Tag Archives: NRLPA:OCRIM

Trump defied Jan 6 committee subpoena, panel says

Nov 14 (Reuters) – Former President Donald Trump did not show up for deposition testimony before the congressional committee investigating his supporters’ attack on the U.S. Capitol last year, the panel said on Monday.

In doing so Trump defied a subpoena issued by the panel in October, Chair Bennie Thompson, a Democrat, and co-Chair Liz Cheney, a Republican, said in a joint statement.

“The truth is that Donald Trump, like several of his closest allies, is hiding from the Select Committee’s investigation and refusing to do what more than a thousand other witnesses have done,” Thompson and Cheney said.

The panel did not say what next steps they might pursue against Trump. Thompson told the New York Times in an interview that he would not rule out seeking contempt of Congress charges against the former president.

“That could be an option. And we’ll have to wait and see,” Thomson told the Times. “The first thing we’ll do is see how we address the lawsuit. At some point after that, we’ll decide the path forward.”

Trump filed a lawsuit on Friday seeking to avoid having to testify or provide any documentation to the Jan. 6 committee.

The congressional committee has held a series of hearings as it seeks to make its case to the public that Trump provoked his supporters into storming the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, while lawmakers met to formally declare his loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

The subpoena ordered Trump to submit documents to the panel by Nov. 4 and for him to appear for deposition testimony beginning on or about Nov. 14.

On Nov. 4, it said it had agreed to give Trump an extension before producing the documents but the Nov. 14 deadline remained in place.

Republicans are expected to dissolve the panel if they win control of the U.S. House of Representatives in the mid-term elections.

Reporting by Tyler Clifford and Dan Whitcomb; Editing by Leslie Adler

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Nikolas Cruz: Parkland school shooter sentenced to life in prison

Nov 2 (Reuters) – Nikolas Cruz, who murdered 17 students and staff with a semi-automatic rifle at a Florida high school, was formally sentenced to life in prison on Wednesday after listening to hours of anguished testimony from survivors and victims’ relatives.

A jury voted last month to spare Cruz, 24, the death penalty, instead choosing life in prison without possibility of parole for one of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history.

Cruz pleaded guilty last year to premeditated murder for his rampage on Feb. 14, 2018, then faced the three-month penalty trial earlier this year.

Broward County Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer agreed to a prosecution request to first allow relatives of Cruz’s victims to address the court before the sentence was handed down. The sentencing proceedings began on Tuesday with victim impact statements.

Many victims’ relatives castigated the jury’s decision and criticized a state law requirement that all 12 jurors be unanimous in order to sentence a convicted person to be executed.

“How much worse would the crime have to be to warrant the death penalty?” said Annika Dworet, the mother of 17-year-old victim Nicholas Dworet.

Some relatives also chided Cruz’s defense lawyers, who fruitlessly objected to the judge about the criticism of them and the jurors on Tuesday, noting that Cruz had a constitutional right to legal representation.

Many victims’ relatives directly addressed Cruz, who sat inscrutable behind large spectacles and a COVID-19 mask at a table alongside his public defenders, wearing red prison overalls and handcuffs. He removed his mask when the mother of one of his victims told him keeping it on was disrespectful

Anne Ramsay, the mother of 17-year-old Helena Ramsay, told him he was “pure evil;” Inez Hixon called him a “domestic terrorist” for killing her father-in-law, school athletics director Chris Hixon.

Cruz was 19 at the time of his attack on Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, about 30 miles (50 km) north of the courthouse in Fort Lauderdale. He had been expelled from the school.

Some of the survivors went on to organize a youth-led movement for tighter gun regulations in the United States, which has the highest rate of private gun ownership in the world and where mass shootings have become recurrent.

Cruz spoke only briefly at the hearing, answering the judge’s questions about whether he understood the proceedings.

Samantha Fuentes, who Cruz shot in the leg, asked Cruz if he remembered making eye contact with her when she lay bleeding in her classroom.

“You are a hateful bigot with an AR-15 and a god complex,” she said. “Without your stupid gun, you are nothing.”

Victoria Gonzalez, whose boyfriend 17-year-old Joaquin Oliver was among those Cruz killed, told Cruz they were in the same class together.

