Trump held in contempt of court in New York trial for gag order violations | Donald Trump News

Judge in hush money trial says Trump violated the order nine times and warns future violations could result in jail time.

The judge in Donald Trump’s New York hush money trial has held the former United States president in contempt of court for repeatedly violating a gag order.

The order prohibited Trump from speaking publicly and posting on social media about individuals involved in the trial.

Judge Juan Merchan on Tuesday said Trump had violated the order nine times. He fined Trump $1,000 per violation: With nine of his statements identified as breaching the order, the fine came to a total of $9,000.

Prosecutors had detailed 14 possible violations to the court, and Merchan could make more determinations at a hearing on Thursday.

The judge also ordered Trump to remove seven “offending posts” from his Truth Social account and two from a campaign website by Tuesday afternoon.

He added that Trump was “hereby warned that the court will not tolerate continued willful violations of its lawful orders and that if necessary and appropriate under the circumstances, it will impose an incarceratory punishment”.

The decision came as Trump’s criminal trial entered its third week, with witness testimony continuing on Tuesday.

The former president faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to alleged hush money paid to adult film star Stormy Daniels, who claims she and Trump had a sexual encounter.

Many of the gag order violations relate to Daniels, as well as Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen. Both are expected to testify at the trial.

Trump is not only barred from attacking witnesses but also jurors, court staff and their relatives.

The decision came at the start of the second week of witness testimony, after the days-long testimony of former tabloid publisher David Pecker last week.

Pecker said he entered into an agreement with Trump to be the “eyes and ears” of his 2016 presidential campaign. He also testified that he coordinated with Cohen to stifle negative stories about Trump ahead of the election.

The charges against Trump relate to $130,000 he allegedly reimbursed to Cohen, after the lawyer paid Daniels for her silence.

Trump has denied any sexual liaison with Daniels. His lawyers have argued he was acting within the law.

To make felony charges stand, prosecutors must convince the jury that Trump falsified records in service of another crime. They have argued that crime included illegal efforts to influence the 2016 election, which he ultimately won over Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton.

Trump is currently the presumptive nominee for the Republican Party in the 2024 presidential election. The New York trial is the result of one of four criminal indictments Trump currently faces. The other three have yet to proceed to trial.

No matter the outcome, the proceedings are historic: Trump is the first current or former US president to face criminal prosecution.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

US returns ancient artefacts looted from Cambodia, Indonesia | Arts and Culture News

New York district attorney accuses two prominent art dealers of the illegal trafficking of antiquities worth $3m.

Prosecutors in New York City have announced that they returned to Cambodia and Indonesia 30 antiquities that were looted, sold or illegally transferred by networks of American antiquities dealers and traffickers.

The antiquities were valued at a total of $3m, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said in a statement on Friday.

Bragg said he had returned 27 pieces to Phnom Penh and three to Jakarta in two recent repatriation ceremonies, including a bronze statue of the Hindu deity Shiva, which was looted from Cambodia, and a stone bas-relief sculpture of two royal figures from the Majapahit empire, which reigned between the 13th and 16th centuries, that was stolen from Indonesia.

Bragg accused American art dealers Subhash Kapoor and Nancy Wiener of participating in the illegal trafficking of the antiquities.

American-Indian Kapoor – who was accused of running a network that trafficked items stolen in Southeast Asia and put them on sale in his Manhattan gallery – has been the target of a United States justice investigation dubbed “Hidden Idol” for more than a decade.

Kapoor was arrested in Germany in 2011 and then sent to India where he stood trial and was sentenced in November 2022 to 13 years in prison.

Responding to a US indictment for conspiracy to traffic in stolen works of art, Kapoor denied the charges.

Major trafficking hub

New York is a major trafficking hub for stolen and looted antiquities, and several works have been seized in recent years from museums, including the prestigious Metropolitan Museum of Art, and private collectors.

“We are continuing to investigate the wide-ranging trafficking networks that … target Southeast Asian antiquities,” Bragg said in the statement.

“There is clearly still much more work to do.”

Wiener, who was sentenced in 2021 for trafficking in stolen works of art, sought to sell the bronze Shiva statute but eventually donated the piece to the Denver Museum of Art in Colorado in 2007.

