US crime

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Perversion of Justice review: how Julie K Brown brought Jeffrey Epstein down

      by

      BooksPerversion of Justice review: how Julie K Brown brought Jeffrey Epstein downThe Miami Herald reporter is unsparing in her depiction of a life above the law – and the lives that were ruined because of it Lloyd GreenSun 25 Jul 2021 01.00 EDTLast modified on Sun 25 Jul 2021 01.12 EDTIn Perversion of Justice, Julie K Brown recounts the plight of the victims of the deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein and, allegedly, his sometime girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell, and how both avoided life-altering prosecution for a decade and more.Ken Starr helped Jeffrey Epstein with ‘scorched-earth’ campaign, book claimsRead moreThe author is a reporter at the Miami Herald. In November 2018, her three-part series injected Epstein into the public’s conscience, leading to sex-trafficking charges. For her work, Brown won a Polk award.She tracked down more than 60 women who claimed to be victims of abuse, and delivered the back story on an all-too-cozy relationship between prosecutors and Epstein’s lawyers.A sample headline: “How a future Trump cabinet member gave a serial sex abuser the deal of a lifetime.”Days after Epstein’s arrest in July 2019, that cabinet member, Alexander Acosta, Donald Trump’s labor secretary, was forced to resign his post.In 1994, Acosta clerked for Samuel Alito, then an intermediate federal appellate judge, now a supreme court justice. In the 2000s, during the administration of George W Bush, when Epstein was first charged, Acosta was the US attorney for the southern district of Florida. His remit included Palm Beach.Another Brown headline: “Even from jail, sex abuser manipulated the system. His victims were kept in the dark.”Under the deal done by Acosta, Epstein was technically imprisoned but cleared for work release. That was more about keeping an eye on his own finances – and as it turned out continuing his criminal behavior – than community service.With her book, Brown provides a vomit-inducing guide to how a criminal with deep pockets and zealous lawyers repeatedly manipulated and circumvented the American criminal justice system. And how his victims never stood a chance.In Brown’s telling, two nationally prominent legal figures, Ken Starr and Alan Dershowitz, stand atop Epstein’s legal heap. One chapter is titled Starr Power, another Dershowitz v Brown. Both are spotlight moments.In the 1990s, Starr supplied congressional Republicans with the legal fuel to impeach Bill Clinton for lying about his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky. “Starr’s a freak,” Trump told Maureen Dowd in 1999. “I bet he’s got something in his closet.”In the 2000s, Starr and his minions at the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis drove a deal with prosecutors that would keep Epstein out of federal custody until 2019.In 2016, Starr left his post as president of Baylor, as the Texas college grappled with a rape scandal. In 2020, Starr joined Trump’s defense in his first impeachment.Dershowitz is now an 82-year-old former Harvard law professor. Back in the 2000s, he negotiated a “non-prosecution agreement” which permitted Epstein to do little more than a year in a local Florida jail, under the most comfortable conditions.The legal scholar, who also represented Trump at his first impeachment trial, is now suing Netflix in connection with Filthy Rich, a series based on Brown’s reporting. Whether Dershowitz simply received a massage at Epstein’s house from a “large Russian woman” while keeping his underwear on, or had sex with one or more underage girls, is a point of contention. He denies all wrongdoing. Furthermore, he and Virginia Giuffre, an Epstein victim, are suing each other for defamation in federal court in Manhattan.William Barr also appears in Epstein’s life. Why not?Epstein graduated from high school at 16 but never finished college. Regardless, Donald Barr, father to Trump’s second attorney general, gave Epstein his first job, as a math teacher at the Dalton school on the Upper East Side in Manhattan. The elder Barr, as it happens, also wrote Space Relations, a gothic novel from 1973 that contains alien sex.As reported by the Herald and repeated by Brown, one Dalton alumna, Karin Williams, recalled that “Epstein was considered a little creepy”. Another remarked: “You could see how maybe he was looking for young nymphs.”The younger Barr’s law firm – Kirkland & Ellis – came to represent Epstein, a fact which eventually led to Barr’s recusal from the case as attorney general to Trump. Epstein hanged himself in federal custody: on Barr’s watch.Brown pays attention to social connections. Once upon a time, Trump said Epstein was “a lot of fun to be with” and “a terrific guy” and marvelled at his interest in underage girls. According to Michael Wolff’s Fire and Fury, Trump, Epstein and Tom Barrack – a businessmen went on to chair Trump’s inauguration then, this week, to be indicted and bailed on lobbying charges – were a “1980s and 90s set of nightlife Musketeers”.Ultimately, Trump and Epstein parted ways. The predator wasn’t good for business. But there was a coda. Standing in the White House press room nearly two decades later, Trump told reporters he wished Maxwell “well”.Harvey Weinstein extradited to Los Angeles for sexual assault chargesRead moreEpstein was a Democrat and came to befriend Bill Clinton. In Giuffre’s telling, the other living impeached president visited Epstein’s island in the Caribbean with two young girls and flew on Epstein’s plane. Clinton vehemently denies it. Infamously, Prince Andrew was another Epstein buddy. So was Harvey Weinstein, until the two men reportedly had a falling out over Weinstein allegedly abusing one of Epstein’s “favorite” girls. Like Epstein, Claus von Bulow and OJ Simpson, Weinstein came to be represented by Dershowitz. Brown reminds us the rich and powerful can act badly. As if we didn’t know.Epstein is dead. Maxwell, his alleged partner in crime, faces trial in Manhattan. The opening sentence of the operative indictment says plenty: “The charges set forth herein stem from the role of Ghislaine Maxwell, the defendant, in the sexual exploitation and abuse of multiple minor girls by Jeffrey Epstein.” She denies the charges.The coroner said Epstein killed himself. Apparently, Brown isn’t completely convinced. One chapter is titled Jeffrey Epstein Didn’t Kill Himself and the book chronicles the inconsistencies surrounding his death. Brown wishes someone would examine “how and why” Epstein died.Regardless of whether Epstein killed himself or not, he left a world of carnage. But for Julie K Brown, he would quite likely have beaten the rap.TopicsBooksJeffrey EpsteinGhislaine MaxwellUS politicsUS crimereviewsReuse this content More