“I’m sorry that you never saw the love that the world is capable of giving,” she told Cruz. “My justice does not lie in knowing if you live or if you die. My justice lives in knowing that I experienced a love that a lot of people go their whole lifetimes without experiencing.”

Reporting by Jonathan Allen in New York; editing by Jonathan Oatis and Richard Pullin

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Three found guilty of aiding plot to kidnap Michigan Governor Whitmer

Oct 26 (Reuters) – Three men accused of aiding a 2020 plot to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer were found guilty on Wednesday of taking part in a conspiracy that prosecutors ascribed to hostility over restrictions she imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A jury found Joseph Morrison, 28, his father-in-law Pete Musico, 44, and Paul Bellar, 23, guilty of gang membership, firearm violations and providing material support for terrorism.

They could each face up to 20 years in prison when sentenced on December 15.

The three were among more than a dozen men arrested in October 2020 and charged with state or federal crimes related to the conspiracy. The group planned to break into Whitmer’s vacation home, kidnap her and take her at gunpoint to stand “trial” on treason charges, prosecutors said.

Seven of the accused, including Morrison, Musico and Bellar, have now been convicted by a jury or pleaded guilty to playing roles in the conspiracy.

After the verdicts, Whitmer, a Democrat who is up for re-election in November, said she was not disheartened by the evidence presented in the case, which highlighted the growth of U.S. political militancy in recent years.

“No threat, no plot, no rhetoric will break my belief in the goodness and decency of our people,” she said in a tweet. “And these verdicts are further proof that violence and threats have no place in our politics.”

The verdict, after two weeks of testimony in Jackson County Circuit Court, was a victory for state prosecutors who argued that the men on trial assisted two others who in August were found guilty in federal court of orchestrating the kidnapping conspiracy.

Defense attorneys argued their client did not know of a plan to kidnap the governor and that their actions were protected by the First and Second Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

After the verdict, the defense attorneys – all of them public defenders – said they were disappointed and had advised their clients to appeal.

Prosecutors did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the verdicts.

In the earlier trial, Adam Fox and Barry Croft Jr. were found guilty of plotting to abduct Whitmer from her vacation home. Their convictions followed a first trial earlier this year that ended in a hung jury, while two other defendants were acquitted during those proceedings.

The conspirators hoped that an abduction would lead to a violent uprising and instigate a civil war, prosecutors said.

Morrison and Musico were accused of hosting tactical training sessions on their property in a remote part of Michigan. Bellar was accused of providing plans for tactical maneuvers, coded language for covert communication and ammunition.

All three were members of a militia group called the Wolverine Watchmen, prosecutors said.

In September, a federal judge reduced the sentence of another accused conspirator, Ty Garbin, who pleaded guilty to participating in the plot after his testimony helped convict Fox and Croft. read more

Kaleb Franks, who also pleaded guilty to playing a role in the scheme, was sentenced to four years in prison earlier this month after serving as a key witness in the case against Fox and Croft.

Reporting by Tyler Clifford in New York and Brendan O’Brien in Chicago; Editing by Alistair Bell, Jonathan Oatis and Howard Goller

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Exclusive: Tesla faces U.S. criminal probe over self-driving claims

Oct 25 – Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) is under criminal investigation in the United States over claims that the company’s electric vehicles can drive themselves, three people familiar with the matter said.

The U.S. Department of Justice launched the previously undisclosed probe last year following more than a dozen crashes, some of them fatal, involving Tesla’s driver assistance system Autopilot, which was activated during the accidents, the people said.

As early as 2016, Tesla’s marketing materials have touted Autopilot’s capabilities. On a conference call that year, Elon Musk, the Silicon Valley automaker’s chief executive, described it as “probably better” than a human driver.

Last week, Musk said on another call Tesla would soon release an upgraded version of “Full Self-Driving” software allowing customers to travel “to your work, your friend’s house, to the grocery store without you touching the wheel.”

A video currently on the company’s website says: “The person in the driver’s seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself.”

However, the company also has explicitly warned drivers that they must keep their hands on the wheel and maintain control of their vehicles while using Autopilot.

