- Jonathan Majors opts not to testify as defense rests in domestic violence trial ABC News
- Disturbing Jonathan Majors Texts and Audio Released in Court: ‘I’m a Great Man’ and ‘Doing Great Things for My Culture and the World’ Variety
- Who is Grace Jabbari? Everything about Jonathan Majors’ ex-girlfriend and accuser in his domestic violence tri Daily Mail
- Jonathan Majors’ assault trial: What video, audio evidence reveal USA TODAY
- Hear Jonathan Majors Call About His ‘Unconscious’ Ex in 911 Audio from Right Before His Arrest PEOPLE
Tag Archives: rests
Jonathan Majors Trial: Defense Rests Case, Judge Releases 911 Call After Actor Finds Partner ‘Unconscious’ – Hollywood Reporter
- Jonathan Majors Trial: Defense Rests Case, Judge Releases 911 Call After Actor Finds Partner ‘Unconscious’ Hollywood Reporter
- Jonathan Majors opts not to testify as defense rests in domestic violence trial ABC News
- Jonathan Majors Doesn’t Testify In Domestic Violence Trial As Defense Rests; WME’s Elan Ruspoli Details Conversations With Client On Night Of Alleged Assault – Update Deadline
- Video shows Jonathan Majors being chased by Grace Jabbari after alleged violent encounter New York Post
- Jonathan Majors Will Not Testify in Trial; Closing Arguments to Begin Variety
SEC Media Days 2023: Georgia taking on ‘better never rests’ mindset to fight complacency in three-peat quest – CBS Sports
- SEC Media Days 2023: Georgia taking on ‘better never rests’ mindset to fight complacency in three-peat quest CBS Sports
- Transfer Cornerback Smoke Bouie is reportedly no Longer With Georgia Bulldogs Football Team Sports Illustrated
- Dukes & Bell: The Media Doesn’t Step Up For SEC Media Days Barrett Sports Media
- Kirby Smart On Challenges Georgia Faces To 3-Peat As National Champions I SEC Media Day I CBS Spo… CBS Sports
- Georgia talks threat of complacency and how better never rests at SEC Media Days 2023 Local 3 News
- View Full Coverage on Google News
Prosecution rests in Trump Organization’s tax fraud case
NEW YORK (AP) — Prosecutors in the Trump Organization’s criminal tax fraud trial rested their case Monday earlier than expected, pinning hopes for convicting Donald Trump’s company largely on the word of two top executives who cut deals before testifying they schemed to avoid taxes on company-paid perks.
Allen Weisselberg, the company’s longtime finance chief, and Jeffrey McConney, a senior vice president and controller, testified for the bulk of the prosecution’s eight-day case, bringing the drama of their own admitted wrongdoing to a trial heavy on numbers, spreadsheets, tax returns and payroll records.
Weisselberg, who pleaded guilty in August to dodging taxes on $1.7 million in extras, was required to testify as a prosecution witness as part of a plea deal in exchange for a promised sentence of five months in jail. McConney was granted immunity to testify.
The Trump Organization’s lawyers are expected to start calling witnesses Monday afternoon, likely beginning with an accountant who handled years of tax returns and other financial matters for Trump, the Trump Organization and hundreds of Trump entities.
Prosecutors had considered calling the accountant, Mazars USA LLP partner Donald Bender, but decided not to. The defense indicated it would call him instead.
Prosecutors called just three other witnesses: the Trump Organization’s accounts payable supervisor, a forensic accountant for the Manhattan district attorney’s office, and a state tax auditor, on the witness stand Monday, who investigated Weisselberg’s taxes.
Weisselberg, now a senior adviser at the company, testified last week that he conspired with McConney, his subordinate, to hide more than a decade’s worth of extras from his taxable income, but that neither Trump nor the family were involved.
McConney testified that Weisselberg and another executive, Michael Calamari Sr., leaned on him over the years to fudge payroll records to hide extras such as Manhattan apartments and Mercedes-Benz cars from their taxable income, in part by reducing their salaries by the cost of those perks and issuing falsified W-2 forms.
Manhattan prosecutors allege that the Trump Organization helped top executives avoid paying taxes on company-paid perks and that it is liable for Weisselberg’s wrongdoing because he was a “high managerial agent” acting on its behalf.
The tax fraud case is the only trial to arise from the Manhattan district attorney’s three-year investigation of Trump and his business practices. If convicted, the company could be fined more than $1 million and face difficulty making deals.
Trump blamed Bender and Mazars for the company’s troubles, writing on his Truth Social platform last week: “The highly paid accounting firm should have routinely picked these things up – we relied on them. VERY UNFAIR!”
Mazars cut ties with Trump in February and said annual financial statements it prepared for him “should no longer be relied upon” after New York Attorney General Letitia James said they regularly misstated the value of assets.
James filed a lawsuit in September accusing Trump and his company of padding his net worth by billions of dollars and habitually misleading banks and others about the value of assets such as golf courses, hotels and his Mar-a-Lago estate.
Trump’s financial statements are not a part of the criminal case.
