US crime

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Homicides in major US cities falling at ‘one of fastest rates ever’ – report

      by

      Homicides in major US cities are falling at likely “one of the fastest rates of decline ever recorded”, a crime analysis has found.Jeff Asher of AH Datalytics, a New Orleans-based data-analytics company focused on criminal justice, education and the non-profit sector, discussed that finding with the Wall Street Journal on Monday after combing through quarterly data recently released by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).“There’s just a ton of places that you can point to that are showing widespread, very positive trends,” Asher told the Journal.In the company’s sample of almost 200 cities with varying population sizes, murder was down by 20.8% from the period beginning in January through the end of March of this year when compared with the same time period in 2023, as Asher wrote in a recent Substack post on the subject.Furthermore, in some prominent cities like Washington DC, New Orleans, Las Vegas, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Detroit, Columbus, Nashville and Philadelphia, murder is down by more than 30%.Asher’s company’s analysis is based on the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting program, which collects data from local law enforcement agencies across the country. Because participation in the program is voluntary, not all crime is reported, so experts caution it’s not a complete picture.Additionally, FBI data from 2023 will not be audited nor made official until about October. And 2024 data will not be audited and made official until about October 2025.Nonetheless, the preliminary figures reflect particularly heartening news for the US because they suggest that murder had already “plummeted” in 2023 “at one of the fastest declines ever recorded”, according to what Asher wrote in a Substack post late last year.Updated preliminary information suggests those numbers are again falling this year – but at an even faster clip, setting up a return to levels pre-dating the Covid-19 pandemic, when the US experienced a spike in violent crime.The early available statistics also mirror a decline in homicides seen in the 1990s.“Nationally, you’re seeing a very similar situation to what you saw in the mid-to-late 90s. But it’s potentially even larger in terms of the percentages and numbers of the drops,” Asher said.Asher has made it a point to say that even a substantial decline in homicides still involves a collection of “hundreds or thousands of tragedies” for families across the US. But he has said the data paints a picture that is “as encouraging” as can be given that grim reality.It’s not just murder rates that have fallen.Asher said with the exception of motor vehicle theft, all crimes – such as violent crimes, defined as “murder and non-negligent manslaughter, rape, robbery and aggravated assault” and property crime, defined as “burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft and arson” – were down “a considerable amount” in 2023 compared with 2022.At the end of 2023, Asher wrote: “Americans tend to think that crime is rising, but the evidence we have right now points to sizable declines this year (even if there are always outliers). The quarterly data in particular suggests 2023 featured one of the lowest rates of violent crime in the United States in more than 50 years.”Crime has been a principal theme in Republican campaign messaging in recent years. Earlier this year, Donald Trump said without evidence that undocumented immigrants were producing increases in violent crime.“You know, in New York, what’s happening with crime – is it’s through the roof. And it’s called ‘migrant’,” the former president and presumptive 2024 Republican nominee said at a rally in Michigan in February.A 2024 Pew research poll reported “a majority of Americans (57%) [believe] the large number of migrants seeking to enter the country leads to more crime”.Yet national data fails to support Trump’s claim or the public’s stubborn preconceptions that crime is eternally on the rise.Asher wrote: “Tell your friends and family because they probably think crime is surging nationally. And in this case, they’re almost certainly wrong.” More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Judge rejects defense efforts to dismiss Hunter Biden’s federal gun case