The Tesla technology is designed to assist with steering, braking, speed and lane changes but its features “do not make the vehicle autonomous,” the company says on its website.

Such warnings could complicate any case the Justice Department might wish to bring, the sources said.

Tesla, which disbanded its media relations department in 2020, did not respond to written questions from Reuters on Wednesday. Musk also did not respond to written questions seeking comment. A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment.

Musk said in an interview with Automotive News in 2020 that Autopilot problems stem from customers using the system in ways contrary to Tesla’s instructions.

Federal and California safety regulators are already scrutinizing whether claims about Autopilot’s capabilities and the system’s design imbue customers with a false sense of security, inducing them to treat Teslas as truly driverless cars and become complacent behind the wheel with potentially deadly consequences.

The Justice Department investigation potentially represents a more serious level of scrutiny because of the possibility of criminal charges against the company or individual executives, the people familiar with the inquiry said.

As part of the latest probe, Justice Department prosecutors in Washington and San Francisco are examining whether Tesla misled consumers, investors and regulators by making unsupported claims about its driver assistance technology’s capabilities, the sources said.

Officials conducting their inquiry could ultimately pursue criminal charges, seek civil sanctions or close the probe without taking any action, they said.

The Justice Department’s Autopilot probe is far from recommending any action partly because it is competing with two other DOJ investigations involving Tesla, one of the sources said. Investigators still have much work to do and no decision on charges is imminent, this source said.

The Justice Department may also face challenges in building its case, said the sources, because of Tesla’s warnings about overreliance on Autopilot.

For instance, after telling the investor call last week that Teslas would soon travel without customers touching controls, Musk added that the vehicles still needed someone in the driver’s seat. “Like we’re not saying that that’s quite ready to have no one behind the wheel,” he said.

The Tesla website also cautions that, before enabling Autopilot, the driver first needs to agree to “keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times” and to always “maintain control and responsibility for your vehicle.”

Barbara McQuade, a former U.S. attorney in Detroit who prosecuted automotive companies and employees in fraud cases and is not involved in the current probe, said investigators likely would need to uncover evidence such as emails or other internal communications showing that Tesla and Musk made misleading statements about Autopilot’s capabilities on purpose.

SEVERAL PROBES

The criminal Autopilot investigation adds to the other probes and legal issues involving Musk, who became locked in a court battle earlier this year after abandoning a $44 billion takeover of social media giant Twitter Inc, only to reverse course and proclaim excitement for the looming acquisition.

In August 2021, the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration opened an investigation into a series of crashes, one of them fatal, involving Teslas equipped with Autopilot slamming into parked emergency vehicles.

NHTSA officials in June intensified their probe, which covers 830,000 Teslas with Autopilot, identifying 16 crashes involving the company’s electric cars and stationary first-responder and road maintenance vehicles. The move is a step that regulators must take before requesting a recall. The agency had no immediate comment.

In July this year, the California Department of Motor Vehicles accused Tesla of falsely advertising its Autopilot and Full Self-Driving capability as providing autonomous vehicle control. Tesla filed paperwork with the agency seeking a hearing on the allegations and indicated it intends to defend against them. The DMV said in a statement it is currently in the discovery stage of the proceeding and declined further comment.

Additional reporting by Hyunjoo Jin and David Shepardson; Editing by Deepa Babington

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Lafarge pleads guilty to supporting Islamic State, will pay U.S. $778 million

NEW YORK, Oct 18 (Reuters) – French cement maker Lafarge pleaded guilty on Tuesday to a U.S. charge that it made payments to groups designated as terrorists by the United States, including Islamic State.

The admission in Brooklyn federal court marked the first time a company has pleaded guilty in the United States to charges of providing material support to a terrorist organization. Lafarge, which became part of Swiss-listed Holcim (HOLN.S) in 2015, agreed to pay $778 million in forfeiture and fines as part of the plea agreement.

U.S. prosecutors said that Lafarge paid Islamic State and al Nusra Front, through intermediaries, the equivalent of approximately $5.92 million.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Lafarge is also facing charges of complicity in crimes against humanity in Paris for keeping a factory running in Syria after a conflict broke out in 2011.