___
Follow Michael Sisak on Twitter at twitter.com/mikesisak and send confidential tips by visiting https://www.ap.org/tips/.
America’s New Monkeypox Vaccine Strategy Rests on a Single Study
Once again, the United States is messing up its approach to vaccines. Three months into its monkeypox outbreak, just 620,000 doses of the two-injection Jynneos shot—the nation’s current best immune defense against the virus—have been shipped to states, not nearly enough to immunize the 1.6 million to 1.7 million Americans that the CDC considers at highest risk. The next deliveries from the manufacturer aren’t slated until September at the earliest. For now, we’re stuck with the stocks we’ve got.
Which is why the feds have turned to Inoculation Plan B: splitting Jynneos doses into five, and poking them into the skin, rather than into the layer of fat beneath. The FDA issued an emergency-use authorization for the strategy yesterday afternoon.
This dose-sparing tactic will allow far more people to sign up for doses before summer’s end; if successful, it could help contain the outbreak in the U.S., which currently accounts for nearly a third of the world’s documented monkeypox cases. But this decision is based on scant data, and the degree of protection offered by in-skin shots is no guarantee. The FDA is now playing a high-stakes game with the health and trust of people most vulnerable to monkeypox—an already marginalized population. Call it a bold decision; call it a risky gamble: It may be the best option the country currently has, but one the U.S. could have avoided had it marshaled a stronger response earlier on.
Little is known about how Jynneos performs against monkeypox even in its prescribed dosing regimen, the so-called subcutaneous route; the new method, intradermal injection, is a murkier proposition still. “We are in a very data-thin zone,” says Jeanne Marrazzo, an infectious-disease physician at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.
The shot was approved for use against smallpox and monkeypox in 2019. But to date, researchers don’t have a strong sense of how well it guards against disease or infection or how long protection lasts. Although scientists know that two doses of Jynneos can elicit similar numbers of antibodies as older poxvirus vaccines, no estimates of the vaccine’s true efficacy, from large-scale clinical trials, exist; a human study in the Congo hasn’t yet reported results. And though firmer data have shown that the vaccine keeps lab monkeys from getting seriously sick, “I don’t necessarily trust making the clinical decisions” based just on that, says Mark Slifka, a vaccinologist at Oregon Health & Science University. It’s not even clear if Jynneos can stop someone from transmitting the virus, especially now that many cases seem to be arising via skin-to-skin contact during sex, an understudied form of spread.
The emergency switch to lower-dose intradermal administration has been tested with other vaccines, among them the shots that guard against yellow fever and influenza. Skin is rife with specialized defensive cells that can snatch up bits of vaccines and ferry them to other immune fighters, “so you can use a smaller dose and get similar responses” to a full-size subcutaneous shot, says Jacinda Abdul-Mutakabbir, a pharmacist at Loma Linda University, in California.
One lone study from 2015 suggests that this logic should hold for Jynneos—at least among the trial’s participants, healthy adults who were mostly young and white. In that group, the subcutaneous and intradermal shots were “quite comparable” at rousing antibodies in the body, which is “very encouraging,” says Kathryn Edwards, a vaccinologist at Vanderbilt University who helped conduct the study. But that’s not the same as bona fide protection against the virus. And what happened in that single study won’t necessarily play out in the real world, especially in the context of the current outbreak, which differs from its predecessors in demographic and size. “I do think these data need to be confirmed,” Edwards told me. Most of the cases so far have been in men who have sex with men, many of them living with HIV—a community whose immune systems don’t look the same as the population at large, and in whom vaccines may not take as well, or for as long, Slifka told me. And yet the FDA has charged ahead “completely based on” that 2015 study, says Alexandra Yonts, a pediatric infectious-disease physician at Children’s National Hospital. In a statement, the agency explained that it had “determined that the known and potential benefits of Jynneos outweigh the known and potential risks” for green-lighting the intradermal route.
Delivering vaccines into skin leaves little room for error. The tuberculosis skin test is also administered intradermally; Marrazzo has seen “dozens of those messed up.” People have bled or been bruised. Needles have gone too deep—a mistake that can slash effectiveness—or too shallow, letting liquid ooze back out. Intradermal injections are an uncommon and difficult procedure, requiring additional training and specialized needles. “There is going to be some degree of error,” says Kenneth Cruz, a community-health worker in New York. “People are going to wonder if they’re protected, and it’s going to be difficult to check.”
Already, health-care providers are having “issues staffing vaccination clinics for subcutaneous injections,” says Boghuma Kabisen Titanji, an infectious-disease physician at Emory University; the switch to intradermal will exacerbate those shortages and could raise further vaccination barriers for people without reliable health-care access. Intradermal shots can also come with more irksome side effects, as the 2015 study suggested, including redness and swelling at the injection site that can be “pretty robust and severe,” Marrazzo told me. People who get their first doses might not come back for more, defeating the point.