The antiquity was seized by the New York courts in 2023.

Cambodia’s ambassador to the US, Keo Chhea, welcomed the return of the artefacts, calling it “a renewal of commitment between nations to safeguard the soul of our shared heritage”.

“Through this united effort, we ensure the preservation of our collective past for future generations,” he said in the statement issued by New York’s district attorney.

Indonesia’s representative in New York, Consul General Winanto Adi, also praised Bragg’s effort, saying it served as a “precious gift” as the US and Indonesia celebrated the 75th anniversary of their diplomatic relations.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Top New York court overturns Harvey Weinstein’s 2020 rape conviction | Sexual Assault News

Defence and prosecution prepare for retrial of the once-powerful movie producer in a case that was a landmark for the #MeToo movement.

New York’s highest court has overturned disgraced Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein’s 2020 conviction for rape and sexual assault, highlighting the challenges of holding powerful men to account.

The Court of Appeals found on Thursday that the landmark trial was unfair because the judge allowed women whose accusations were not part of the charges Weinstein faced to give evidence in court.

Judge Jenny Rivera called for a new trial following the 4-3 decision.

The ruling does not affect a separate 16-year rape sentence handed down in California, so the 72-year-old will remain behind bars.

Bombshell allegations against the Oscar-winning producer broke into the open in 2017 and led to a flood of allegations against other powerful men as women fought back against sexual violence in what became known as the #MeToo movement.

Three years later, a New York court found Weinstein guilty of sexually assaulting former production assistant Miriam Haley in 2006, and raping aspiring actress Jessica Mann in 2013.

He was jailed for 23 years in a case that was considered a landmark for the #MeToo movement.

Following his conviction, a civil trial awarded $17m to dozens of other women who had accused Weinstein of abuse.

Many of his accusers condemned Thursday’s decision, with actress Ashley Judd calling it “an act of institutional betrayal”.

The office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg signalled it planned to put Weinstein back on trial.

Stinging dissent

At a news conference, Weinstein’s lawyer Arthur Aidala called the ruling “a tremendous victory for every criminal defendant in the state of New York” and said Weinstein was ready to testify in his own defence at a retrial.

“He’s been dying to tell his story from day one,” Aidala said. Weinstein has contended that any sexual activity was consensual.

Any retrial would be overseen by a different judge. The term of the judge in the original trial, James Burke, expired at the end of 2022.

In its ruling on Thursday, the state Court of Appeals said the trial court erred in allowing “testimony of uncharged, alleged prior sexual acts” and saying it would permit questions about Weinstein’s “bad behaviour” if he had testified. The producer did not take the stand in his own defence.

In a stinging dissent, Judge Madeline Singas wrote that the court was continuing a “disturbing trend of overturning juries’ guilty verdicts in cases involving sexual violence”. She said the ruling came at “the expense and safety of women”.

In another dissent, Judge Anthony Cannataro wrote that the decision was “endangering decades of progress in this incredibly complex and nuanced area of law” regarding sex crimes after centuries of “deeply patriarchal and misogynistic legal tradition”.

The reversal of Weinstein’s conviction is the second major #MeToo setback in recent years.

In 2021, a court in Pennsylvania threw out Bill Cosby’s conviction on sexual assault and he was freed from prison. The Supreme Court declined to take up the case.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

‘Battlelines’ drawn as jury hears opening remarks in Trump hush money case | Donald Trump News

In a historic day in the United States, a New York jury has heard opening arguments in the hush-money case against Donald Trump — the first criminal trial against a former president in the country’s history.

Assistant District Attorney Matthew Colangelo on Monday laid out the allegations against Trump, who is accused of falsifying business records to conceal payments made to an adult film star with whom he is accused of having a sexual relationship.

Prosecutors allege that the money was intended to silence the adult entertainer, Stormy Daniels, before the 2016 US presidential election.

“This case is about a criminal conspiracy and a cover-up,” Colangelo said, as reported by US media outlets inside the New York City courtroom.

Trump’s legal team also presented its defence in an opening statement on Monday morning, rejecting the state’s allegations in their entirety. “President Trump is innocent. President Trump did not commit any crimes,” his lawyer, Todd Blanche, said.