    • 250 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      America’s left can’t afford to be silent on crime. Here’s how to talk about it and win | Ben Davis

      by

      OpinionUS politicsAmerica’s left can’t afford to be silent on crime. Here’s how to talk about it and winBen DavisPeople have a right to safety. That’s why we must acknowledge crime and insist that we have the best solutions to address its root causes Tue 6 Jul 2021 06.12 EDTLast modified on Tue 6 Jul 2021 10.33 EDTIn the wake of last summer’s mass uprisings against the police state that killed George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, among so many others, many on the progressive left believed that real change was imminent. Unprecedented numbers of people poured into the streets, day after day, week after week, in the midst of a global pandemic. Polls showed a massive upsurge in support for the Black Lives Matter movement. So-called establishment politicians appeared to be on the back foot, with lawmakers in Minneapolis going so far as to pledge to abolish their police department and replace it with a community-based public safety model. Large municipalities across the country saw a wave of action, from calls to remove police officers from schools to more demands to defund police departments. Politicians and public figures who had previously been loth to wade into issues of police brutality unequivocally acknowledged the need for drastic reform. Floyd’s gruesome death at the hands of police, and the months of protest that followed, felt like an inflection point – at long last, elected officials and the general public alike seemed jolted out of the usual refrains. Enough was enough.Yet just over a year later, the state of policing appears largely unchanged. Almost no US cities have reduced their police budget – some, in fact, have expanded them – and efforts toward the goals of the defund movement have mostly stalled. In addition, a small but notable rise in crime since last summer has changed the picture. While some of this comes from cynical and nakedly misleading crime statistics produced by police departments, and much of it is media narrative, the truth is that many people do not feel safe. Support for BLM has fallen in the past year while support for the police has dramatically risen. This is something people care about, and defensive explanations that this is a bogus narrative are not going to cut it. The left needs a compelling counternarrative around crime in addition to our critique of policing. It is clear that street action and grassroots legislative pressure is not enough: the left needs to win power at the local level, where most police budgets are controlled, with a clear mandate for radical action around crime and policing.Since the protests, however, many Democratic cities have elected candidates who are vocally pro-police. Most notable is the mayoral election in New York City – the epicenter of the resurgent American left – where all the major candidates vocally rejected defund efforts, some after supporting these efforts last summer. The apparent victory of former cop Eric Adams, who heavily focused his campaign on opposing any efforts to defund the police, has been portrayed as a referendum on calls to defund the police. His campaign was powered by widespread support among working-class Black voters in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx – the same voters who gave progressives a surprising win in 2013. Even if Adams loses the election due to the new ranked-choice system, polling shows him taking an astonishing 83% of Black voters in the final round. He framed his support for a more muscular police department through a racial justice lens, claiming that cutting policing would hurt communities of color as “Black and brown babies are shot in our streets”. This is a narrative that has been difficult to counter for a left that is comfortable talking about policing but can sometimes be uncomfortable talking about crime.The left and the defund movement’s goals seemed so close just a year ago, but as the momentum of street protest alone has once again turned into the grinding work of long-term organizing in the electoral arena, we need a reassessment and change in strategy. This means building an overarching shared program on crime that connects with working-class voters at the ballot box in the same way left candidates across the country have on jobs, housing and police brutality. While the nascent left now has an electoral constituency and has increased its elected representation many times over, it has still been unable to build a base in large swaths of Black working-class communities in particular. To fix this, and to actually implement the demands of the defund movement, the left needs a message on crime rather than just policing. Crime overwhelmingly affects the working class rather than the wealthy and is a symptom of neoliberalism as much as job precarity, student debt, lack of access to medical care, and all the other issues the left talks about. Police themselves are in effect an austerity program: replacing needed social services with a punitive force that addresses these problems after they occur. After all, prison cells are cheaper than houses.The solution is a redistributive agenda that ameliorates these causes and prevents crime. As long as we live under the conditions of neoliberal austerity, without providing for the basic needs of citizens, crime will continue to exist. The left cannot run from this; we must acknowledge it and respond forcefully. Talking about crime can be a winning issue for the left if it is explicitly part of an overall program of redistribution of wealth, investment in communities, and guaranteeing a society