Dose-splitting is still “a much better way to go,” Yonts told me, than skipping or seriously delaying second doses—which has already happened in cities such as New York; Washington, D.C.; and San Francisco—in an effort to conserve supplies. Even elsewhere, second appointments are very hard to get. “I do not know anyone who’s gotten the second dose,” says Nick Diamond, one of the investigators behind RESPND-MI, an LGBTQ-led survey of monkeypox symptoms and networks. Which isn’t great: After just one shot, antibody levels “barely budge,” Yonts said, leaving people vulnerable until two weeks after the second injection is complete. (Another vaccine, ACAM2000, is available but can cause serious side effects, and isn’t recommended for people who are immunocompromised, including those with HIV.)
With no other good choices on the table, dose-splitting is the only road to take. “I don’t really see another viable option,” Marrazzo told me. That doesn’t erase the fact that the nation squandered its chance with Inoculation Plan A: leveraging its considerable resources to deploy the tests, treatments, and vaccines to contain the outbreak early on, and keep subcutaneous shots in contention. Now, with about 9,500 recorded infections among Americans nationwide—a definite undercount—the door to that has slammed shut. Sticking with the strategy of two full subcutaneous doses for all was projected to leave us with “no vaccine by October,” Marrazzo said.
Plan B, though, could have real costs, depressing vaccine demand and trust. Already, “we haven’t been able to answer questions about the level of protection,” Diamond told me, “which makes it really hard for people to make decisions around risk.” The best Abdul-Mutakabbir has been able to tell her patients is that “receiving this vaccine will likely protect you more than if you had not,” she said. Which doesn’t do much to “allay fears and worries,” Cruz told me, especially after more than a year of confusing and conflicting messages about COVID vaccination.
Joseph Osmundson, a microbiologist at NYU and a RESPND-MI investigator, told me that he thinks the Biden administration did not properly consult members of vulnerable communities before plowing ahead with dose-splitting. And he worries that disparities could arise if subcutaneous shots end up outperforming intradermal ones: People who had the socioeconomic privilege to find and access appointments early will have gotten the primo doses, while those already at higher risk skate by on a smaller serving of immunity, exacerbating the inequities the outbreak has already begun to exploit. The numbers alone could leave a bad taste: “If I were standing in line to get a fifth of a vaccine,” Diamond told me, “I would wonder why my health is valued less.”
Dose-splitting is a stopgap—“not a solution” that’s sustainable, says Luciana Borio, a former acting chief scientist at the FDA. The monkeypox outbreak could stretch on for many months, or become endemic in animals. Eventually, boosts may be necessary; ACAM2000 may yet have a larger role to play. The U.S. will need clinical trials to understand which dosing strategies actually work best, and in whom—and the populations most affected, especially men who have sex with men, should be involved in those decisions along the way. Officials must be “transparent about the gaps that exist,” Abdul-Mutakabbir told me, “and be intentional about working to fill those gaps.”
Still, as news of the dose-splitting decision continues to percolate out into the population, an inadvertent message may already be getting sent: “The government is placing the onus on community members to protect themselves,” Cruz said. “But we’re in this position because the government failed.” Should the administration’s big bet on dose-splitting not pay off, Osmundson said, for those who have so far borne the outbreak’s brunt, “that will be the nail in the coffin of any public trust.”
Ghislaine Maxwell trial: Fourth and accuser testifies and prosecution rests
Friday’s witnesses included Annie Farmer, the fourth and final accuser to take the stand. She testified she was 16 years old when Maxwell massaged her naked chest at billionaire Jeffrey Epstein’s New Mexico ranch in 1996.
Maxwell faces six counts, including sex trafficking of a minor, for allegations of conduct that allegedly occurred between 1994 and 2004.
The government alleges Maxwell facilitated and took part with Epstein in the alleged sexual abuse described by the four accusers.
Defense attorneys moved for an acquittal at the end of the court Friday, which is standard practice after the prosecution rests. Judge Alison Nathan denied the motion.
The defense is expected to start its case next Thursday. The trial will not sit Monday through Wednesday due to a scheduling conflict for the judge.
Defense attorneys said their case will likely take two or three days and they expect to rest on December 20.
Some defense witnesses want to testify anonymously given they “might get a lot of unwanted attention” testifying for Maxwell, attorney Christian Everdell said. The parties will confer on that over the break.
Farmer was the only accuser to testify by her full name in the federal trial in New York. Others did so under pseudonyms or their first name only to protect their privacy.
Farmer’s allegations are connected to the charges of conspiracy to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, and conspiracy to transport minors with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity.
Farmer, now 42, is identified as “Minor Victim-2” in the indictment detailing the charges against Maxwell. It alleges that Farmer traveled to New Mexico in 1996 where Epstein abused her at his ranch. Maxwell groomed Farmer, giving her an unsolicited massage while she was topless and encouraging Farmer to massage Epstein, according to the indictment.
Prosecutors additionally allege, in a perjury case severed from this trial, that Maxwell denied ever giving Farmer a massage when explicitly asked during a 2016 civil deposition.
‘I felt like kind of frozen’
Prosecutor Lara Pomerantz told Farmer to look around, “Do you see anyone in this courtroom who has ever given you a massage?”
“Yes,” Farmer said, and described Maxwell seated at the defense table.