The opening arguments set the tone for what is expected to be a tense, six-week trial, the outcome of which, experts said, may have wide-reaching consequences for the country.

“Each side did what most legal experts expected,” said Ronald Sullivan Jr, a professor at Harvard Law School and director of the Criminal Justice Institute.

“The prosecution characterised the conduct as a scheme, and in contrast, the defence came out and characterised the conduct as not criminal at all,” Sullivan told Al Jazeera.

“I think this is where the battlelines are going to continue to fall.”

The New York case is one of four criminal indictments against Trump, who is the presumptive Republican Party nominee heading into November’s presidential election despite his legal troubles.

The former president faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in relation to payments made to Daniels, who said she had a sexual encounter with the married real estate developer-turned-politician.

Trump has denied that claim and slammed the indictment as a politically motivated “witch-hunt”.

Prosecutors have zeroed in on the political dimensions of the payments, and Colangelo argued on Monday that Trump engaged in a conspiracy that aimed to “undermine the integrity” of the 2016 presidential election.

Trump defeated Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton in that contest.

Meanwhile, Trump’s lawyer argued that “there’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election”. “It’s called democracy,” Blanche said in his opening arguments.

Gregory Germain, a law professor at Syracuse University, said that argument highlighted the central legal question in the case, which is whether Trump’s alleged falsification of business records, a misdemeanor, rises to the level of a felony crime under New York law.

Former President Donald Trump speaks to the media after opening statements in his trial in New York on April 22, 2024 [Victor J Blue/Pool via Reuters]

To be considered a felony, the falsification must have been committed with “intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime”.

Legal observers have noted it is somewhat unique – but not unprecedented – to charge a defendant in New York with felony falsification without charging him with a secondary crime.

Prosecutors will have to persuade a jury only that the falsification was done with “intent” to cover up or commit another crime, not that Trump was successful in committing that crime.

In court filings, the prosecution has suggested that the secondary crime committed by Trump could be a violation of New York state law that criminalises schemes “to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means”.

It could also be a violation of federal election law governing spending disclosures or a violation of New York state tax law, they said.

In Monday’s opening statements, Trump’s defence stressed that, in and of itself, it is not a crime to “pay hush money”, Germain told Al Jazeera.

The defence were “clearly pointing out that elements are missing in [the prosecution’s] arguments”, Germain said. “They’re raising it for the jury, and I’m sure it’s going to be discussed at great length in closing arguments.”

The prosecution will ultimately have to provide evidence of the secondary crime, Germain said. “Those are the two essential elements to this criminal indictment. We’re going to have to see: where’s the fraud and where’s the [secondary] crime?”

Michael Cohen in focus

On Monday, both the prosecution and defence lawyers addressed one of the key witnesses in the case: former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen.

A convicted felon, Cohen has said Trump directed him to make the payment to Daniels.

Trump’s team has sought to paint Cohen has a disgruntled former insider who has a personal vendetta against the former president.

Shanlon Wu, a former federal prosecutor and political commentator, told Al Jazeera that the prosecution used its opening statement to preview Cohen’s testimony and get ahead of any defence arguments.

The prosecution emphasised two things, Wu said: “One is everything’s gonna be backed up by documents. It’s not just [Cohen’s] word against Trump’s.

“Second was laying out the fact that Cohen would help show the degree of involvement Trump had with everything going on, trying to in advance negate the defence saying Trump just didn’t know about the particular strategies or details of what was happening.”

Blanche described Cohen as a “criminal” who was “obsessed” with Trump. “I submit to you that he cannot be trusted,” the defence lawyer said.

According to Wu, the emphasis on Cohen by Trump’s legal team effectively “put all their eggs in one basket”.

“If Cohen does OK [during his testimony], they’re really kind of sunk. And then they have to backpedal,” Wu explained.

“And that may be at Trump’s urging to his lawyers. ‘This guy’s a traitor. He’s a scumbag. You really have to attack him,’” he continued.

“I think their best argument is to say, ‘Look, this is not about election interference. He was just trying to make this scandal go away for his family.’ I think they should have made that more of the focus.”

