial change.The Menendez brothers shot and killed their parents in August of 1989, when Erik was 18 and Lyle was 21. For months, the murders went unsolved, and the police believed that perhaps the parents had been victims of a mafia hit. During that time, the brothers went on a spending spree, buying cars, private tennis lessons, even a restaurant. When the truth finally emerged, the world was shocked. How could two young men born into privilege squander not only their futures but also quite possibly their lives?There was a televised trial, the men sobbing on the stand, detailing years of abuse at the hands of their father. Sexual abuse, emotional abuse, coercion, violence. And their mother — where was she in all of this? Drinking away the woes of her family, failing in her sacred duty to protect her children.The trial ended in hung juries, and Judge Stanley Weisberg declared a mistrial. So the men were tried again in 1995, and this time it was not televised. Judge Weisberg seemed to say enough with the shenanigans and less of this messy talk of abuse. He barred much of the evidence of the sexual perversions of Lyle and Erik’s father, Jose Menendez. The trial ended in convictions for each brother, and sentences of life without parole.I was in college and then graduate school as the fate of the Menendez brothers played out. Their lurid travails were a sort of background static for the orderly world in which I lived, attending classes, struggling with rent and groceries. What did rich kids have to be so upset over?Like so many people, I now understand more of how abuse and trauma play out in a person’s life. I understand that a male victim of abuse feels the pain no less than a woman, a child even more so. What I question is whether judges have absorbed this new understanding of abuse, and whether a court today would reach a different verdict.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

  • in

    U.S. Court Denies TikTok’s Request to Freeze Sale-or-Ban Law

    TikTok had sought to temporarily freeze a law that requires its Chinese parent to sell the app or face a U.S. ban next month. The case may now head to the Supreme Court.A federal court on Friday denied TikTok’s request to temporarily freeze a law that requires its Chinese parent company to sell the app or face a ban in the United States as of Jan. 19, a decision that puts the fate of the app in the Supreme Court’s hands.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said in a filing late on Friday that an injunction was “unwarranted,” and that it had expedited its decision so that TikTok and its users could seek an emergency freeze from the Supreme Court.A week ago, three judges in the same court unanimously denied petitions from the company and its users to overturn the law. TikTok then asked the court on Monday to temporarily block the law until the Supreme Court decided on TikTok’s planned appeal of that decision, and sought a decision by Dec. 16.The court said on Friday that TikTok and its users “have not identified any case in which a court, after rejecting a constitutional challenge to an Act of Congress, has enjoined the Act from going into effect while review is sought in the Supreme Court.”It isn’t clear whether the Supreme Court will agree to temporarily freeze the law and hear the case, though experts say that is likely.Michael Hughes, a spokesman for TikTok, said, “As we have previously stated, we plan on taking this case to the Supreme Court, which has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech.” He said that American users’ voices would be “silenced” if the law were not stopped.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

  • in

    Albertsons Backs Out of Merger Deal and Sues Kroger After Court Rulings

    The supermarket chain had tried to join forces with Kroger, but judges sided with federal and state regulators who charged that the merger would reduce competition.The grocery chain Albertsons said on Wednesday that it had backed out of its $25 billion merger with Kroger and sued its rival for failing to adequately push for regulatory approval, after both a federal and state judge blocked the deal on Tuesday.The deal, which would have been the biggest grocery store merger in U.S. history, faced three separate legal challenges — one filed by the Federal Trade Commission — over concerns that the combined company would reduce competition and raise prices. Judge Adrienne Nelson of U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon temporarily halted the deal on Tuesday, siding with federal regulators who have argued that the merger would lessen competition at the expense of consumers and workers.Another decision blocking the merger in Washington State court, issued by Judge Marshall Ferguson just one hour later, added to the hurdles facing the companies.“Given the recent federal and state court decisions to block our proposed merger with Kroger, we have made the difficult decision to terminate the merger agreement,” Vivek Sankaran, chief executive of Albertsons, said in a statement. “We are deeply disappointed in the courts’ decisions.”On Wednesday, Albertsons also said it filed a lawsuit against Kroger in the Delaware Court of Chancery, seeking billions of dollars in damages and accusing Kroger of failing to exercise “best efforts” to secure regulatory approval. Kroger refused to divest assets necessary for antitrust approval, ignored regulators’ feedback and rejected strong buyers of stores it had planned to divest, Albertsons said in a statement announcing the lawsuit.Erin Rolfes, a spokeswoman for Kroger, disputed Albertsons’s claims, calling them “without merit.” Albertsons breached the merger agreement multiple times, she said in a statement, and the company filed the lawsuit in an attempt to deflect responsibility and seek payment for the merger’s termination fee.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