Farmer testified that Maxwell gave her a massage at Epstein’s New Mexico ranch in 1996, telling her she wanted Farmer to experience how nice a professional massage felt.
“She told me to get undressed,” Farmer, 16 at the time, recalled.
At some point as she lay on her back, Maxwell pulled the sheet down, exposing her naked breasts and rubbed her chest and upper breast, Farmer testified.
“Once she pulled down the sheet I felt like kind of frozen,” she testified. “It didn’t make sense to me that that would happen. I just wanted so badly to get off the table and have this massage be done.”
On her last day at the ranch Epstein bounded into her guestroom where she still lay in bed telling her he wanted to “cuddle.”
“He climbed into bed with me and kind of laid behind me and reached his arms around me and like pressed his body into me,” she said.
Feeling uncomfortable, she made an excuse to get out of bed and went to the bathroom, closing the door behind her.
Prosecutors allege a ‘pyramid scheme of abuse’
Previously in the trial, a woman identified as “Jane” said last week that Maxwell sometimes joined in on the sexualized massages and a woman identified as “Kate” testified Monday that Maxwell set up those sexual meetings.
And on Tuesday, a woman who used only her first name, Carolyn, testified that Maxwell once touched her breasts, hips and butt and told her she “had a great body for Epstein and his friends.” She was 14 at the time, she said.
The trial, which began last week, has alternated between disturbing testimony from sexual abuse victims and illuminating testimony about some of Epstein’s connections to high-profile figures such as Donald Trump, Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew. None are alleged to have committed wrongdoing in relation to the ongoing trial.
Epstein, who pleaded guilty in 2008 to state prostitution charges, was indicted on federal sex trafficking charges in July 2019 but died by suicide in prison a month later. Maxwell, his former girlfriend, was arrested a year afterward and has pleaded not guilty.
In opening statements of her trial, prosecutors said Maxwell and Epstein created a “pyramid scheme of abuse” to lure underage girls into sexual relationships with Epstein and pay them bonuses to bring other girls into the fold. Her defense, meanwhile, said she was a “scapegoat” for Epstein’s actions and attacked the memories and motivations of the women who say they were sexually abused.
Fourth accuser read her diary entries
Farmer testified that she told her mother, Janice Swain, in the summer of 1996 that something happened to her at the New Mexico ranch without going into detail. “I told my mom I was not raped and I didn’t want to talk about it,” she said.
Swain was the last witness in the government’s case and told the jury that she spoke on the phone with Epstein to plan Annie’s trips to New York and New Mexico.
Swain testified that when the billionaire invited Farmer to go to the ranch he told the mother it would be for a “retreat” with 20 to 25 other students who Epstein would also be funding for enrichment trips abroad later that year.
Epstein told Swain that “his wife, Ghislaine” would be chaperoning the girls on what she was told was a co-ed retreat, she said. But Farmer said she was surprised when she was the only one there.
Farmer also said Friday that she years ago had confided in a boyfriend and spoke to law enforcement in 2006.
The boyfriend, David James Mulligan, testified Friday they started dating in the fall of 1996.
He said Farmer confided in him that Epstein touched her leg at the movies in New York and spoke of the massage in New Mexico. Mulligan recalled that she told him she felt “fearful and awkward and helpless” during the massage.
Farmer said she first met Epstein over the holidays in 1995 into 1996 through her older sister, who worked for him in New York. Epstein paid for her commercial flight there and tickets for the Farmer sisters to see “Phantom of the Opera” on Broadway, she testified. At some point on that trip Epstein took the sisters to see the movie “Five Monkeys,” she recalled.
Farmer read portions of January 1996 diary entries in which she wrote about Epstein holding her hand and “caressing” her foot while her sister sat on the opposite side of Epstein in the theater.
She testified that Epstein would stop touching her any time he spoke to her sister as if to hide it from her.
What appeared to be an inner struggle unfolded in the journal entry. Farmer wrote that she felt “weird” about his behavior but it was probably “normal” and “fine.”
“I know it sounds like me trying to justify him doing something weird but it isn’t,” 16-year-old Farmer wrote.
Annie Farmer also wrote that she didn’t tell her sister about the incident because her sister “worshiped” Epstein and she feared it would upset her or cost her sister her job.
‘I imagined it would be different’ with Maxwell present
Defense attorney Laura Menninger during cross examination repeatedly pointed out that Maxwell was not present on Farmer’s New York trip.
Annie Farmer recalled she wasn’t excited for the New Mexico trip in April 1996 because of the movie incident with Epstein months earlier.
However, knowing Maxwell would on the trip made her more comfortable. “I imagined it would be different this time because Maxwell was there,” she testified.
Maxwell bought her beauty cream and Epstein bought her expensive cowboy boots on a day they all went shopping, she said.
They also went to see the movie “Primal Fear” that day, where Epstein again caressed her in a more “blatant” way, seemingly making no effort to hide it from Maxwell, she recalled.
Later that day Maxwell insisted she teach Farmer how to massage Epstein’s bare feet, Farmer testified.
“She instructed me to you know, pull back his big toe, rub this part of his foot, you know, and so I did what she told me,” Farmer said in court.
