Decisions and Verdicts

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Music

      Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs Is Denied Bail a Third Time

      by

      A federal judge ruled against the music mogul’s efforts to be released from jail while he awaits trial on sex trafficking and racketeering charges.Sean Combs, the embattled music mogul who has been charged with sex trafficking and racketeering, was denied bail again on Wednesday after a federal judge rejected his lawyers’ third attempt to challenge his detention.Judge Arun Subramanian wrote in the order that prosecutors had presented evidence of Mr. Combs’s propensity for violence and that he had violated jail regulations by trying to obscure his communications with the outside world.The judge wrote that “there is evidence supporting a serious risk of witness tampering.”The decision orders Mr. Combs to remain at the Metropolitan Detention Center, a hulking federal facility on the Brooklyn waterfront, until his trial, which is scheduled for May. Mr. Combs, 55, has been detained since his arrest in September after a nearly 10-month federal investigation.After Mr. Combs’s arrest, his lawyers offered a robust bail package that they argued was more than sufficient to assuage the court’s concerns about the risks of his release. They offered a $50 million bond, secured by Mr. Combs’s Florida mansion and said that Mr. Combs would pay for round-the-clock security, with visitors restricted to family. Apart from contact with his lawyers, he would have no access to phones or the internet.Prosecutors asserted that there was no way the government could trust that private security guards, paid for by Mr. Combs, could be depended on to prevent efforts toward obstructing justice, which, they argued, he had been engaging in before and after his indictment.Judge Subramanian agreed, writing in the order that “the Court doubts the sufficiency of any conditions that place trust in Combs and individuals in his employ — like a private security detail — to follow those conditions.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Music

      Banned From Atlanta: The Challenges of Young Thug’s Unique Probation

      by

      The rapper was released from jail last week after a surprise guilty plea. For 15 years, a set of strict requirements will govern his life and music.One of the defining Atlanta rappers of his generation is no longer welcome in Atlanta.Following a surprise guilty plea last Thursday in a gang conspiracy and racketeering case that had already lasted nearly three years, the musician Young Thug, born Jeffery Williams, was given 48 hours to vacate the Atlanta metro area, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau, for the next decade.Once the chart-topping face of Atlanta’s ever-evolving music scene, Mr. Williams, 33, may now return only briefly, under strict circumstances: for the anti-gun and anti-gang presentations he is required to make to local youth four times annually, or for the weddings, funerals, graduations or medical emergencies of his immediate family members.Mr. Williams’s banishment from his hometown was just one of 12 special conditions that he agreed to as part of a plea deal that allowed him to be released from jail that very evening. But can an international hip-hop star pick up where he left off under a new set of strict provisions that could reshape his lyrics, persona and pool of collaborators?According to experts, the length and intensity of Mr. Williams’s probation could present complications down the line, given the requirements of his profession and the vagueness or subjectivity of some of the rules that now govern his life.The judge in the case — who was given full discretion to decide on a punishment because Mr. Williams’s lawyers and prosecutors could not agree on a sentence even if he pleaded guilty — decided on time served and 15 years of probation, with an additional 20 years of prison time hanging over Mr. Williams’s head if he violates the agreement.Along the way, Mr. Williams must agree to be searched at any time; take random drug tests; refrain from promoting gangs in any way; and avoid associating with known gang members, excluding his brother, the musician Quantavious Grier, who is known as Unfoonk; and Sergio Kitchens, or Gunna, a rapper signed to Mr. Williams’s label. (Both Mr. Grier and Mr. Kitchens took plea deals in the same case ahead of trial.)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