Michael Cohen is expected to be a star witness for the prosecution [File: Jeenah Moon/Reuters]

Views of Trump

It remains to be seen what consequences – if any – the trial will have on Trump’s re-election chances in November. He is expected to face off against the Democratic incumbent, Joe Biden, in a rematch of their 2020 contest.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted this month found that 24 percent of Republican voters said they would not cast a ballot for Trump if a jury convicted him of a felony.

Another poll conducted by The Economist/YouGov showed that Americans are fairly divided on the merits of the case: 43 percent said they believed Trump should be convicted compared with 37 percent who did not.

But Monday’s legal proceedings provided both prosecutors and Trump’s defence team an opportunity to paint their respective portraits of the former president for the jury.

That is especially critical, Sullivan at Harvard Law School said, because “a supermajority of jurors make up their mind by the end of opening statements and they tend to retain that opinion throughout the trial”.

For example, Blanche described the former president on Monday as “a man”, “a husband” and “a father”. He also alluded to Trump’s connection to New York, where he built his real estate empire.

“Use your common sense,” Blanche told the jury. “We’re New Yorkers. It’s why we’re here.”

Sullivan explained that “one of the techniques of a good trial lawyer is to put their client in the jury box, metaphorically speaking, with the jury.”

And Trump’s lawyer is “wanting the jury to believe that the former president is one of them fighting against an overreaching state, and that [is the] basic theory that President Trump wants the jury to believe”, Sullivan said.

The prosecution, for its part, hoped to persuade the jury that Trump “is someone who simply never follows the rules and that no man is above the law”, Sullivan said.

Its argument, he added, is that “President Trump committed a crime and he should be held accountable.”

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Two Mexican mayoral contenders found dead on same day | Elections News

Killing of Noe Ramos Ferretiz in Tamaulipas and of Alberto Garcia in Oaxaca bring to 17 the number of slain candidates ahead of June 2 polls.

Two mayoral contenders have been found dead in a single day in Mexico, adding to the toll of slain candidates in what is shaping up to be the country’s most violent election on record.

The deaths reported in different parts of the country on Friday bring to 17 the number of candidates killed in the lead-up to the presidential, congressional and local polls on June 2.

In the northern state of Tamaulipas, authorities said they had launched a manhunt for the person who killed candidate Noe Ramos Ferretiz. He was seeking re-election as mayor of Ciudad Mante for a coalition of the opposition National Action Party and Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI).

Local media reported he had been stabbed and posted photos showing a bloodied body lying on a sidewalk.

“We will not allow violence to decide these elections,” PRI party leader Alejandro Moreno wrote on social media, where he confirmed the “cowardly assassination” of Ramos Ferretiz.

The second slain candidate, Alberto Garcia, was found dead a day after he was reported missing. He was running for mayor of San Jose Independencia in the southern state of Oaxaca.

The state electoral board condemned the death of Garcia, who went missing along with his wife, the current mayor of San Jose Independencia and and who was found alive. The board called Garcia’s death a “killing”, and said such crimes “should not occur during elections”.

Bodyguards for candidates

Violence linked to organised crime in Mexico has long killed politicians from various parties, especially those who hold or are seeking regional positions.

Drug cartels have often carried out such assassination attempts in a bid to control local police or extort money from municipal governments.

President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador acknowledged in early April that the cartels often seek to determine who will serve as mayor – either by running their own candidates or eliminating potential rivals.

“They make an agreement and say, ‘this person is going to be mayor; we don’t want anyone else to register to run’, and anybody who does, well, they know [what to expect],” he said.

The recent slayings have prompted the government to provide bodyguards for about 250 candidates, while those running for municipal positions – the most endangered – are the last in line for security.

Earlier this month, candidate Bertha Gaytan was shot dead on the first day of her campaign. She was running for mayor of Celaya, a city in the north-central state of Guanajuato.

Also in April, the mayor of Churumuco, a town in the western state of Michoacan, was shot dead at a taco restaurant in the state capital, Morelia.

In late February, in another town in Michoacan, two mayoral hopefuls were shot dead within hours of each other.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Ecuador weighs security, international arbitration in latest referendum | Elections News

Quito, Ecuador – He was elected president at a time of crisis, as Ecuador’s murder rate skyrocketed and gang violence seeped across the country.