Epstein “groaned” with pleasure as she methodically followed Maxwell’s lead massaging his feet, she said.
Menninger asked Farmer several questions suggesting to Farmer that she “pieced together” the timeline around her memory of the New Mexico trip by looking up when “Primal Fear” was released in theaters. Farmer acknowledged doing the research and said she had already recalled it was the spring of 1996 but wanted to be more accurate.
Farmer filed a civil lawsuit against Maxwell and Epstein in 2019 but later dropped the suit as a condition to receive $1.5 million for her claim with the Epstein Victim Compensation Program, she testified.
Menninger admitted Farmer’s black leather cowboy boots into evidence and had her review the footwear on the stand. She clarified with Farmer that she’d worn them to the point of wearing down the heels and scuffing the toes.
The defense attorney also suggested that Farmer overstated what she alleges happened to her in her public statements and on her Epstein Victim Compensation Program application for personal gain.
The judge permitted the defense to review Farmer’s victim fund application during cross examination. The claim says Farmer was “groped” during the massage by Maxwell.
Farmer responded on the stand, “Yes, I don’t see that as significantly different — rubbed, groped, massaged.”
Farmer has spoken out publicly about Epstein and Maxwell for years. She spoke in open court during both Epstein’s 2019 bail hearing and Maxwell’s bail hearing a year later.
“I was 16 years old when I had the misfortune of meeting Jeffrey Epstein here in New York,” Farmer said at the July 2019 hearing. Her voice cracked as Epstein stared at her just feet away, his gaze unwavering. “He was inappropriate with me.”
CNN’s Eric Levenson contributed to this report.
Elizabeth Holmes’ Defense Rests Their Case in Fraud Trial
When asked how that had affected her work at Theranos, Ms. Holmes said it was difficult to separate where his influence began and ended. In legal filings before the trial, Mr. Balwani strongly denied allegations of abuse.
But Ms. Holmes also acknowledged making mistakes. She said she regretted adding the logos of pharmaceutical companies to validation reports that she had sent out to investors, which led them to believe that the drug companies had endorsed Theranos’s technology. She said she also regretted the way she had handled a Wall Street Journal exposé with private investigators and legal attacks on former employees who had spoken to the journalist. And she said she had allowed incorrect information to be disseminated in a positive Fortune cover article about her.
Ms. Holmes concluded a portion of her testimony with a speech about her intentions in pitching Theranos to investors, patients and the press.
“I wanted to convey the impact,” she said. “I wanted to talk about what this company could do a year from now, five years from now, 10 years from now. They weren’t interested in today or tomorrow or next month — they were interested in what kind of change we could make.”
It was all meant to support the defense’s main argument, as outlined in opening statements in September. Ms. Holmes, her lawyers said, made mistakes. But her mistakes were not a crime. She was naïve and ambitious, they argued, but never meant to deceive.
“Theranos didn’t see mistakes as crimes. They saw them as part of the path to success,” Lance Wade, one of Ms. Holmes’s lawyers, said in his opening statement.
In their cross-examination, prosecutors sought to dismantle Ms. Holmes’s excuses. They noted that Theranos had shared plenty of other trade secrets with its partners, which signed nondisclosure agreements. Mr. Leach pointed out times when Ms. Holmes allowed false or misleading information about Theranos to spread to investors and patients.
Earlier in the trial, during testimony from 29 witnesses called by prosecutors, Ms. Holmes’s lawyers sought to poke holes and create confusion around the facts of the case. They attacked the credibility of investors, trying to show that they should have done better research on Theranos before investing to understand the risks and the details of its business. And they tried to argue that patients who testified that they had received troubling blood test results from Theranos were not qualified to interpret them.
Erin Woo contributed reporting.
Defense rests in Josh Duggar trial, jury deliberations begin
Testimony has concluded in the trial of Josh Duggar, the former reality star charged with two counts of downloading and possessing child pornography, and jury deliberations began Wednesday.
According to court documents, in May 2019, Duggar allegedly used the internet to download child pornography, some of which depicts the sexual abuse of children under the age of 12.
The federal trial in Arkansas began last week and the prosecution rested its case on Monday, according to the Associated Press. Duggar’s lawyers the began calling witnesses, and the defense rested on Tuesday.
Duggar’s lawyers questioned forensic computer analyst Michele Bush, according to the AP. Bush said the computer where the child pornography was downloaded could’ve been remotely accessed and his lawyers argued someone else could’ve placed the pornography on the device.
The computer was used at Duggar’s workplace. In October, his lawyers filed a motion to suppress video evidence found on his devices, arguing the case had become “stale” since so much time had passed between the time federal agents downloaded the files and the time they obtained a search warrant, the Associated Press reports.
However, a federal judge decided to allow videos found on electronic devices used by Duggar to be used as evidence in the case. Even though time had elapsed between the downloading of the files and the search warrant, U.S. District Judge Timothy L. Brooks said the investigators did not take too long to review the electronic devices. He said these searches are complicated and can take a while.
On Wednesday, closing arguments will be followed by jury deliberations, the AP reports.