Lafarge eventually evacuated the cement plant in September 2014, U.S. prosecutors said. At that point, Islamic State took possession of the remaining cement and sold it for the equivalent of $3.21 million, prosecutors said.

U.S. Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco said on Tuesday during a news conference that the company’s actions “reflect corporate crime that has reached a new low and a very dark place.”

“Business with terrorists cannot be business as usual,” Monaco added.

The cement maker previously admitted after an internal investigation that its Syrian subsidiary paid armed groups to help protect staff at the plant. But it had denied charges that it was complicit in crimes against humanity.

Lafarge Chair Magali Anderson said in court on Tuesday that from August 2013 until November 2014 former executives of the company “knowingly and willfully agreed to participate in a conspiracy to make and authorize payments intended for the benefit of various armed groups in Syria.”

“The individuals responsible for this conduct have been separated from the company since at least 2017,” she said.

Monaco said that French authorities have arrested some of the executives involved but did not provide names. Court records refer to six unnamed Lafarge executives.

In a statement, Holcim noted that none of the conduct involved Holcim, “which has never operated in Syria, or any Lafarge operations or employees in the United States, and it is in stark contrast with everything that Holcim stands for.”

Holcim said that former Lafarge executives involved in the conduct concealed it from Holcim, as well as from external auditors.

The SIX Swiss Exchange suspended trading in Holcim shares before the news.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Reporting by Luc Cohen in New York and Karen Freifeld;
Editing by Noeleen Walder and Lisa Shumaker

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Luc Cohen

Thomson Reuters

Reports on the New York federal courts. Previously worked as a correspondent in Venezuela and Argentina.

Read original article here

Baltimore murder case dropped against Syed, subject of ‘Serial’ podcast

Oct 11 (Reuters) – Baltimore prosecutors on Tuesday dismissed their case against a man found guilty of the 1999 killing of his ex-girlfriend in a case that drew national attention after the podcast “Serial” raised doubts about his guilt.

Adnan Syed, 42, served more than 20 years in prison for the slaying of Hae Min Lee. A circuit court judge vacated the murder conviction last month and released him after an investigation identified problems with the case, leaving prosecutors to decide whether to retry him. read more

On Tuesday, the State’s Attorney for Baltimore City Marilyn Mosby said during a news conference that she ordered prosecutors to drop the criminal case against Syed after DNA testing cast doubt on his guilt.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

“The criminal justice system should be based on fair and just prosecution and crux of the matter is that we are standing here today because that wasn’t done 23 years ago,” she said, apologizing to the Lee and Syed families. “Today, justice is done.”

Mosby said no DNA was recovered from Lee’s skirt, panty hose or jacket during a touch DNA testing that was recently performed for the first time on the evidence. She added that DNA was found on Lee’s shoes, but it was not from Syed.

“Finally, Adnan Syed is able to live as a free man,” Syed’s lawyer, Erica Suter, said in a statement released to local media.

Adnan Syed, whose case was chronicled in the hit podcast “Serial,” departs the courthouse with his attorney Erica Suter, after a judge overturned Syed’s 2000 murder conviction and ordered a new trial during a hearing at the Baltimore City Circuit Courthouse in Baltimore, Maryland U.S., September 19, 2022. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst/File Photo

Mosby said the investigation into who killed Lee remains open.

Syed has maintained he was innocent and did not kill Lee, who was 18 when she was strangled and buried in a Baltimore park. The podcast “Serial,” produced by Chicago public radio station WBEZ, drew national attention to the case in 2014.

Prosecutors filed a motion on Sept. 15 to vacate the conviction after conducting a yearlong investigation alongside a public defender representing Syed. Several problems were found with witnesses and evidence from the trial, the investigation found.

Four days later, prosecutors told Baltimore Circuit Court Judge Melissa Phinn that they no longer had confidence in “the integrity of the conviction,” and that justice required that Syed at least be afforded a new trial.

Prosecutors said they had discovered new information about two alternative suspects, whom they have not named, including one who had threatened to kill Lee, and both of whom have a history of violent crimes against women. Their identities were known to the original prosecutors but not disclosed to the defense as required by law.