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in Television

      ‘Bob’s Burgers’ Actor Sentenced to One Year in Prison for Role in Jan. 6 Riot

      by

      The actor, Jay Johnston, pleaded guilty in July to obstructing police during the riots at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, according to prosecutors.Jay Johnston, a comedian and actor who voiced Jimmy Pesto Sr. on the Fox sitcom “Bob’s Burgers,” was sentenced to a year and a day in prison over his involvement in the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.Mr. Johnston, 55, pleaded guilty in July to a felony charge of obstruction of law enforcement after reaching a plea agreement that dropped three other charges originally brought against him. The actor was arrested in June 2023 in California with the help of internet sleuths who identified Mr. Johnston after the F.B.I. posted photos of him at the Capitol during the riot. Three other people who know Mr. Johnston also identified him.While Mr. Johnston is best known for his role in “Bob’s Burgers,” he was a regular on the 1990s sketch comedy show, “Mr. Show with Bob and David,” as well as on “The Sarah Silverman Program.” He has mostly starred in comedies on television and in movies.He will be on supervised release for two years after his yearlong prison sentence, according to a news release from the U.S. attorney’s office for the District of Columbia. U.S. District Judge Carl J. Nichols also ordered Mr. Johnston to pay a $2,000 fine.Authorities said that when rioters broke through police barricades, Mr. Johnston continued to get closer to the police line. Security footage showed that he had helped push others up against police officers who were pinned against a door near the tunnel entrance of the Capitol building, prosecutors said.Mr. Johnston also filmed the crowds throughout the day on his phone, according to the news release. A person who knows Mr. Johnston showed investigators a text message that he had sent in which he admitted to having been at the Capitol.“The news has presented it as an attack,” the message stated, according to court documents. “It actually wasn’t. Thought it kind of turned into that. It was a mess. Got maced and tear gassed and I found it quite untastic.”Investigators also found that he had booked flights to arrive in Washington on Jan. 4, 2021, and to return to Los Angeles three days later.Mr. Johnston is one of more than 1,500 people who have been charged with crimes related to the Jan. 6 riots at the Capitol, according to the Justice Department. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Television

      The Menendez Brothers’ Case Under Review: What to Know.

      by

      Prosecutors are revisiting the brothers’ convictions in the killings of their parents. It could lead to their release from prison.Over 35 years ago, Lyle and Erik Menendez — then 21 and 18 years old — walked into the den of their Beverly Hills mansion and fired more than a dozen shotgun rounds at their parents.Now, after serving decades behind bars as part of a life sentence without the possibility of parole, the Menendez brothers may be getting a chance at freedom.In early October, the Los Angeles County district attorney, George Gascón, announced that his office was reviewing the case after lawyers representing the Menendez brothers asked prosecutors to recommend a resentencing, a move that could lead to their release.The reconsideration of their life sentences comes at a time when the Menendez brothers have been thrust back into the media spotlight thanks to the revelation of new evidence, an army of social media defenders and a recent television series and documentary examining their crime and trials.Here’s what to know about the Menendez brothers’ case:What were they convicted of?In 1996, the Menendez brothers were found guilty of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole for killing their parents, Jose, a music executive, and Mary Louise, a former beauty queen who went by the name Kitty.It was their second trial. Two years prior, a mistrial was declared after two separate juries (one for each brother) deadlocked over a 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

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Rust’ Armorer Is Denied New Trial After Dismissal of Alec Baldwin’s Case

      by

      The armorer’s lawyers failed to convince the judge that the same evidence dispute that led her to toss the actor’s manslaughter charge had deprived their client of a fair trial.A judge in New Mexico declined on Monday to grant a new trial to the armorer in the fatal “Rust” shooting, who had accused the prosecution of suppressing evidence.The armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, is serving an 18-month prison sentence and had asked to be retried on an involuntary manslaughter charge in New Mexico after the same judge dismissed the case against Alec Baldwin during his trial in July. Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer found then that the state had withheld evidence that could have shed light on how live rounds got onto the film set.On the afternoon of Oct. 21, 2021, Mr. Baldwin was positioning the old-fashioned revolver for a tight camera framing when the weapon discharged, killing the movie’s cinematographer, Halyna Hutchins, and wounding its director. A jury convicted Ms. Gutierrez-Reed, who loaded the gun that day, of manslaughter in March after prosecutors argued that she was reckless in overseeing guns and ammunitions on the set.Judge Marlowe Sommer ruled on Monday that the suppressed evidence that felled the Baldwin case — a set of ammunition that was delivered to law enforcement on the day of the armorer’s conviction — did not warrant dismissal of Ms. Gutierrez-Reed’s trial because her lawyer was aware of and had access to the evidence.The judge wrote that the ammunition “does not qualify, as a matter of law, as material evidence because it was available to defendant in advance of and during trial.”The ruling was a moment of relief for the prosecution after its case against Mr. Baldwin, 66, collapsed under an accusation that state investigators had intentionally withheld the ammunition from them by putting it under a new case number. The accusation led to an extraordinary hearing in which the judge examined the ammunition in the courtroom; the lead special prosecutor, Kari T. Morrissey, called herself as a witness; and the other prosecutor on her team resigned.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