A Duggar family friend testified this week that Duggar admitted in 2003 to molesting four young girls, the Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reported.
In 2015, In Touch magazine published a 2006 police report that claimed Duggar sexually molested five girls as far back as 2002. The incidents were not reported to police until 2006 and authorities could not pursue charges because the statute of limitations had passed.
After the report about Duggar’s molestation allegations became public in 2015, the family’s reality show “19 Kids and Counting” was canceled by TLC. Duggar is the the oldest child of Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar, whose family was featured on the show.
That same year, Duggar was also accused of having an account on Ashley Madison, a popular website dedicated to discreet encounters and extramarital affairs. In a statement he said he was the “biggest hypocrite ever” by being unfaithful to his wife, Anna Duggar.
Just weeks ago, Anna Duggar announced on Instagram she had given birth to the couple’s seventh child, Madyson Lily Duggar.
Jussie Smollett trial: Defense rests after prosecution’s contrasts his version of events with other testimony
Smollett, 39, has pleaded not guilty to six counts of disorderly conduct for filing false police reports. The charge is punishable by up to three years in prison.
Closing arguments are set to take place Wednesday morning, followed by jury instructions and deliberations.
Smollett, who is Black and gay, took the stand in his own defense Monday and Tuesday and laid out his version of the alleged attack, cast doubt on the motivations of the prosecution’s key witnesses, and explained his distrust for police. In cross-examination, though, prosecutors contrasted his testimony with other evidence in the case that they say proves he set up the hoax attack and lied to police about it.
The trial, which began last week, is the culmination of a case that began on the frigid night of January 29, 2019, when Smollett told police two men had attacked him, made anti-gay and racist comments, poured bleach on him and put a noose around his neck. Celebrities, politicians and advocacy groups rallied behind the actor, and police poured significant resources into solving the case.
But authorities soon came to believe the actor had paid two acquaintances – brothers Bola and Ola Osundairo – $3,500 to fake a hate crime attack in order to garner sympathetic media coverage.
Authorities brought charges of disorderly conduct against Smollett, but Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx agreed to drop the charges weeks later. However, a special prosecutor appointed to the case then brought charges against him last year.
The prosecution sought testimony last week from five police investigators and the Osundairo brothers, who said that Smollett concocted the hoax and directed them what to say and do. Bola Osundairo said he agreed to the plan because, “I believed he could help further my acting career.”
Defense attorneys have argued Smollett was a real victim of an attack and have suggested the Osundairo brothers had other motivations. The defense called seven witnesses in all, highlighted by Smollett’s own testimony.
The prosecution declined to call any rebuttal witnesses.
Prosecution picks at Smollett’s testimony
Special prosecutor Dan Webb’s cross-examination of Smollett began Monday afternoon and resumed Tuesday morning as he compared Smollett’s testimony with testimony from the Osundairo brothers.
Last week, the brothers testified Smollett reached out to them in the days before January 29, 2019, with an idea to carry out a fake anti-gay and racist attack. Smollett rejected that in cross-examination Tuesday.
“I fully deny that. That never happened,” he said emphatically.
During his eight hours of testimony, Smollett denied he ever told the brothers to buy a red hat to look like Trump supporters or any items in particular. He also said he never told them to do any sort of rehearsal of the alleged fake attack.
On January 27, 2019, two days before the incident, Smollett picked up the Osundairo brothers for what prosecutors described as a “dry run” of the purported scheme. However, Smollett told jurors he actually reached out to Bola Osundairo for a workout, and Ola Osundairo got in the car as well.
Smollett said he picked the brothers up at their north Chicago residence because Uber prices were getting expensive and drove them back to his apartment building downtown with the purpose of going up to his gym and working out. However, footage of the vehicle shows the group riding around Smollett’s neighborhood and no one ever got out.
Smollett testified he was on his phone, texting about doing an interview and that Ola being there was “weird,” so he decided to cancel the workout.
“It was easier to just use the interview as a reason, ‘Well, now we can’t really work out, so I’ll drive you back,’ ” he said.
The vehicle passed the staircase three times where the alleged attack later unfolded. Smollett said the staircase was “around my apartment” and he denied he told the brothers that was where he wanted an attack to take place.
Webb and Smollett engaged in a series of contentious exchanges during cross-examination, particularly as Webb read one of Smollett’s Instagram messages to Bola Osundairo from January 28, 2019.
Webb began to read aloud a message that included the word “n***a,” as Smollett winced and shook his head. Then Webb moved to another of Smollett’s messages, starting with “n***a” again, but this time Smollett cut him off.
“Can you just say ‘the n-word’ or spell the word?” Smollett said. “Out of respect for every African American here.”
Webb agreed, and focused on the multiple flight status updates Smollett gave through Instagram messages as he was delayed in returning back to Chicago from New York. Smollett admitted that Bola Osundairo called him at 12:49 a.m. when the actor finally landed on January 29.
Bola Osundairo testified last week that this call was Osundairo asking what time the staged attack was going to take place. But under oath Tuesday, Smollett denied that ever happened.
Smollett said the two had initially been scheduled to work out at his apartment January 28, but agreed that if he got in after 11 p.m. they would reschedule their workout for 9:30 a.m.