Now, Ecuadorian leader Daniel Noboa is taking a plan of action to the voters, with an 11-part referendum on Sunday.

The referendum includes a wide range of proposals, from the militarisation of Ecuador’s police to tougher punishments for crimes like drug trafficking, murder and money laundering.

But Sunday’s vote is set to go beyond beefed-up security practices. One question, for example, aims to reform the judiciary system. Another considers whether arbitration should be the default approach to settling international financial disputes.

Noboa has been pushing for Ecuadorians to vote in favour of all 11 ballot measures, in an effort to streamline the economy and stamp out gang violence.

“Voting yes will strengthen our laws and leave no opportunities for those criminals who wish to joke with our justice [system] with the help of corrupt lawmen,” Noboa said in a public event on Monday.

But the broad nature of the proposals has prompted concern, with critics wondering what the consequences could be for human rights, the economy and efforts to stabilise Ecuador’s security situation.

Some have even questioned whether the referendum reflects a shift towards the “mano dura” or “iron fist” policies popular in countries like El Salvador, where human rights organisations have warned of false imprisonment and a lack of due process.

Daniel Noboa has made the national security referendum a goal of his presidency [Dolores Ochoa/AP Photo]

Limited opposition

Still, only one major political group in the country has consistently called for Ecuadorians to vote “no” on all 11 ballot measures: the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE).

The group has accused the government of exploiting the referendum to further Noboa’s political ambitions, as the country approaches its 2025 general election.

Noboa — a 36-year-old politician and heir to a banana industry fortune — was sworn in last November to serve an abbreviated 18-month term, after the departure of embattled President Guillermo Lasso. But he is widely expected to run for a full term in the next race.

In a virtual forum on April 11, CONAIE president Leonidas Iza called the referendum a chance for Noboa to rally support.

“The government needs to consolidate its strength to impose neoliberal policies,” Iza said.

Referendums, he added, are costly to organise, and he called for the policies to instead be considered in Ecuador’s National Assembly.

Another CONAIE leader, Agustin Cachipuendo, was later quoted in the newspaper El Universo as saying any repercussions from the vote would disproportionately fall on marginalised groups.

“This government does not know poverty [but] makes decisions that affect the poor,” he said.

Soldiers patrol during a presidential visit to dairy farms in Poalo, Ecuador, on March 21 [Dolores Ochoa/AP Photo]

Rallying public support

Nevertheless, the referendum enjoys relatively broad public support. According to the research institute Comunicaliza, 42.7 percent of voters plan to back Noboa’s proposals.

Still, another 27.5 percent said they have not made up their minds yet.

Maria, a 48-year-old resident of Guayaquil who asked to use a pseudonym for her safety, is among those supporting the president’s measures to tighten security in the country.

Her city has been at the forefront of the crisis. In January, for instance, a criminal group stormed a local TV station during a live broadcast and held employees at gunpoint, generating international outcry.

Maria explained she had been targeted by a criminal group herself: They blackmailed her by threatening her children. But she said she feels safer thanks to the state of emergency Noboa imposed in January, which allowed the military to be deployed to city streets.

“Policemen and soldiers have been patrolling the borough in these months, so we can finally sleep tight at night,” Maria told Al Jazeera.

She credits the soldiers with curbing the violence in her neighbourhood. The referendum could pave the way for the military to have a permanent role in policing, something Maria hopes will happen.

“If they will leave us, what happens then? This is what everyone is worried about,” she said.

A soldier guards cell block 3 of the militarised Litoral prison in Guayaquil, Ecuador, on February 9 [Santiago Arcos/Reuters]

Searching for a permanent fix

Noboa’s government has argued that the referendum is a necessary step to curb the wave of violence that has rattled the country since 2018.

Declaring a state of emergency, officials argue, is only a temporary solution.

“The general purpose of the [referendum] is to establish some permanent mechanisms, breaking the cycle of enacting emergency decrees and then going back to business as usual,” said the government spokesperson Roberto Izurieta in an interview with local television station Teleamazonas.

The state of emergency granted the government additional powers, allowing officials to impose a curfew and take stronger action against gangs.

Under the state of emergency, for instance, Noboa’s government labelled 22 criminal groups as “terrorist” organisations, clearing the way for the police and military to focus extra resources towards combatting them.