Phinn then ordered Syed to be released from prison, where he was serving a life sentence, and put him on home detention. Mosby said Syed will need to go through an innocence certification process for those who are wrongly convicted.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Reporting by Brendan O’Brien in Chicago; editing by Jonathan Oatis and Chizu Nomiyama

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

U.S. appeals court says Trump criminal probe can resume classified records review

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

WASHINGTON, Sept 21 (Reuters) – The U.S. Justice Department can resume reviewing classified records seized by the FBI from former President Donald Trump’s Florida home pending appeal, a federal appellate court ruled on Wednesday, giving a boost to the criminal investigation into whether the records were mishandled or compromised.

The Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted a request by federal prosecutors to block U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon’s stay barring them from using the classified documents in their probe until an independent arbiter, called a special master, vets the materials to weed out any that could be deemed privileged and withheld from investigators.

The appeals court also said it would agree to reverse a portion of the lower court’s order that required the government to hand over records with classification markings for the special master’s review.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

“We conclude that the United States would suffer irreparable harm from the district court’s restrictions on its access to this narrow—and potentially critical—set of materials, as well as the court’s requirement that the United States submit the classified records to the special master for review,” the three-judge panel wrote.

The decision is “limited in nature,” the panel wrote, as the Justice Department had asked only for a partial stay pending appeal, and that the panel was not able to decide on the merits of the case itself.

The three judges who made the decision were Robin Rosenbaum, an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama, and Britt Grant and Andrew Brasher, both of whom were appointed by Trump.

Trump’s lawyers could potentially ask the U.S. Supreme Court, whose 6-3 conservative majority includes three justices appointed by him, to intervene in the matter.

In filings on Tuesday, Trump’s lawyers urged the court to keep the stay in place and to allow them under the supervision of the special master, U.S Judge Raymond Dearie, to review all of the seized materials, including those marked classified.

A Justice Department spokesperson did not have an immediate comment. Attorneys for Trump could not be immediately reached for comment.

In an interview on Fox News Wednesday night, Trump repeated his claim without evidence that he declassified the documents and said he had the power to do it “even by thinking about it.”

The FBI conducted a court-approved search on Aug. 8 at Trump’s home at the Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, seizing more than 11,000 documents including about 100 marked as classified.

The search was part of a federal investigation into whether Trump illegally removed documents from the White House when he left office in January 2021 after his failed 2020 re-election bid and whether Trump tried to obstruct the probe.

Cannon, a Trump appointee herself, appointed Dearie to serve as special master in the case at Trump’s request, despite the Justice Department’s objections about a special master.

Cannon tasked Dearie with reviewing all of the materials, including classified ones, so that he can separate anything that could be subject to attorney-client privilege or executive privilege – a legal doctrine that shields some White House communications from disclosure.

However, Trump’s lawyers have not made such claims in any of their legal filings, and during a hearing before Dearie on Tuesday, they resisted his request to provide proof that Trump had declassified any records. read more

Although the appeals court stressed its ruling was narrow in scope, it nevertheless appeared to sharply rebuke Cannon’s ruling from top to bottom and many of Trump’s legal arguments.

“[Trump]has not even attempted to show that he has a need to know the information contained in the classified documents,” the judges wrote. “Nor has he established that the current administration has waived that requirement for these documents.”

The Justice Department previously also raised strong objections to Cannon’s demand that Dearie review the seized records for documents possibly covered by executive privilege, noting that Trump is a former president and the records do not belong to him.

While it voiced disagreement, however, the Justice Department did not appeal that portion of Cannon’s order. It is not clear if prosecutors may separately seek to appeal other parts of Cannon’s ruling on the special master appointment.

“We decide only the traditional equitable considerations, including whether the United States has shown a substantial likelihood of prevailing on the merits, the harm each party might suffer from a stay, and where the public interest lies,” the appeals court said.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch; additional reporting by Eric Beech, Mike Scarcella and Jacqueline Thomsen; Editing by Leslie Adler & Shri Navaratnam

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Trump lawyers oppose Justice Department request on classified documents

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

WASHINGTON, Sept 12 (Reuters) – Former President Donald Trump’s attorneys on Monday opposed a U.S. Justice Department request to immediately resume examining the contents of classified documents seized by the FBI from his Florida estate last month in an ongoing criminal investigation.