Webb asked whether Osundairo ever showed up at 9:30 a.m. the next morning.
“I don’t know,” Smollett responded.
Webb pressed further that there were no messages about canceling the workout either from Smollett or Osundairo, which Smollett stressed was because there were more “important” matters to deal with at the time.
The actor told authorities he was attacked around 2 a.m. on January 29.
Smollett put rope back around neck for police to see
In his testimony Monday, Smollett laid out his version of what happened on the night of January 29, 2019.
He told the court he was walking back to the staircase of his building after returning from a Subway sandwich shop when he heard two people yell the word “Empire” and anti-gay and racist slurs. The men then walked toward him very quickly and attacked, Smollett testified.
He did not realize until afterward there was a rope tied around his neck, he testified, “because I was getting my ass whooped.”
In cross-examination, Webb questioned Smollett about the noose on his neck when police arrived. He pulled up side-by-side images of Smollett — one with the noose on while walking into his building and one when police arrived — and noted differences in the appearance of the rope.
Smollett denied tampering with the rope. He testified he took the noose off after getting back to his building. However, his manager told him not to mess with evidence, he testified, so he put the rope back around his neck before police arrived.
One of the officers who testified early last week for the prosecution said he arrived to find Smollett with a noose around his neck.
“My first reaction was to ask if he wanted to take it off… he responded by saying he’d like to take it off but he wanted us to see it first,” Officer Muhammad Baig testified.
Smollett says he had sexual relationship with witness
Smollett’s testimony also outlined his relationship with Bola and Ola Osundairo, who he knew from the set of the TV show “Empire.”
Prosecutors say the brothers were paid by Smollett to stage an attack because he was disappointed in the way executives with the TV show responded to a hate letter he received. The defense has countered Smollett had paid the men for training and nutritional advice.
The defense has suggested at points during the trial that homophobia may have been a motive in a real hate crime attack against Smollett.
In his testimony, Smollett said Bola Osundairo would help him get drugs, including cocaine. He also said the two had forged a sexual relationship. Smollett testified they got a private room at a Chicago bathhouse one night and “did more drugs and like, made out.”
On a separate occasion, Smollett told jurors he and Bola Osundairo snuck away from his brother after the three were at a female strip club together. Smollett testified they again got a private room and “made out a little bit, masturbated together.”
Smollett’s testimony contradicted that of Bola Osundairo last week, who denied they had a sexual relationship and said he “didn’t know” there was even any sexual tension.
The defense has struggled to make headway on this point. Last week, during cross-examination of Ola Osundairo, a defense attorney asked him about his use of words they say paint him as homophobic.
However, the judge told them to move on to another line of questioning. Defense attorney Tamara Walker then asked for a mistrial, sobbed in court and said the judge had “lunged” at her during a sidebar conversation. The judge denied the accusation and denied the motion for a mistrial, saying he was stunned by the request.
CNN’s Omar Jimenez and Bill Kirkos reported from Chicago. Steve Almasy reported and wrote from Atlanta and Eric Levenson reported and wrote from New York.
Jussie Smollett trial: Prosecution rests after brothers testify the actor directed them to carry out a fake racist and anti-gay attack
Abimbola “Bola” Osundairo and his brother Olabinjo “Ola” Osundairo provided critical testimony on Wednesday and Thursday in Smollett’s criminal trial on charges that he staged the attack and falsely reported it to police.
The prosecution rested Thursday evening after three days of testimony in which it called seven witnesses, including the brothers.
Ola Osundairo told jurors that Smollett “had this crazy idea of having two MAGA supporters attack him,” and that he wanted “to put that on social media.”
“Mr. Smollett asked you to fake attack him?” Deputy Special Prosecutor Sam Mendenhall asked.
“Yes,” Ola Osundairo responded.
“Pretending to be Trump supporters?” Mendenhall continued.
“Yes,” Ola Osundairo said.
“So he could then post it on social media?” the prosecutor continued.
“Yes,” Ola Osundairo answered.
He said that Bola was tasked with hitting Smollett, while Smollett wanted Ola to put a noose around his neck and pour gasoline on him. They ultimately changed gasoline to bleach because, Ola Osundairo said, “I wasn’t comfortable pouring gasoline on somebody.”
Smollett, who is Black and gay, has said two men struck him, yelled anti-gay and racist remarks, put a noose around his neck and poured bleach on him on a frigid night in Chicago in January 2019. Police initially investigated the incident as a possible hate crime and poured significant resources into solving the case and locating the two men.
But after interviewing them and finding other evidence, authorities instead determined that Smollett paid the men $3,500 to stage the hate crime against him so he could get publicity and a career boost.
Smollett has pleaded not guilty to six counts of disorderly conduct for allegedly making false reports to police that he was a victim of a hate crime. His defense attorney said in opening statements he is a real victim and the men saw the actor as a “mark” or “target.”
Thursday’s session got heated and defense attorneys called for a mistrial. One of the lawyers alleged Judge James Linn lunged at her, and another said the judge was making facial expressions.