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in Music

      Sean Combs Must Remain in Jail Until Trial After Judge Denies Bail Appeal

      by

      The judge said Mr. Combs posed a risk of witness tampering and was a danger to the community while awaiting his sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy trial.A federal judge on Wednesday ordered Sean Combs to remain in jail until his trial for sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy, rejecting an appeal by the music mogul’s lawyers requesting that he be released on bail.Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr. said at a hearing in Lower Manhattan that Mr. Combs posed a risk of witness tampering and was a danger to the safety of the community. He rejected an unusual proposal from Mr. Combs’s legal team in which he would have remained at his mansion in Florida, monitored around the clock by a private security force. The lawyers had offered a $50 million bond for his release.Arguing that Mr. Combs was prone to violence, prosecutors spoke at length about a leaked surveillance video from 2016 in which he was seen physically assaulting Casandra Ventura, his former girlfriend, who is known as Cassie. She filed a sexual assault lawsuit against him last year that was quickly settled.The judge said “that video is quite disturbing,” after which Mr. Combs, seated between his lawyers, nodded several times.Marc Agnifilo, one of Mr. Combs’s lawyers, said his client should not be detained based on an assault from eight years ago that led him to go to rehab. “Mr. Combs has the unfortunate reality that the worst thing he ever did is on videotape,” the lawyer said.The government’s concern that Mr. Combs might intimidate witnesses was a theme of the hearing.“His influence makes it so difficult for witnesses to share their experiences and trust that the government can keep them safe from him,” said Emily A. Johnson, one of the prosecutors.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Rust’ Armorer Asks for New Trial After Dismissal of Alec Baldwin’s Case

      by

      Lawyers for the armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, are seizing on a judge’s dramatic dismissal of the actor’s case to argue for her release from prison.The armorer who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter for loading a live round into a gun on the “Rust” movie set, resulting in the fatal shooting of its cinematographer, asked a court in New Mexico on Tuesday for a new trial following the collapse of the case against Alec Baldwin.On Friday, Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer halted Mr. Baldwin’s manslaughter trial and dismissed the case against him permanently after determining that the state had intentionally withheld new evidence that could have shed light on how live rounds ended up on the movie set, leading to the death of the cinematographer, Halyna Hutchins.Now lawyers for the armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, whose case was handled by the same prosecutor and who was sentenced to 18 months in prison by the same judge, are seizing on the problems exposed during Mr. Baldwin’s case to seek a new trial.“This court stated on July 12 that the integrity of the judicial system demanded that the court dismiss Mr. Baldwin’s case with prejudice,” the lawyers wrote. “How can it be any different with Ms. Gutierrez-Reed’s case, with this proven litany of serious discovery abuses?”The dramatic dismissal of the case against Mr. Baldwin followed a hearing in which the judge herself examined the new evidence in the Santa Fe County District Courthouse: a batch of live rounds that someone had dropped off to the local sheriff’s office around the time the armorer’s trial ended in March.Law enforcement officials acknowledged during testimony that when the ammunition was turned in, it was put in a separate case file from the rest of the “Rust” evidence. Mr. Baldwin’s lawyers said they had never received it despite asking the state for all ballistics evidence.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares159 Views

      in Music

      Judge in Young Thug Trial Is Ordered Off the Case

      by

      Judge Ural Glanville, who had overseen the case for more than two years, must step aside for meeting with prosecutors and a key witness without the defense.The unpredictable, much-delayed criminal trial of Young Thug, the Atlanta rap star, has been thrown for another loop: The judge overseeing the case for two years has been ordered to step aside.Following weeks of upheaval in the courtroom over an uncooperative witness, a judge in Fulton County, Ga., ruled on Monday that Judge Ural Glanville, who has already presided over 10 months of jury selection and eight months of arguments, must recuse himself in order to preserve “the public’s confidence in the judicial system.”The trial has been paused for two weeks and will resume once a new judge is assigned to the case.The move to have Judge Glanville removed stemmed from motions by lawyers for Young Thug, born Jeffery Williams, and another of the rapper’s five co-defendants in the sprawling gang conspiracy case after the judge met secretly with prosecutors and a key witness who refused to testify last month. The defense lawyers said they should have been present for, or at least informed of, the meeting, calling it “improper and coercive.”The ruling by one of Judge Glanville’s judicial colleagues disagreed. “While the meeting could have — and perhaps should have — taken place in open court, nothing about the fact of the meeting or the substance discussed was inherently improper,” Judge Rachel Krause wrote in her decision.But the fact that Judge Glanville defended his actions regarding the meeting in court and ruled on related motions instead of immediately referring those decisions to another judge meant that he should step aside to assure fairness, Judge Krause wrote.“This court has no doubt that Judge Glanville can and would continue presiding fairly over this matter if the recusal motions were denied,” the decision said, “but the ‘necessity of preserving the public’s confidence in the judicial system’ weighs in favor of excusing Judge Glanville from further handling of this case.”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