His lawyers in a filing also asked U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon to make those roughly 100 documents – among the more than 11,000 records found in the court-approved Aug. 8 search – part of a review that an independent arbiter, called a special master, will conduct to vet all the materials.

The special master, requested by Trump and approved by the judge last week, could deem documents privileged and wall them off from investigators.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Trump is under investigation by the Justice Department for retaining government records – some of which were marked as highly classified, including “top secret” – at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach after leaving office in January 2021. The department is also examining possible obstruction of the probe.

Trump’s lawyers on Monday also told Cannon they opposed two retired judges – Barbara Jones and Thomas Griffith – proposed by the government to serve as special master. Trump’s team has proposed federal judge Raymond Dearie and Paul Huck, Florida’s former deputy attorney general.

In its own filing, the department said it could support the appointment of Dearie, but not Huck. It said Huck did not appear to have the type of “substantial” experience presiding over federal criminal and civil cases, including cases involving national security, as did Dearie and the two other candidates.

In another development, the Justice Department has charged a Texas woman who prosecutors accused of making phone threats against Cannon, including saying the judge was “marked for assassination.” The incident marks the latest example of threats reported against various federal authorities in recent months. read more

Cannon previously blocked the department from immediately using the seized records in the investigation, a move that will slow down the work of prosecutors and make it harder for them to determine whether additional classified materials could be missing. read more

Former U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a rally in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, U.S., September 3, 2022. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly/File Photo

“In what at its core is a document storage dispute that has spiraled out of control, the government wrongfully seeks to criminalize the possession by the 45th President of his own presidential and personal records,” Trump’s lawyers wrote.

“The government should therefore not be permitted to skip the process and proceed straight to a preordained conclusion,” they added.

Trump’s lawyers in Monday’s filing disputed the department’s claim that the roughly 100 documents at issue are in fact classified, and they reminded Cannon that a president generally has broad powers to declassify records. They stopped short of suggesting that Trump had declassified the documents, a claim he has made on social media but not in court filings.

“There still remains a disagreement as to the classification status of the documents,” Trump’s lawyers wrote. “The government’s position therefore assumes a fact not yet established.”

The Justice Department has asked the judge to let investigators immediately resume going through the documents marked as classified. If the judge rules that the department cannot continue relying on the classified materials for its criminal probe or insists on letting the special master review them, prosecutors have vowed to appeal to a higher court.

The documents probe is one of several federal and state investigations Trump is facing from his time in office and in private business as he considers another run for the presidency in 2024.

Following the search, Trump’s attorneys sought the appointment of the special master to review the seized records for materials that could be covered by attorney-client privilege or executive privilege – a legal doctrine that can shield some presidential records from disclosure.

In ruling in favor of Trump’s request last week, Cannon rejected Justice Department arguments that the records belong to the government and that because Trump is no longer president he cannot claim executive privilege. Cannon was appointed to the bench by Trump in 2020. read more

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch and Doina Chiacu; Editing by Will Dunham and Rosalba O’Brien

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Exclusive: Cassava Sciences faces U.S. criminal probe tied to Alzheimer’s drug, sources say

WASHINGTON, July 27 (Reuters) – The U.S. Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into Cassava Sciences Inc (SAVA.O) involving whether the biotech company manipulated research results for its experimental Alzheimer’s drug, two people familiar with the inquiry said.

The Justice Department personnel conducting the investigation into Austin, Texas-based Cassava specialize in examining whether companies or individuals have misled or defrauded investors, government agencies or consumers, according to the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity. The sources did not provide details of the focus of the probe and whether the department was looking into any specific individuals.

As in any Justice Department investigation, this one could lead to criminal charges or be closed without any charges being brought.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

In an emailed statement, Kate Watson Moss, a lawyer representing Cassava, neither confirmed nor denied the existence of the Justice Department criminal probe.

“To be clear: Cassava Sciences vehemently denies any and all allegations of wrongdoing,” Watson Moss said, adding that the company “has never been charged with a crime, and for good reason – Cassava Sciences has never engaged in criminal conduct.”