      by

      A federal judge in Delaware refused on Friday to throw out a federal gun case against Hunter Biden, rejecting the president’s son’s claim that he is being prosecuted for political purposes as well as other arguments.The US district judge Maryellen Noreika denied defense efforts to scuttle the prosecution charging Hunter Biden with lying about his drug use in October 2018 on a form to buy a gun that he kept for about 11 days.Hunter Biden’s lawyers had argued the case was politically motivated and asserted that an immunity provision from an original plea deal that fell apart still held. They had also challenged the appointment of the special counsel David Weiss, the US attorney in Delaware, to lead the prosecution.Noreika, who was appointed to the bench by Donald Trump, has not yet ruled on a challenge to the constitutionality of the gun charges.Hunter Biden faces separate tax counts in Los Angeles alleging he failed to pay at least $1.4m in taxes over three years while living an “extravagant lifestyle”, during his days of using drugs. The judge overseeing that case refused to dismiss the charges this month.Biden has pleaded not guilty in both cases. A representative for his legal team didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday.The president’s son has acknowledged struggling with an addiction to crack cocaine during that period in 2018, but his lawyers have said he didn’t break the law and another nonviolent, first-time offender would not have been charged.The defense attorney Abbe Lowell had argued Hunter Biden was “selectively charged” for improper political purposes. He argued that Weiss “buckled under political pressure” to indict the president’s son amid criticism of the plea deal from Trump and other Republicans.Noreika said in her ruling that Biden’s team had provided “nothing concrete” to support a conclusion that anyone actually influenced the special counsel’s team.“The pressure campaign from congressional Republicans may have occurred around the time that special counsel decided to move forward with indictment instead of pretrial diversion, but the court has been given nothing credible to suggest that the conduct of those lawmakers (or anyone else) had any impact on special counsel,” the judge wrote. “It is all speculation.” More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s latest attempt to delay criminal trial in hush-money case fails

      by

      A New York appeals court judge on Tuesday rejected Donald Trump’s latest bid to delay his hush-money criminal trial while he fights a gag order, clearing the way for jury selection to begin next week.Justice Cynthia Kern’s ruling is yet another loss for Trump, who has tried repeatedly to get the trial postponed.Trump’s lawyers had wanted the trial delayed until a full panel of appellate court judges could hear arguments on lifting or modifying a gag order that bans him from making public statements about jurors, witnesses and others connected to the hush-money case.The presumptive Republican nominee’s lawyers argue the gag order is an unconstitutional prior restraint on Trump’s free speech rights while he’s campaigning for president and fighting criminal charges.“The first amendment harms arising from this gag order right now are irreparable,” Trump lawyer Emil Bove said at an emergency hearing on Tuesday in the state’s mid-level appeals court.Bove argued that Trump shouldn’t be muzzled while critics, including his former lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen and the adult film star Stormy Daniels, routinely assail him. Both are key prosecution witnesses.Steven Wu, the appellate chief for the Manhattan district attorney’s office, said there is a “public interest in protecting the integrity of the trial”.“This is not political debate. These are insults,” Wu said of Trump’s statements.The trial judge, Juan M Merchan, issued the gag order last month at the urging of Manhattan prosecutors, who cited Trump’s “long history of making public and inflammatory remarks” about people involved in his legal cases.Merchan expanded the gag order last week to prohibit comments about his own family after Trump lashed out on social media at his daughter, a Democratic political consultant, and made false claims about her.It’s the second of back-to-back days for Trump’s lawyers in the appeals court.On Monday, Lizbeth González, an associate justice, rejected the defense’s request to delay the 15 April trial while Trump seeks to move his case out of heavily Democratic Manhattan.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTrump’s lawyers framed their gag order appeal as a lawsuit against Merchan. In New York, judges can be sued to challenge some decisions under a state law known as Article 78.Trump has used the tactic before, including against the judge in his civil fraud trial in an unsuccessful last-minute bid to delay that case last fall and again when that judge imposed a gag order on him.Trump’s hush-money criminal case involves allegations that he falsified his company’s records to hide the nature of payments to Cohen, who helped him bury negative stories during his 2016 campaign. Cohen’s activities included paying Daniels $130,000 to suppress her claims of an extramarital sexual encounter with Trump years earlier.Trump pleaded not guilty last year to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. He has denied having a sexual encounter with Daniels. His lawyers argue the payments to Cohen were legitimate legal expenses.Trump has made numerous attempts to get the trial postponed, leaning into the strategy he proclaimed to TV cameras outside a February pretrial hearing: “We want delays.” More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      US historians file brief with supreme court rejecting Trump’s immunity claim