  • in

    2 Indianapolis Officers Are Acquitted of Manslaughter in 2022 Death

    Herman Whitfield III had told officers “I’m dying” and that he couldn’t breathe after one of the officers deployed a Taser, according to body camera footage.Two Indianapolis police officers were acquitted on Friday of involuntary manslaughter charges in the 2022 death of Herman Whitfield III, after he was handcuffed and placed face down by the officers, who were responding to reports that he was having a mental health crisis.A jury also acquitted the officers, Adam Ahmad, 32, and Steven Sanchez, 35, of all of the other charges they faced, including reckless homicide, a felony, and felony and misdemeanor battery charges, according to court records. Officer Sanchez had also faced a second count of involuntary manslaughter for using a Taser on Mr. Whitfield, but that charge was dismissed before trial, according to one of the officer’s lawyers.Officers Ahmad and Sanchez will return to normal duty after they complete a refresher training, Chris Bailey, the chief of police for the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department, said on social media. As part of a standard protocol, the officers had been placed on various administrative duties after they were indicted, according to their lawyers, John F. Kautzman and Mason Riley.“We had always maintained that they did not do anything wrong in this case,” Mr. Kautzman said in an interview on Friday evening. “They certainly did not engage in any kind of criminal activity.”On April 25, 2022, Officers Ahmad and Sanchez arrived at the Whitfields’ home after Mr. Whitfield’s mother, Gladys Whitfield, called 911 saying that her son was having a mental health crisis. Body camera footage that was released after his death showed Mr. Whitfield, who was 39, walking around the house naked.In another portion of the footage, Mr. Whitfield starts running and an officer draws a Taser and pulled the trigger, stunning Mr. Whitfield. He falls and the officers handcuff him, face down. Mr. Whitfield can be heard saying “I’m dying” and that he can’t breathe and, later, the officers are seen performing CPR on him.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

  • in

    Which States Have Passed Bans on Treatment for Transgender Minors?

    The challenge to a Tennessee law before the Supreme Court this week traces its roots to the spring of 2021, when Arkansas became the first state to pass a law prohibiting gender-transition treatments for minors. Alabama followed in 2022. Tennessee’s was part of a coordinated deluge: Of 28 states where Republicans control the legislature, 24 now restrict doctors from providing puberty blockers, hormone therapies or surgery to transgender minors. Two more, New Hampshire and Arizona, ban only surgeries.Why the flood? In exploring the motivation behind Florida’s ban, one federal district judge, Robert Hinkle, concluded that some of the state’s lawmakers acted on “old-fashioned discriminatory animus.” But Republican lawmakers in many states have said that they are seeking to shield adolescents from a path that has become more common, with consequences they are too young to fully comprehend. Republican strategists, for their part, have said that elevating the issue was a winning strategy leading up to the 2024 election.United States v. Skrmetti, the challenge to Tennessee’s ban, is one of 18 filed over the last three years, with mixed results. The highest courts in two states, Texas and Nebraska, have upheld their restrictions. By contrast, two federal district judges — Judge Hinkle in Florida and Judge James M. Moody Jr. in Arkansas — struck down bans in those states. But their decisions are being appealed, and preliminary injunctions on enforcement of the bans in Alabama and Indiana, each issued by a federal district judge, were reversed by separate appeals courts. Eleven other cases are in various stages of litigation.How the Supreme Court rules on Skrmetti will almost surely affect how lower courts handle the challenges to similar statutes in states across the country. But the outcome may not be universal.“If Tennessee wins, the states will say ‘Skrmetti controls,’ and vice versa,” said Jim Campbell, chief counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal advocacy group that is helping to defend Idaho’s ban on transition treatments for minors. “And then the other side, the losing side, will say, ‘No, it’s actually different, and here’s why.’” More

  • in

    Owners of Colorado Funeral Home Admit to Abusing Nearly 200 Corpses

    Jon and Carie Hallford pleaded guilty to corpse abuse after dozens of decaying bodies were found at their funeral home.A couple who owned a funeral home at two locations in Colorado pleaded guilty on Friday to multiple counts of corpse abuse, more than a year after 191 bodies were found decaying at their businesses in a horrific scene, the authorities said.The couple, Jon and Carie Hallford, operated the Return to Nature Funeral Home in Colorado Springs and Penrose, Colo.They agreed to facing 15 to 20 years in prison after they each pleaded guilty in El Paso County Court to 191 felony counts of abuse of a corpse, Michael Allen, the district attorney for the 4th Judicial District of Colorado, said at a news conference.The Hallfords are scheduled to be sentenced in April.Return to Nature advertised to families that their loved ones would be given green burials that included the use of biodegradable caskets, baskets or shrouds.But when a foul odor led investigators to the Penrose location, they found at least 190 improperly stored corpses at the Hallfords’ funeral home in Penrose and Colorado Springs in October last year. They were arrested in November.“The impact on these family members has been immense,” Mr. Allen said.He added that the Hallfords deceived grieving families and that “having somebody violate that trust is something that they’ll likely never recover from.”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