Watson Moss added that Cassava Sciences has received confidential requests for information from government agencies, but declined to identify those agencies. Watson Moss said that “Cassava Sciences has provided information in response to these requests in full satisfaction of its legal obligations.” Watson Moss added that no government agency has accused the company of wrongdoing.

A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment.

The company already was facing scrutiny from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and investors after two physicians from outside Cassava last year made allegations of data manipulation and misrepresentation involving research underpinning the company’s Alzheimer’s drug, called simufilam.

Cassava, a small company with about two dozen employees, in a statement last year called the allegations of data manipulation and misrepresentation “false and misleading.”

Cassava on its website describes simufilam as taking an “entirely new approach” to treating Alzheimer’s, the most common form of dementia and a progressive brain disorder that affects nearly 6 million Americans. The oral medication restores the normal shape and function of a key protein in the brain, the company said.

A PETITION TO THE FDA

The criminal investigation began, according to the sources, sometime after a petition was filed in August 2021 with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration by a lawyer on behalf of two physicians asking the agency to halt clinical trials of simufilam. The physicians are David Bredt, a neuroscientist formerly at Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen, and Geoffrey Pitt, a cardiologist who serves as director of Weill Cornell Medicine’s Cardiovascular Research Institute in New York.

The petition filed by Jordan Thomas, a New York-based lawyer representing both doctors, said Cassava’s published studies on clinical trials involving simufilam in various journals contained data misrepresentation and images of experiments that appeared to have been manipulated by photo-editing software. The FDA denied the petition and let the trials proceed.

Bredt and Pitt disclosed last November in an article published by The Wall Street Journal that they shorted Cassava’s stock, betting that the price would go down once investors learned of the manipulation they alleged. They later told The New Yorker magazine that they no longer have a short position in Cassava, a claim Reuters could not independently verify.

The short-selling represents “a major conflict of interest,” Watson Moss said in her statement to Reuters.

“Cassava Sciences is interested in helping those with Alzheimer’s disease, not an easy payday,” Watson Moss added.

STOCK DROP

Cassava’s stock fell precipitously following the petition filed with the FDA by Thomas, presenting an opportunity for Bredt and Pitt to profit on their bet against the company.

Thomas declined to comment on the matter.

The FDA in February said the so-called citizen petition filed by the two physicians urging it to launch an investigation into simufilam was not a proper avenue for such a request. Requests for the FDA to initiate an enforcement action, meanwhile, are “expressly excluded from the scope of the FDA’s citizen petition procedures,” the agency said, adding that it exercises its own discretion on such matters.

An FDA spokesperson declined to comment.

Cassava shares rose on Nasdaq from around $7 in January 2021 to above $135 in July 2021 on investor hopes that the company was on the verge of a breakthrough in treating Alzheimer’s. The stock plunged weeks later following word of the petition questioning Cassava’s research results.

The company’s shares closed at $21.72 on Tuesday.

Cassava has received more than $20 million from the U.S. National Institutes of Health to support developing simufilam.

The NIH told Reuters it does not discuss potential cases of research misconduct related to grants but that officials “take research misconduct very seriously. Research misconduct may distort NIH funding decisions, the overall integrity of the research we support and the public’s trust in science and resulting outcomes.”

Cassava also is facing the SEC investigation, the sources said. The Wall Street Journal last November first reported on the SEC probe, saying the agency was examining the claims made in the FDA petition. Reuters was unable to determine what specific claims, if any, drew the agency’s scrutiny.

An SEC spokesperson said the agency “does not comment on the existence or nonexistence of a possible investigation.”

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Reporting by Marisa Taylor in Washington and Mike Spector in New York; Editing by Will Dunham and Michele Gershberg

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Trump ex-adviser Bannon convicted of contempt of U.S. Congress

  • Conviction follows less than 3 hours of jury deliberations
  • First contempt of Congress conviction in U.S. since 1974
  • Defense suggested Bannon’s prosecution was political

WASHINGTON, July 22 (Reuters) – Steve Bannon, a key associate of former President Donald Trump and an influential figure on the American right, was convicted on Friday of contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena from the committee probing last year’s attack on the U.S. Capitol, a verdict the panel called a “victory for the rule of law.”