Security forces also seized 77 tonnes of drugs and detained 18,736 people, 300 of whom have since been accused of terrorism. According to the authorities, violent deaths have reduced by 26 percent since Noboa took office.

But in early April, the state of emergency came to an end. Ferdinando Carrion, a security expert, believes some of the reforms in the referendum could help Noboa to continue his campaign against the violence, but more structural reforms are needed.

“They achieved good results in the first two months,” Carrion said of the government’s state of emergency. “But it looks like the effect has been exhausted.”

He pointed to Ecuador’s prison system as a particular area of vulnerability. Investigations have shown that criminal organisations use prisons as spaces through which they can run their operations.

But under the state of emergency, the military was allowed to intervene. Carrion said that produced positive results.

“They intervened in 18 prisons out of 36, managing to sever [the gang leaders’] relations with the outside,” Carrion explained.

“But the minute the army leaves the prisons and gives them back to the national service SNAI, they will return to business as usual, since it has shown problems of efficiency, corruption and collusion.”

Carrion would like to see even greater reforms to government agencies like SNAI, beyond what is on the ballot on Sunday.

“Strengthening our institutions is paramount,” he told Al Jazeera, calling for the creation of a new body to replace SNAI.

The Ecuadorian government has deployed the military to control prisons like the one in Guayaquil [Santiago Arcos/Reuters]

Elections in the crosshairs

Still, some analysts question the efficacy of the referendum, even if it is successful.

Carla Alvarez, a professor studying security at the National Institute for Higher Studies, believes that the referendum will fall short of addressing the country’s gang crisis.

“No query made for public consultation will damage the structure of criminal organisations,” she told Al Jazeera.

She echoed concerns that the referendum has done more to bolster Noboa’s public image than to address the roots of crime in Ecuador.

Many experts trace the rise in the violence to Ecuador’s strategic location between the two largest cocaine producers in the world, Colombia and Peru.

They also point out that Ecuador’s economy was significantly weakened during the COVID-19 pandemic, leaving unemployed youth vulnerable to gang recruitment.

But Alvarez said Noboa’s emphasis on holding the referendum is also motivated by his future ambitions. “This vote is happening in the middle of an electoral race. And this allows the president to revive his image on social media and achieve more visibility.”

The security situation has a direct impact on the integrity of Ecuador’s democracy. In the lead-up to the snap election last August, a presidential candidate running on an anticorruption platform was gunned down outside of a rally.

And in recent months, politicians have continued to be targets of the spike in violence.

Five mayors have been shot dead since the year began, the most recent murder unfolding on Friday, just days before Sunday’s vote.

The slain mayor, Jorge Maldonado of Portovelo, was the third to be killed in less than a month. His death followed that of Mayor Brigitte Garcia of San Vicente and Mayor Jose Sanchez of Camilo Ponce Enriquez.

Suspects and weapons are displayed for reporters at a police station in Guayaquil, Ecuador, on January 11, shortly after a TV station was stormed during a live broadcast [Ivan Alvarado/Reuters]

Chance of a split vote

Critics like Alvarez underscore that referendums are no silver bullet to the security crisis.

Rather, they are a relatively common political tool. Since 2006, Ecuadorians have been asked to express their will through referendums nine times, on issues ranging from oil exploration to presidential term limits.

Paulina Recalde, director of pollster Perfiles de Opinion, also questions whether Sunday’s referendum will create the groundswell of support Noboa seeks.

While Noboa is angling for approval on all 11 items, Recalde’s research suggests that voters will not unanimously back all the proposals.

“Since the very beginning, we never found an overall majority. People won’t vote the same in all the 11 queries,” she said.

Recalde also said there was confusion over the vote. According to her research, 68 percent of respondents knew little or nothing about the referendum a month ago.

She added that the power outages Ecuador is currently experiencing — as well as a controversial police raid on Mexico’s embassy in Quito — could dent Noboa’s popularity, regardless of the vote’s outcome.

“If people vote yes to expand the role of the military, does it mean that they are providing strong support for the president? I would say no,” she said.