      by

      Fifteen prominent historians filed an amicus brief with the US supreme court, rejecting Donald Trump’s claim in his federal election subversion case that he is immune to criminal prosecution for acts committed as president.Authorities cited in the document include the founders Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Adams, in addition to the historians’ own work.Trump, the historians said, “asserts that a doctrine of permanent immunity from criminal liability for a president’s official acts, while not expressly provided by the constitution, must be inferred. To justify this radical assertion, he contends that the original meaning of the constitution demands it. But no plausible historical case supports his claim.”Trump faces four federal election subversion charges, arising from his attempt to overturn his defeat by Joe Biden in 2020, fueled by his lie about electoral fraud and culminating in the deadly attack on Congress of 6 January 2021.He also faces 10 election subversion charges in Georgia, 34 charges over hush-money payments in New York, 40 federal charges for retaining classified information, and multimillion-dollar penalties in civil cases over tax fraud and defamation, the latter arising from a rape allegation a judge called “substantially true”.Despite such unprecedented legal jeopardy, Trump strolled to the Republican nomination to face Biden in November and is seeking to delay all cases until after that election, so that he might dismiss them if he returns to power. His first criminal trial, in the New York hush-money case, is scheduled to begin next Monday.Despite widespread legal and historical opinion that Trump’s immunity claim is groundless, the US supreme court, to which Trump appointed three justices, will consider the claim.Oral arguments are scheduled for 25 April. The court recently dismissed attempts, supported by leading historians, to remove Trump from ballots under the 14th amendment, passed after the civil war to bar insurrectionists from office.In a filing on Monday, the special counsel Jack Smith urged the justices to reject Trump’s immunity claim as “an unprecedented assault on the structure of our government”.Seven of the 15 historians who filed the amicus brief are members of the Historians Council on the Constitution at the Brennan Center for Justice, a progressive policy institute at New York University law school.Holly Brewer, a professor of American cultural and intellectual history at the University of Maryland, said: “When designing the presidency, the founders wanted no part of the immunity from criminal prosecution claimed by English kings.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“That immunity was at the heart of what they saw as a flawed system. On both the state and national level, they wrote constitutions that held all leaders, including presidents, accountable to the laws of the country. St George Tucker, one of the most prominent judges in the new nation, laid out the principle clearly: everyone is equally bound by the law, from ‘beggars in the streets’ to presidents.”Other signatories to the brief included Jill Lepore of Harvard, author of These Truths, a history of the US; Alan Taylor of the University of Virginia, author of books including American Revolutions, about the years of independence; and Joanne Freeman of Yale, author of The Field of Blood, an influential study of political violence before the civil war.Thomas Wolf, co-counsel on the brief and director of democracy initiatives at the Brennan Center, called Trump’s immunity claim “deeply un-American”, adding: “From the birth of the country through President Clinton’s acceptance of a plea bargain in 2001 [avoiding indictment over the Monica Lewinsky affair], it has been understood that presidents can be prosecuted.“The supreme court must not delay in passing down a ruling in this case.” More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      New York appeals judge rejects Trump’s request to delay hush-money trial