that provides safety and security for all of its members, not just those at the top. We must emphasize that people have a right to safety, and this is the only program that truly provides that.Though the left has failed to accomplish its goals around policing at the municipal level, it is also true that the defund message is not necessarily anathema to voters. Leftwing candidates who have campaigned on defunding the police and abolishing prisons have won a number of decisive victories, including in many areas with large Black populations. After much media chatter about a backlash to his criminal justice reform efforts, the Philadelphia district attorney, Larry Krasner, won a resounding victory, capturing more than 80% of the vote in many majority-Black precincts. Last year, after a relentless opposition campaign attacking her support for defunding the police, Janeese Lewis George won a council seat to represent a majority-Black ward in Washington DC. Notably, the former Queens district attorney candidate and abolitionist Tiffany Cabán, won majority support in working-class Black-majority areas that Adams handily swept on the same ballot.Adams’s likely election has a number of confounding factors: he made his political bones in large part as a Black police officer who was willing to publicly advocate for police reform. What his success reveals is that voters can hold muddled, often contradictory, political views: Polls show, for example, that a majority of Black voters support the Black Lives Matter movement, believe police treat Black people unfairly, distrust the police, and simultaneously want more police in their neighborhoods. Fundamentally, people want to feel safe in their communities. Though many people of color do not trust the police, we have yet to successfully articulate an alternative. While activists on the left cannot tail public opinion, shifting our views to follow only what is popular, we also cannot afford to be out of touch with the working class. Instead, we must be the next link in the chain, connecting the organic demands of the working class with more radical demands, pulling the movement forward without losing the chain as a whole.While there is scant evidence that defunding the police is a surefire losing issue among working-class communities of color, it has also not resonated well enough to provide a decisive electoral mandate. Defunding the police – which calls for reallocating public funds from a bloated, militarized police force to necessary, life-saving services – is both a moral necessity and commonsense policy. To actually accomplish this, however, the left needs a comprehensive program on crime and policing that resonates with working-class voters. This requires connecting our vision on crime and policing to proven, election-winning issues such as good jobs, Medicare for All, and housing – in other words, people’s immediate, material needs and desire for safety and security. The key is to make the connection between defunding the police and other foundational elements of any left program: investment in communities and an overall vision of a society that ensures everyone’s needs are met.On the same day that Adams appeared to win the mayoral race in New York City, a socialist candidate on the opposite side of the state pulled off an unexpected upset in Buffalo. India Walton, an open prison abolitionist, unseated the longtime incumbent Byron Brown to win the Democratic nomination for mayor in the state’s second-largest city. Walton is a prison abolitionist, and her platform in effect called for defunding the police on a large scale, although notably, the words “defund” and “abolish” do not appear on her campaign site.Walton told the New York Times that rather than emphasizing defund, “[W]e say we’re going to reallocate funds. We’re going to fully fund community centers. We’re going to make the investments that naturally reduce crime, such as investments in education, infrastructure, living-wage jobs. Nothing stops crime better than a person who’s gainfully employed.” Her message is hyper-focused on the types of social programs that provide material benefits to her constituents. She links defunding the police to a broad redistributive agenda in a way that emphasizes the role of class struggle and the problems inherent to policing without using alienating or activist-oriented language. Her victory in a heavily working-class city provides a clear path forward for left candidates.This is not to say that the left should abandon the phrase “defund the police”. It is a clear, self-evident demand that has mobilized millions, engendered progressive coalitions, and opened the door for people to imagine what a future without prisons and police – or at least one that is far less reliant on them – might look like. But in order to take the next step from protest to implementing policy, the left needs to both sustain energy in the streets and elect legislators who are able to exercise power and achieve movement demands. The left must emphasize a positive program and make the case for redirecting funds from unaccountable, violent police departments back into the community. This is the only serious approach to preventing crime. Our task is to win; to do this, we need a message on crime that not only refuses to shy away from the problem but also provides a clear, mobilizing vision for the future.
      Ben Davis works in political data in Washington DC. He worked on the data team for the Bernie Sanders 2020 campaign and is an active member of the Democratic Socialists of America
      TopicsUS politicsOpinionUS crimeUS policingcommentReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump Organization and financial chief charged in a tax-related investigation