A jury found Bannon, 68, guilty of two misdemeanor counts for refusing to provide testimony or documents to the House of Representatives select committee as it scrutinizes the Jan. 6, 2021, rampage by Trump supporters who tried to upend the results of the 2020 presidential election.

Each count is punishable by 30 days to one year behind bars and a fine of $100 to $100,000. U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols set an Oct. 21 sentencing date.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

The verdict by the jury of eight men and four women, after less than three hours of deliberations, marked the first successful prosecution for contempt of Congress since 1974, when a judge found G. Gordon Liddy, a conspirator in the Watergate scandal that prompted President Richard Nixon’s resignation, guilty.

Bannon was a key adviser to the Republican Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, then served as his chief White House strategist during 2017 before a falling out between them that was later patched up. Bannon also has played an instrumental role in right-wing media.

“We lost a battle here today. We’re at war,” Bannon told reporters after the verdict.

Bannon castigated the “members of that show-trial committee” who he said “didn’t have the guts to come down here and testify in open court.” Bannon opted not to testify in his own defense.

“The conviction of Steve Bannon is a victory for the rule of law,” Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, a Democrat, and Vice Chair Liz Cheney, a Republican, said in a statement.

“Just as there must be accountability for all those responsible for the events of January 6th, anyone who obstructs our investigation into these matters should face consequences. No one is above the law,” they added.

Bannon’s defense team in closing arguments on Friday suggested that Bannon was a political target and painted the main prosecution witness as a politically motivated Democrat with ties to one of the prosecutors, including belonging to the same book club. The prosecution said Bannon showed disdain for the authority of Congress and needed to be held accountable for unlawful defiance.

Prosecutor Molly Gaston told jurors the attack represented a “dark day” for America, adding: “There is nothing political about finding out why Jan. 6 happened and making sure it never happens again.”

‘BULLET-PROOF APPEAL’

After the verdict, David Schoen, one of Bannon’s attorneys, promised his client will have “a bullet-proof appeal.”

The judge limited the scope of the case Bannon’s team could present. Bannon was barred from arguing that he believed his communications with Trump were subject to a legal doctrine called executive privilege that can keep certain presidential communications confidential and was prohibited from arguing he relied upon an attorney’s legal advice in refusing to comply.

In two days of testimony, prosecutors questioned only two witnesses and the defense called none.

The conviction may strengthen the committee’s position as it seeks testimony and documents from others in Trump’s orbit. Trump last year asked his associates not to cooperate, accusing the committee of trying to hurt him politically. Several rebuffed the panel.

Another former Trump adviser, Peter Navarro, was charged with contempt of Congress in June for refusing a committee deposition. Navarro’s trial is scheduled for November. The Justice Department opted not to charge Trump associates Mark Meadows and Daniel Scavino for defying the committee despite a House vote recommending it. read more

The main prosecution witness was Kristin Amerling, a top committee staffer who testified that Bannon spurned deadlines to respond to last September’s subpoena, sought no extensions and offered an invalid rationale for his defiance: Trump’s claim of executive privilege.

The Justice Department charged Bannon last November after the Democratic-led House voted the prior month to hold him in contempt. Bannon separately was charged in 2020 with defrauding donors to a private fund-raising effort to boost Trump’s project to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border. Trump pardoned Bannon before that case went to trial. read more

A pro-Trump mob stormed the Capitol and attacked police with batons, sledgehammers, flag poles, Taser devices, chemical irritants, metal pipes, rocks, metal guard rails and other weapons in a failed effort to block congressional certification of his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

According to the committee, Bannon spoke with Trump at least twice on the day before the attack, attended a planning meeting at a Washington hotel and said on his right-wing podcast “all hell is going to break loose tomorrow.”

Bannon’s defense argued he believed the subpoena deadlines were flexible and subject to negotiation. In an 11th-hour reversal with the trial looming, Bannon this month announced a willingness to testify in a public committee hearing, an offer prosecutors said did not change the fact he had already broken the law.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch; Editing by Will Dunham

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here