It began when the judge interjected as attorney Tamara Walker repeatedly pressed Ola Osundairo on his use of homophobic words, such as when he referred to a musician friend as a “fruity ass.” Linn angrily instructed Walker to move on from her line of “collateral” questioning.
The defense has suggested during the trial that homophobia may have been a motive in a real hate crime attack that night.
In a heated exchange, Walker asked the judge for a sidebar, which he denied at first. After the defense for a second time requested a meeting outside of earshot of the jury, Linn sent the panel out of the room.
Walker and her defense team requested a mistrial.
As the exchange between the judge and the defense quickly escalated, Walker became emotional, at one point sobbing as she paced around a table, claiming Linn was not allowing her to continue a line of questioning that was critical to the defense’s case.
Walker also claimed Linn lunged at her while at the sidebar, something Linn vehemently denied.
“When you said the word mistrial, and I know you have some pressures here, I’m stunned that you would consider a mistrial,” Linn said. “Ms. Walker, there were objections that had to be sustained and I was trying to get back on point.”
“Just because you think you were allowed to go one way, we’re all just doing our jobs,” Linn told Walker.
“There will be no mistrial,” he told the stunned courtroom.
Defense attorney Heather Widell also addressed the judge, stating, “I would also like to go on the record that there are facial objections coming from the bench when there are objections.”
“You’re great at facial expressions,” Linn shot back.
Court ended Thursday night after the defense calling its own witnesses.
Defense sharply questions Bola Osundairo
The brothers delivered the core testimony of the case, stating plainly that the attack was always intended to be fake.
Bola Osundairo was the first of the two brothers to testify, speaking in court on Wednesday and Thursday. He told the court that Smollett “wanted me to fake beat him up,” and he agreed to do so because he felt indebted to the actor.
“I believed he could help further my acting career,” Osundairo testified. “He told me that we would need another person to fake beat him up. He mentioned could my brother do it. I said yes.”
The actor directed them to say “Empire, f****t, n***er, MAGA,” fake punch him, pour bleach on him and then run away, he testified.
“Who was in charge of this thing?” Webb asked.
“Jussie was,” Bola Osundairo told the jury.
The man also said Smollett first explained the plan to him in a car where Smollett was smoking marijuana.
“Even though he’s smoking you still think he’s serious?” asked defense attorney Shay Allen.
“He sounded serious,” Bola Osundairo responded.
Osundairo said Smollett “wanted to use the fake attack or camera footage for media.” He testified that while he didn’t expect payment for helping Smollett stage the attack, the actor still gave him a check for $3,500.
In cross-examination, Allen accused Bola Osundairo of having a desire to work security for Smollett and that it became a growing point of tension. Osundairo testified he didn’t remember.
“You attacked Jussie because you wanted to scare him into hiring you,” accused Allen, to which Osundairo responded, “No.”
However, special prosecutor Dan Webb asked whether Smollett ever talked about security at all while this “fake attack” was being hatched and Osundairo responded, “No.”
Testimony grew tense at times as Allen asked whether Bola Osundairo had a sexual relationship with Smollett, which he denied, and how he could not have expected the police to get involved if the media attention on the story grew, as Smollett allegedly planned.
“I wasn’t thinking,” Bola Osundairo said.
“We finally agree on something,” Allen responded.
During re-direct examination, Webb honed in on the timing of the alleged hoax on one of the coldest nights in Chicago. “If you had not had advanced discussions with Jussie Smollett how would you know where he would be at 2 a.m. in a polar vortex?”
“I wouldn’t,” Osundairo responded.
Later, Ola Osundairo testified the brothers had at one point contemplated leaving if the actor didn’t show up.
“It was super cold that night. I was freezing the whole time we were out there,” he said. “My brother saw him and that’s when we continued to approach him.”
Osundairo said that’s when he put the rope over Smollett’s head and poured bleach on him, while trying not to get bleach on Smollett’s face to avoid injuring the actor.
Defense witness says Smollett sounded panicked
The first witness called by the defense described what he heard as he talked to Smollett during the encounter.
Brandon Moore, Smollett’s former music manager, said he heard “something something MAGA country,” then what sounded like scuffling.
“Jussie said, ‘Yo, I just got jumped,’ ” Moore told the court.
Smollett sounded panicked and out of breath, Moore testified.
During cross-examination, deputy special prosecutor Sean Wieber pointed out, “You couldn’t see how hard the punches landed,” and “you did not witness what happened to Mr. Smollett,” to which Moore responded, “Correct.”
The defense also called an emergency medicine physician who examined Smollett after the alleged attack and Smollett’s publicist at the time, Pamela Sharp.
The prosecution said in its opening statement that Smollett orchestrated the attack for publicity and a career boost. Sharp testified that Smollett earned between $100,000 and $125,000 per episode — about $2 million for a season.
The judge ended the day by telling jurors not to come back until Monday, when they might hear closing arguments and begin deliberating.
CNN’s Omar Jimenez and Bill Kirkos reported from Chicago and CNN’s Eric Levenson reported and wrote from New York. CNN’s Steve Almasy contributed to this report.