      by

      The Trump Organization and its chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg, have been charged in a tax-related investigation, marking the first criminal charges against the former president’s company since prosecutors began investigating it three years ago, two people familiar with the matter told the Associated Press.Multiple news outlets including the New York Times and the Washington Post reported the indictment on Wednesday evening, citing sources familiar with the matter.The move marks the latest stage of an escalating battle between New York prosecutors and the former president. The charges against the Trump Organization and Weisselberg remained sealed Wednesday night, but were expected to involve alleged tax violations related to benefits the company gave to top executives, possibly including use of apartments, cars and school tuition, people familiar with the case said.While no charges are expected to be brought against Trump personally the charges mark an extraordinary turning point for the former president and more are likely to follow. New York prosecutors are still investigating allegations of “hush money” paid to women who say they had sexual relations with Trump, and claims of real-estate price manipulation.The charges are a severe blow to the Trump Organization, which may now find it more difficult to raise money as the case continues. They also pose a challenge to Trump’s apparent political ambitions. The former president has begun a series of campaign style rallies and is positioning himself for another run at the presidency in 2024.Prosecutors have been pressing Weisselberg, 73, to cooperate with their investigations but with little success so far.No one other than Trump has such a thorough knowledge of the Trump Organization. “They are like Batman and Robin,” Jennifer Weisselberg, ex-wife of Allen Weisselberg’s son Barry told the New York Times. Jennifer Weisselberg has aided Manhattan district attorney Cyrus Vance investigation into Trump’s business after a contentious divorce, supplying hundreds of pages of tax documents.Michael Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer, testified before Congress in 2019 that Weisselberg helped orchestrate a cover-up to reimburse him for a $130,000 payment made to the adult film actor Stormy Daniels, who has claimed she had sex with Trump.Cohen also testified that he and Weisselberg concocted phoney valuations of Trump’s real estate holdings to devalue assets for tax purposes while inflating them for loan agreements.Vance and the New York state attorney general, Letitia James, are investigating both those allegations.A grand jury was recently empaneled to weigh evidence, and James said she was assigning two of her lawyers to work with Vance on the criminal inquiry while she continues a civil investigation of Trump.The Manhattan district attorney’s office did not respond to a request for comment from the Guardian.Trump had blasted the investigation in a statement Monday, deriding Vance’s office as “rude, nasty, and totally biased”.Trump Organization lawyers met virtually with Manhattan prosecutors last week in a last-ditch attempt to dissuade them from charging the company. Prosecutors gave the lawyers a Monday deadline to make the case that criminal charges shouldn’t be filed.Ron Fischetti, a lawyer for the Trump Organization, told the AP this week that there was no indication Trump himself was included in the first batch of charges.“There is no indictment coming down this week against the former president,” Fischetti said. “I can’t say he’s out of the woods yet completely.”Weisselberg, a loyal lieutenant to Trump and his real estate-developer father, Fred, came under scrutiny, in part, because of questions about his son’s use of a Trump apartment at little or no cost.Prosecutors investigating untaxed benefits to Trump executives have also been looking at Matthew Calamari, a former Trump bodyguard turned chief operating officer, and his son, the company’s corporate director of security. However, a lawyer for the Calamaris said Wednesday that he didn’t expect them to be charged.“Although the DA’s investigation obviously is ongoing, I do not expect charges to be filed against either of my clients at this time,” said the lawyer, Nicholas Gravante.The company and Weisselberg were expected to make their first court appearance Thursday. More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats cite Ku Klux Klan Act in suits over ‘Trump Train’ Texas bus incident