      by

      A New York appeals court judge has rejected former President Donald Trump’s request to delay his 15 April hush-money criminal trial while he fights to move the case out of Manhattan.The decision came Monday, a week before jury selection was set to start.Trump’s lawyers had argued at an emergency hearing that the trial should be postponed while they seek a change of venue to move it out of heavily Democratic Manhattan.Trump was ready on Monday to sue the judge in his New York hush-money case a week before the start of the much-anticipated trial, the New York Times reported, detailing yet another attempt by the former president to delay legal proceedings against him.Citing court records indicating the filing of sealed documents and two unnamed sources with knowledge of the matter, the paper said the aim was to delay trial and challenge a gag order imposed by the judge.“Mr Trump’s unorthodox move – essentially an appeal in the form of a lawsuit – is unlikely to succeed, particularly so close to trial,” the paper said.Facing 34 criminal charges related to hush-money payments to Stormy Daniels, an adult film star who claimed an affair with him, Trump has pleaded not guilty.He has repeatedly attacked the judge in the case, Juan Merchan, and members of his family, alleging political bias.The trial is set for Manhattan next Monday and will be the first criminal trial involving a former US president.Trump, the Times said, was also expected to ask an appeals court to move the trial out of Manhattan, his home borough before his post-presidency move to Florida but a heavily Democratic area.That gambit was also deemed unlikely to succeed.Harry Litman, a US attorney turned law professor and commentator, said: “Trump’s latest desperate move of personally suing Merchan in the appellate division is reminiscent of his initial gambit in Palm Beach [Florida], where judge [Aileen] Cannon permitted him to take the whole action off track [in his classified information case].“But won’t happen here. Imagine if a criminal defendant could do this … ”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe Times said the suit would be an Article 78 action, under New York laws that can be used to challenge state agencies and judges.Trump faces 54 other criminal charges: 40 in Florida, over his retention of classified information after leaving office, and 14 over his attempt to overturn the 2020 election – 10 in Georgia and four in Washington DC.Trump also faces multimillion-dollar penalties in two civil cases, both in New York, one concerning tax fraud and the other for defamation arising from a rape allegation a judge called “substantially true”.Denying all wrongdoing and claiming political persecution, Trump is attempting to delay all cases against him until after the presidential election in November.If he were to defeat Joe Biden and return to the White House, he could ensure the dismissal of federal charges in the classified information case and in four charges of election subversion. State charges would be tougher to deal with.In the New York hush-money case, Merchan last week denied an attempt to delay trial until the US supreme court rules on Trump’s claim of immunity regarding any act committed in office, lodged in his federal election subversion case.Merchan has also rejected one call to recuse himself and is thought overwhelmingly likely to reject another. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Suspect arrested in arson attack on Bernie Sanders’ Vermont office

      by

      Authorities say they have arrested an alleged arsonist accused of setting the US senator Bernie Sanders’ Burlington, Vermont, office on fire while staff worked inside – but investigators have yet to release details about a possible a motive.A justice department notification published on Sunday said Shant Soghomonian, 35, had been charged with using fire to damage the building but did not include any reason for his alleged actions.Soghomonian, who has also gone by the first name Michael, was listed as being from Northridge, California. He allegedly entered the building on Friday morning, went to the third floor where Sanders’ offices are situated, and sprayed the entry door with an accelerant.He then set fire to the door with a handheld lighter – all in view of a security camera that was recording video, the justice department said.Soghomonian then left through a staircase as the fire spread, damaging the door and triggering the sprinkler system. Several employees were in the progressive senator’s office at the time, though no injuries were reported.The Burlington police department said the fire engulfing the door and part of the vestibule had impeded “staff members who were working in the office” from exiting, which endangered their lives.In a statement to CNN, Sanders said: “I am deeply grateful to the swift, professional, coordinated efforts of local, state, and federal law enforcement in response to the fire at my Vermont office.” The independent senator who votes in line with Democrats added that he was grateful none of his staff had been injured while describing his office’s commitment to serve those in his home state of Vermont “during these challenging times”.If convicted, Soghomonian could face between five and 20 years in prison as well as up to a $250,000 fine, according to the justice department.While no motive has been advanced for Soghomonian’s alleged actions, the arson attack comes as implied threats of political violence are becoming a feature of the 2024 presidential and congressional elections.Politicians on both sides of the aisle have in recent months been subjected to anonymous calls to law enforcement that invite an armed, potentially forceful emergency response.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn early January, it was reported that at least three members of Congress had reported “swatting” incidents over the previous week, including Representative Brandon Williams of New York, Senator Rick Scott of Florida, and Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, all Republicans.Maine’s Democratic secretary of state, Shenna Bellows, who ruled that Donald Trump should be ineligible to appear on the state’s 2024 primary ballot after the former president’s supporters attacked Congress on 6 January 2021, was also the target of a swatting call.The US supreme court later forced Bellows to reverse her decision. More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Murder victim’s sister says Trump didn’t speak to family despite his claim he did