  • in

    Why Botham Jean’s Family Won’t Get $100 Million Awarded by Jury

    Cities have paid out billions of dollars in police misconduct cases, but depending on the case, families may not receive any money at all. A recent $100 million penalty for a police shooting case in Dallas may never lead to a payout.The family of George Floyd received $27 million after he was killed by police officers in Minneapolis. The family of Breonna Taylor got $12 million. Richard Cox, who was paralyzed after a ride in a police van in New Haven, Conn., got $46 million.But the family of Botham Shem Jean, who was killed by an off-duty officer, Amber R. Guyger, as he watched television in his apartment in Dallas in 2018, may never see a penny.That is not because the courts did not value his life. On Tuesday, a jury awarded his family almost $100 million. The difference lies, rather, in who was held responsible for his death.How do police violence cases usually work?In many high-profile cases of police violence, the city or county where the misconduct occurred is responsible for any payout connected to wrongful death or injury. Those taxpayer-funded payouts have amounted to billions of dollars: In 2023, New York City paid nearly $115 million in police misconduct settlements, according to an analysis by the Legal Aid Society.Awards to victims or their families can vary greatly, depending on factors such as the projected earnings over a victim’s lifetime, the sympathies of juries in a given jurisdiction and the amount of publicity generated by the case. Some families win money in civil rights claims even when the officers involved are not criminally charged or disciplined.But in order to have a successful case, plaintiffs must surmount at least two significant legal obstacles. First, officers are granted qualified immunity from lawsuits if victims cannot show that the officers have violated their “clearly established” rights. Second, municipalities can be held responsible only if the plaintiff’s rights were violated because of a negligent policy or practice — for example, if the police department had ignored previous bad behavior on the part of an officer or had failed to properly train its officers.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

  • in

    Urologist Who Sexually Abused Patients Is Sentenced to Life in Prison

    Darius A. Paduch, a fertility specialist, assaulted men and boys for years at prominent New York hospitals, prosecutors said.A urologist convicted of sexually abusing seven patients, including five who were minors, was sentenced to life in prison on Wednesday, prosecutors said.The doctor, Darius A. Paduch, a fertility specialist, molested boys and young men for years at two prominent New York hospitals, prosecutors said. Hundreds of other young men and boys have also accused Dr. Paduch, 57, of abuse spanning more than 15 years in scores of civil suits.Dr. Paduch “was a sexual predator who preyed on patients seeking treatment for sensitive medical issues,” Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan, said in a statement on Wednesday. “He used his position as a renowned urologist at prestigious hospitals to sexually assault vulnerable patients, including children, to gratify his own sexual desires.”In May, a jury found him guilty of five counts of inducing a minor to engage in unlawful sexual activity and six counts of enticing people to travel to engage in unlawful sexual activity. The trial lasted just two weeks.On Wednesday, his sentence was handed down by Judge Ronnie Abrams in federal court in Manhattan.Dr. Paduch, of North Bergen, N.J., was arrested last April. He has been barred from practicing in New York. Through the trial, he maintained his innocence. A lawyer who represented him, Michael Baldassare, said on Wednesday that “we are confident that one day he will be vindicated.”Once a urologist who specialized in treating patients with a genetic condition, Dr. Paduch worked at hospitals including NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital and Weill-Cornell Medical Center in Manhattan and Northwell Health on Long Island. According to prosecutors, he used his position at prominent hospitals “to make the victims believe that the sexual abuse he inflicted on them was medically necessary and appropriate, when, in fact, it was not.”The abuse continued over several years in some cases, as Dr. Paduch instructed the patients to return for follow-up appointments, where he continued to assault them. During appointments, the indictment said, Dr. Paduch told patients to masturbate in front of him, sometimes groping them or showing them pornography.During the course of the trial, 11 victims testified about abuse they had suffered under Dr. Paduch’s care, and dozens more wrote impact statements before he was sentenced Wednesday.Mallory Allen, a lawyer for a firm that represents 140 former patients who have filed civil suits against him, said in a statement that the sentence affirms that “heinous sexual abuse will not be overlooked.”Survivors of the abuse have also sued the hospitals where he worked under the Adult Survivors Act, which opened a yearlong window between 2022 and 2023 during which adult victims of abuse could file claims even after the statute of limitations had passed.“While no sentence can ever undo the pain and suffering endured by each and every survivor who experienced abuse at the hands of Dr. Darius Paduch, the sentencing closes an important chapter for these survivors,” Ms. Allen said in the statement. More