      by

      A convoy of Trump supporters that swarmed a Biden-Harris campaign bus on a Texas highway last October violated the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, which prohibits violent election intimidation, two new lawsuits allege.One suit targets drivers in the self-described “Trump Train”, saying they conspired to intimidate and harass Biden-Harris campaigners.The other suit names as defendants law enforcement officials in San Marcos, Texas, saying they “abdicated” their responsibility to protect the bus “despite repeated calls for help”.The lawsuits were filed by Eric Cervini, an author and volunteer; Wendy Davis, a former Texas state senator and a Biden campaign surrogate; David Gins, now a White House staffer; and Timothy Holloway, the bus driver. Cervini was driving his own car.The FBI previously confirmed it was investigating the incident in which a pack of vehicles flying flags in support of Trump’s re-election effort besieged a Biden bus on a Texas highway.Court documents say some members of a New Braunfels Trump Train were “identified in media reports and on social media as having taken part in the 6 January 2021 insurrection” at the US Capitol.Court papers also say Congress passed the Ku Klux Klan Act in the aftermath of the civil war and during Reconstruction “to prevent groups from joining together to obstruct free and fair federal elections by intimidating and injuring voters, or denying them the ability to engage in political speech”.The members of the Trump Train “openly and wilfully violated that statutory command”, court papers say.In February a Democratic congressman from Mississippi, Bennie Thompson, joined with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People to sue Donald Trump and his lawyer Rudy Giuliani under the KKK Act, accusing them of conspiring to incite the Capitol attack.The new lawsuits were filed on 24 June in federal court in the western district of Texas. They claim that on 27 October, when the Biden campaign made plans for the bus tour public, Trump Train members in Alamo City and New Braunfels plotted “to intercept and intimidate the bus as it traveled through Bexar, Comal, Hays and Travis counties”. As the bus traveled from Laredo to San Antonio on the morning of 30 October, papers say, about 15 to 20 Trump Train vehicles were spotted on a “feeder road” near the I35 interstate. The bus left the highway due to safety concerns and reached San Antonio.However, court papers say, some Trump Train members “were not dissuaded, and began deploying to pre-planned positions along I-35”. Alamo City Trump Train members started posting on Facebook that they were heading to the highway and would wait for the bus while others said they were in position, court documents say.When the bus left San Antonio, papers say, campaign members started seeing social media posts about “the converging of vehicles”. When the bus left San Antonio city limits, a police escort departed. Not long after, court papers say, “Trump Train vehicles converged on the bus”.The papers say: “Vehicles – most of them large trucks and SUVs – displayed a variety of flags, including Trump campaign flags, Confederate battle flags and many others. The Trump Train began harassing the bus by surrounding it, forcing it to slow down, honking, yelling and making hand gestures. Vehicles started getting close to the bus and taking videos.”[embedded content]After the bus arrived in New Braunfels, a staffer called police, who sent vehicles to escort the bus. “As soon as the police arrived, the Trump Train resumed driving at around the posted speed limit and stopped harassing the bus passengers,” court documents say.“When the bus tour reached the New Braunfels-San Marcos city line, however, the New Braunfels police dropped off, and the Trump Train resumed its harassing behavior.”The bus passengers say they were “terrified” and called police dispatchers in New Braunfels and San Marcos, asking for an escort. San Marcos police “refused to send an escort and said officers would be looking out for traffic violations as usual”, court documents say, adding: “They said that unless the Biden-Harris campaign was reporting a crime, we can’t help you.’”Campaign staffers say they “pleaded” for help. But while San Marcos police “assured” them they would send backup, court documents say, none came.San Marcos police did not immediately respond to a request for comment.One Trump Train participant is alleged to have “side-swiped” a campaign staffer’s SUV. A campaign event was cancelled.Davis, who rose to national attention with a 13-hour filibuster in an attempt to block a draconian abortion bill in 2013, said: “We filed this lawsuit because everyone should be able to engage in peaceful political activity free from fear, intimidation, or threats of violence.” More

    • 213 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Derek Chauvin sentenced to 22 and a half years for murder of George Floyd – latest news

      by

      Key events

      Show

      3.55pm EDT
      15:55

      Chauvin given 22 and a half years for George Floyd murder

      1.42pm EDT
      13:42

      Health secretary ordered to investigate Fort Bliss migrant children complaints

      1.28pm EDT
      13:28

      Charges possible in Trump Organization investigation – report

      12.50pm EDT
      12:50

      Republican congressman compares Democrats to Nazis

      12.17pm EDT
      12:17

      DoJ sues over Georgia voting rights measure – full report

      12.05pm EDT
      12:05

      Georgia governor slams DoJ voting rights lawsuit

      11.10am EDT
      11:10

      Justice Department sues Georgia over voting law

      Live feed

      Show

      5.43pm EDT
      17:43

      Gabrielle Canon here, taking over from the west coast for the evening.
      Minnesota Governor Tim Walz has tweeted his reaction to the Chavin sentence it “historic” but agreeing with others that more needs to be done.
      “This is a positive step toward justice, but our work is not done. We’ve known all along that accountability in the courtroom is not enough,” he says.

      Governor Tim Walz
      (@GovTimWalz)
      Today, Judge Cahill gave Derek Chauvin a historic sentence. This is a positive step toward justice, but our work is not done. We’ve known all along that accountability in the courtroom is not enough. https://t.co/mlLijFciIf

      June 25, 2021

      “The statements today from George Floyd’s family and members of the community were painful but powerful,” he continues. “Now, as Derek Chauvin faces years behind bars, we must come together around our common humanity and continue on towards justice for all”.
      The stataement echoed the statement the governor issued on April 20, when Chauvin was found guilty of murdering George Floyd, when he said that systemic change was needed to prevent this from happening again.
      Here is more from his statement in April:

      “Too many Black people have lost—and continue to lose—their lives at the hands of law enforcement in our state.”
      “Our communities of color cannot go on like this. Our police officers cannot go on like this. Our state simply cannot go on like this. And the only way it will change is through systemic reform.”
      “We must rebuild, restore, and reimagine the relationship between law enforcement and the communities they serve. We must tackle racial inequities in every corner of society—from health to home ownership to education. We must come together around our common humanity.”
      “Let us continue on this march towards justice.”