      by

      Donald Trump used a campaign stop in Grand Rapids, Michigan, to describe meeting the family of a woman killed by an immigrant in order to spin a narrative about what he calls “Biden’s border bloodbath” – except Ruby Garcia’s family now say he never did.Garcia, 25, was found shot to death on highway US-131 on 22 March of this year. Court records later showed that her boyfriend confessed to killing her and dumping her body.The man, Brandon Ortiz-Vite, had come to the US as a child and was allowed to stay as a so-called “Dreamer”. He was deported in 2020 before re-entering again without documents.Many have read Garcia’s murder not as an illegal immigration issue but one of domestic violence, given authorities said Garcia and Ortiz-Vite were dating.Trump tells the story differently. “She lit up that room, and I’ve heard that from so many people,” Trump said about Garcia. “I spoke to some of her family.”But according to her sister, Mavi Garcia, who is acting as a family spokesperson, neither Trump nor his campaign had reached out to her or her relatives.She said Trump’s comments were intended merely to blame immigrants for crime in order to justify a border crackdown.“It’s always been about illegal immigrants,” Garcia told the local news station Target 8. “Nobody really speaks about when Americans do heinous crimes, and it’s kind of shocking why he would just bring up illegals. What about Americans who do heinous crimes like that?”The Trump campaign has yet to comment on the former president’s claim, but the Washington Post reported he did not mention Garcia again at a stop in Wisconsin later on Tuesday.On Monday Trump had called into a Michigan radio show before heading to Michigan and Wisconsin, two crucial battleground states, to highlight the immigration theme, which he has called the top issue in the 2024 election.“This is a horrible incident with Ruby,” Trump told the conservative host Justin Barclay. “Let Ruby’s relatives and everybody know that we’d love to say hello to them.”Last month, Trump did meet with family and friends of Laken Riley, a nursing student who became a potent symbol for the border issue after an undocumented person from Venezuela was charged with her murder.But Mavi Garcia told Target 8 that Trump was misleading people.“He did not speak with any of us, so it was kind of shocking seeing that he had said that he had spoke with us, and misinforming people on live TV,” Mavi Garcia said. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Father of Laken Riley decries politicization of daughter’s murder

      by

      The father of Laken Riley, whom authorities suspect was murdered by an undocumented migrant in February, has objected to how he says his daughter’s death is “being used politically” ahead of the upcoming presidential and congressional elections.Riley, a 22-year-old nursing student, was beaten to death on the University of Georgia’s campus on 22 February. Republicans have claimed Riley’s death represents a failure of the Joe Biden White House’s border policies and have used the killing to push legislation which would make it easier for law enforcement to detain unauthorized migrants accused of theft.“I’d rather her not be such a political – how you say – it started a storm in our country,” Jason Riley, Laken’s father, told NBC’s Today show.He added: “It’s incited a lot of people.”Jason Riley said that since his daughter was killed, “there’s people on both sides that have lashed out at [his and Laken’s mother’s] families”.Investigators have charged José Ibarra with Riley’s murder. The 26-year-old, who is originally from Venezuela, had previously been charged with two crimes in New York before being released, ​​US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement said, although officials in the state told the Associated Press they had no record of Ibarra being previously arrested.“I think it’s being used politically to get those votes,” Jason Riley said of his daughter’s death.“It makes me angry. I feel like, you know, they’re just using my daughter’s name for that. And she was much better than that, and she should be raised up for the person that she is. She was an angel.”Biden mentioned Laken Riley in his State of the Union address but was criticized in some political quarters for using the word “illegal” to describe her killer. The term has long been seen as dehumanizing and unhelpful language for describing undocumented migrants.The president later expressed regret for describing Ibarra as “an illegal”, which in turn ignited another round of criticism against him from other political quarters.Donald Trump is among the Republicans who has attempted to link Biden to Riley’s death. During a rally in March, where the former president seeking another term in the White House was joined by Riley’s parents, sister and friends, Trump said Laken “would be alive today” were it not for Democrats’ policies.
      The Associated Press contributed reporting More