      Updated
      at 5.47pm EDT

      5.27pm EDT
      17:27

      Evening summary

      That’s it for me. Here’s a recap of what happened today:

      Derek Chauvin was sentenced to 22 years in prison for the death of George Floyd.
      Here’s Joe Biden responding to the ruling.
      The UFO report is out.
      Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida addressed the building collapse and efforts by rescue workers there.
      The Manhattan district attorney informed attorneys for Donald Trump that criminal charges could be filed against the family business.

      5.13pm EDT
      17:13

      Here’s Al Sharpton reacting to the ruling. Like Ellison, he said the ruling was not enough. Sharpton noted that the ruling is “longest sentence they’ve ever given but it is not justice. Justice is George Floyd would be alive.”

      ABC News
      (@ABC)
      Rev. Al Sharpton on Derek Chauvin 22.5-year sentence: “Had they done sentences like this before, maybe Chauvin would not have thought he would have gotten away with it.” https://t.co/IuuRKnTv3s pic.twitter.com/vw7mGKzXvh

      June 25, 2021

      5.06pm EDT
      17:06

      Some reaction from various corners of Twitter to the Chauvin ruling:

      Jemele Hill
      (@jemelehill)
      If you’re wondering if Derek Chauvin’s sentence is fair, Chauvin will be 60 years old when he’s released from prison after serving 15 years of his 22 1/2-year sentence. George Floyd was murdered by Chauvin when he was 46. Floyd can never resume his life. Chauvin can.

      June 25, 2021

      Meena Harris
      (@meena)
      Just a reminder that Chauvin being sentenced to 22 years in prison is not justice. George Floyd being alive today — along with countless other black people murdered by the police — is justice. There’s no achieving justice from a system that is fundamentally unjust.

      June 25, 2021

      W. Kamau Bell
      (@wkamaubell)
      White people, do not celebrate Derek Chauvin’s sentence. Figure out how you can put the same attention & activism on all police murders of Black people that you put on George Floyd. Your work is not done.

      June 25, 2021

      Harry Litman
      (@harrylitman)
      Presumptive sentence for the crime for a person of Chauvin’s criminal history is 12.5 years. So in effect Judge Cahill imposed an additional 10 years for the aggravating factors. Remember, Chauvin waived his right for a jury to determine & probably jury would have found even more

      June 25, 2021

      5.02pm EDT
      17:02

      My colleague Adam Gabbatt had a long dispatch about the UFO report:

      The mystery of UFOs seen in American skies is likely to continue following the release of the US government’s highly anticipated UFO report.
      The report released Friday afternoon made clear that while American intelligence officials do not believe aliens are behind the UFOs – or what scientists prefer to call unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) – that were observed by Navy pilots, they cannot explain what the flying objects are.
      The report confirms that the observed phenomena are not part of any US military operations.
      The Pentagon studied over 140 incidents reported by Navy pilots of UFOs seen over the last two decades for the report, many of which were seen during the summer of 2014 into the spring of 2015.
      The release of the report caps a six-month wait, since a group of elected officials succeeded in including the Intelligence Authorization Act for fiscal year 2021 in a $2.3tn coronavirus relief bill signed by Donald Trump last December.
      The act ordered government agencies to provide a declassified “detailed analysis of unidentified aerial phenomena data and intelligence” and “a detailed description of an interagency process” for reporting UFOs.
      The discussion of UFOs – at government level or outside it – has been stigmatized for decades. While some have used the UAP materials as fodder for theories on alien life, officials have pointed to the possible threat of the UAPs being from an adversary using technology unknown to the US.

      4.50pm EDT
      16:50

      The much-awaited (at least to me) Director of National Intelligence report on UFOs is here. Read it.

      4.41pm EDT
      16:41

      Joe Biden was asked about his reaction to the Chauvin ruling. Here’s the pool report:

      Question: Do you have a reaction to Derek Chauvin being sentenced to 22.5 years in prison?
      Biden: “I don’t know all the circumstances that were considered but it seems to me, under the guidelines, that seems to be appropriate.”
      Thanks to the AP’s Darlene Superville for lending a good recording of the quote.
      More quotes coming.

      The Recount
      (@therecount)
      President Biden reacts to Derek Chauvin sentence of 22.5 years, saying “that seems to be appropriate.” pic.twitter.com/hNGv84W1LY

      June 25, 2021

      Updated
      at 4.51pm EDT

      4.32pm EDT
      16:32

      Oliver Laughland

      Just before sentencing Derek Chauvin to 22 and a half years, judge Cahill, known as a forthright and relatively brusque jurist, stated he had written a lengthy, 26 page sentencing memo to explain his thinking on the sentence, which is 10 years above the state guidance for second degree murder. “What the sentence is not based on is emotion or sympathy, but at the same time I want to acknowledge the deep and tremendous pain families are feeling, especially the Floyd family,” Cahill told the court.
      The document itself is filled with a lot legal reasoning, but the conclusion is worth reporting here as it’s a neat summary of Cahill’s thinking.
      He writes: “Part of the mission of the Minneapolis police department is to give citizens ‘voice and respect’. Here, Mr Chauvin, rather than pursuing the MPD mission, treated Mr Floyd without respect and denied him the dignity owed to all human beings and which he certainly would have extended to a friend or neighbor. In the court’s view, 270 months, which amounts to an additional 10 years over the presumptive 150 month sentence, is the appropriate sentence.”

      Updated
      at 4.36pm EDT

      4.17pm EDT
      16:17

      Here is the sentencing order on the Chauvin ruling in the Floyd case.

      4.16pm EDT
      16:16

      Attorney Ben Crump has also responded to the ruling.

      Ben Crump
      (@AttorneyCrump)
      22.5 YEARS! This historic sentence brings the Floyd family and our nation one step closer to healing by delivering closure and accountability.

      June 25, 2021

      4.15pm EDT
      16:15

      Ellison continues: “My hope for Derek Chauvin is that he uses his long sentence to reflect on the choices he made … my hope is that he takes the time to learn something about the man whose life he took.”
      Ellison is going on to say the sentencing “is not enough”.

      Updated
      at 4.19pm EDT

      4.14pm EDT
      16:14

      Ellison is now speaking.
      “The sentence that the court just imposed on Derek Chauvin … is one of the longest a former police officer has ever received for an unlawful use of deadly force,” Ellison said. “Today’s sentencing is not justice but it’s another moment of real accountability on the road to justice.”

      Updated
      at 4.19pm EDT

      4.12pm EDT
      16:12

      Attorney General Keith Ellison of Minnesota is about to speak about the ruling and Derek Chauvin’s sentencing. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      US Capitol attack: first defendant in 6 January riot expected to be sentenced

      by

      Three years of probation, 40 hours of community service and $500.That is the punishment federal prosecutors have requested for the first Capitol rioter expected to be sentenced in court, Anna Morgan-Lloyd, a 49-year-old Donald Trump supporter from Indiana.“Best day ever. We stormed the capitol building,” Morgan-Lloyd wrote on Facebook on 6 January, prosecutors said. She added that she and her friend “were in the first 50 people in”, authorities said.With nearly 500 people already arrested and charged for their roles in the 6 January attack, the sentencing of Morgan-Lloyd, a grandmother from a small town in Indiana with no known connections to extremist groups, will be the first indication of what kinds of sentences federal judges may impose on the hundreds of people who invaded the Capitol during the official certification of Trump’s loss in the 2020 presidential election.While some members of extremist groups are facing more serious conspiracy charges for allegedly planning the violence at the Capitol in advance, and others are facing charges for assaulting law enforcement officers, many defendants, like Morgan-Lloyd, are facing only misdemeanor charges.Morgan-Lloyd has agreed to plead guilty to a single misdemeanor charge of “parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building,” which carries a maximum penalty of six months’ imprisonment, and is scheduled to be sentenced by a federal judge on Wednesday afternoon.In a sentencing memo, federal prosecutors said Morgan-Lloyd and her friend Donna Sue Bissey were inside one hallway of the Capitol for a little over 10 minutes, that she did not engage in any acts of violence or destroy any government property, and that she did not appear to have planned her actions in advance or coordinated with any extremist groups.In a letter to the court, prosecutors said, the 49-year-old took responsibility for her actions, and wrote, “At first it didn’t dawn on me, but later I realized that if every person like me, who wasn’t violent, was removed from that crowd, the ones who were violent may have lost the nerve to do what they did.”Because she had no previous criminal record, Morgan-Lloyd quickly confessed to her participation and cooperated with law enforcement, and later expressed regret for what she had done, prosecutors wrote in a sentencing memo, they believed it was appropriate to request no prison time for Morgan-Lloyd, only an extended period of probation, community service, and a $500 restitution payment towards the nearly $1.5m in damages the Capitol building sustained during the invasion.“I think she’s learned a lot,” Morgan-Lloyd’s attorney, Heather Shaner, told the Guardian. “This has been a trauma for her, and she knows it was a trauma for the United States of America that people did what they did, and she would never do it again.”Shaner said that her client was “from a very small town and has had very limited life exposure”, and that she believed that many of the people who participated in the Capitol riots were “were uninformed or misinformed”.“She’s a very fine woman, and I hope she gets probation,” Shaner said.Prosecutors wrote that Morgan-Lloyd spent “approximately two days” incarcerated after she was initially arrested in February and that the time inside the criminal justice system was likely “eye-opening” and a deterrent to any future criminal behavior.The conditions of her probation should include barring her owning firearms, prosecutors requested.Unlike most federal defendants, who typically remain in detention before trial, the vast majority of people charged in the Capitol riots have already been released, a Guardian analysis found. The stark contrast in pretrial detention rates has prompted questions about whether the predominantly white Capitol defendants were getting different treatment from prosecutors and judges than most federal defendants, who are Black and Latino. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Police records show threats to kill lawmakers in wake of Capitol attack

      by

      Washington’s Metropolitan police department recorded threats to lawmakers and public facilities in the wake of the 6 January attack on the Capitol, according to documents made public in a ransomware hack on their systems this month.The documents also show how, in the month following the Capitol attack, police stepped up surveillance efforts, monitoring hotel bookings, protests in other jurisdictions, and social media for signs of another attack by far-right groups on targets in the capital, including events surrounding the inauguration of Joe Biden as president.The revelation of the seriousness of the threats comes amid Republican opposition to forming a 9/11-style commission to investigate the January attack, which saw the Capitol roamed by looting mobs hunting for politicians and involved the deaths of five people.The police documents were stolen and published by the ransomware attack group Babuk, and some were redistributed by the transparency organization Distributed Denial of Secrets, from whom they were obtained by the Guardian. Various outlets last week published stories based on the data showing intelligence indicating that far-right Boogaloo groups planned to attack various targets in the capital.But another collection of documents labeled “chiefs intelligence briefings” shows a broad, cross-agency effort in the days following the attack on the Capitol to identify suspects, monitor and apprehend far-right actors, and anticipate further attacks on Washington around events like the inauguration of Joe Biden and the second impeachment trial of Donald Trump.In the aftermath of the riot, the attention of police and other law enforcement agencies was focused on far-right activity on social media platforms, and especially on a group calling itself Patriot Action for America.One 13 January bulletin said that the group had been “calling for others to join them in ‘storming’ state, local, and federal government courthouses and administrative buildings in the event POTUS is removed as president prior to inauguration day”.The bulletin also noted that the agency was facing broader challenges in monitoring far-right actors on social media websites, saying that “with the shutdown of Parler it has been a challenge to track down how activities are being planned”, and that they continued to “see more users on Gab and Telegram following the de-platforming of many accounts on more conventional social media companies”.The bulletin mentions a “possible second suspect” in the placement of pipe bombs near the DNC and RNC, who was “observed on video scouting/taking photographs in advance of the placement”, who “took a metro to the East Falls church stop and took a Lyft from there”.On 12 January, a bulletin noted that a supreme court agent had noticed “two vehicles stopped beside each other” outside the court building, and that in one an older white male was “videotaping the Capitol fence line and the court”, and in the other a passenger was “hanging out the window in order to videotape the court”.A 22 January bulletin mentions that in Pennsylvania a man was arrested after “transmitting interstate threats to multiple US senators of the Democratic party”, having stated that he was “going to DC to kill people and wanted to be killed by the police”. When Pennsylvania state police apprehended him “he was in possession of a rifle, two handguns, and a large quantity of ammunition”.A later bulletin described an incident in which a man with an illegal firearm was arrested after asking for directions to the “Oval Office”, and another man’s van was searched after he was observed sitting in the vehicle while parked outside the supreme court justice Sonya Sotomayor’s house.The same day’s bulletin mentioned that Metropolitan police were cooperating with Capitol police in investigating “a number of threats aimed at members of Congress as the Senate impeachment trial of Donald Trump nears”.The threats continued for weeks after the attack.Almost a month later, a bulletin reported that “an identified militia group member” in Texas was claiming that if their “operation failed at the US Capitol”, there was a “back-up plan” involving the group “detonating bombs at the US Capitol during the State of the Union”.The group was not named but was described as “a large organization allegedly with members from every state, which included individuals who were former military and law enforcement”.The documents also reveal how law enforcement agencies secured the cooperation of private companies, from ride-share companies to hotels.A bulletin includes the claim that “FBI [is] working with Lyft and Uber to identify riders to and from the protest locations”.The same bulletin carries detailed figures on reservations in hotels across the capital leading up to the inauguration on 20 January, which was secured by an unprecedented mobilization of law enforcement and the national guard.Two days later, another bulletin said that “MPD’s intelligence division has conducted extensive outreach with security directors of area hotels”, who they asked to be “vigilant for evidence of suspicious activity and firearms possession by hotel guests”. More