A member of Ecuador’s security forces stands guard outside the Ministry of Energy and Mines in Quito, Ecuador, on April 16 [Karen Toro/Reuters]

Arbitration on the ballot

One of the most controversial ballot measures in Sunday’s referendum asks Ecuadorians to implement a system of “international arbitration” to resolve conflicts between the state and private foreign investors.

In international arbitration, a third neutral party is used to reach a binding decision that settles any claims.

Supporters of the measure feel arbitration could safeguard foreign investment in Ecuador, thereby boosting the country’s economy.

“In a dollarised economy like Ecuador, we need an increase in strong direct foreign investments aligned with our public policies,” said Eric Vinueza, investment counsellor for the Corporation for the Promotion of Exports and Investments (Corpei) who supports the measure.

But activists have criticised this proposal as a tool to discourage the government from enacting environmental reforms that might disadvantage foreign mining interests and other overseas companies.

With arbitration, foreign investors could file complaints and negotiate settlements behind closed doors, leaving the public no recourse to appeal.

“These are private and unilateral judicial spaces which allow transnational companies to sue the states, where the states are only able to defend themselves,” said Ivonne Ramos, a mining expert at the NGO Accion Ecologica.

In the 2008 constitution, Ecuador prohibited any international agreement that would limit its national sovereignty, including through international arbitration.

Sunday’s referendum would undo that protection. Ramos added that international arbitration could come with steep expenses for taxpayers.

Ecuador already owes $2.9 trillion to foreign companies. It is currently involved in 29 different lawsuits before international tribunals, with half of the complaints related to mining and fossil fuels.

“Three of the eight pending procedures could cost more than another $10 trillion, which is our national budget for education and health for 2024,” Ramos said.



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Man arrested in France after bomb threat at Iran consulate | Police News

French prosecutors say no explosives found on suspect or at the Iranian consular office in Paris.

French police have arrested a man who threatened to blow himself up at Iran’s embassy in Paris.

Police found no explosives at the embassy or on the suspect who was detained there on Friday, French prosecutors said, after the embassy’s consular office reported a man had entered with ammunition.

Police arrested the suspect, born in 1963 in Iran, when he exited of his own accord after appearing to have “threatened violent action” inside, the Agence France-Presse news agency quoted the Paris prosecutor’s office as saying.

But “no explosive materials have been observed at this stage,” either on him, in his car or in the building, prosecutors said.

A police source told the Reuters news agency the man was seen about 11am (09:00 GMT) entering the consular office, carrying what appeared to be a grenade and explosive vest. Police cordoned off the area.

The man later left the office and was then arrested, the police source said.

The TV channel BFM said he had been carrying replica grenades.

A police source said it was the same man who had been suspected of attempted arson near the Iranian embassy in an incident in September.

Le Parisien newspaper said on its website that, according to several witnesses, the man had dragged flags on the floor of the consulate and said he wanted to avenge the death of his brother.

An AFP journalist said the whole neighbourhood around the consulate in the capital’s 16th district had been closed off and a heavy police presence was in place.

Paris transport company RATP wrote on the social media platform X that traffic had been suspended on two metro lines that pass through stops close to the consulate.

Iran’s embassy and consulate in the French capital share the same building but have two different entrances on separate streets.

The incident came with tensions running high in the Middle East; however, there was no suggestion of any link.

Earlier on Friday, explosions echoed over the Iranian city of Isfahan in what sources described as an Israeli attack. Tehran played down the incident and indicated it had no plans for retaliation, a response that appeared aimed at averting a regional war.

Meanwhile, countries around the world and the United Nations have called for de-escalation as tensions in the region rise.

The United States embassy in Paris asked Americans to avoid the area around the Iranian embassy, following similar recommendations by French police.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Full jury panel seated on third day of Trump’s New York hush-money trial | Donald Trump News

Twelve jurors and one alternate have been sworn in to serve in the criminal trial against former United States President Donald Trump, as the third day of his New York court proceedings concludes.

Thursday saw Trump return to court after Wednesday’s weekly break. There, lawyers for both the defence and prosecution continued to haggle over which candidates to select from the jury pool.

But the proceedings started with a setback. Seven jurors had been selected and sworn in on Tuesday — only for two of those jurors to be dismissed during Thursday’s hearing.

One claimed to face pressure from family and friends about her appointment to the jury. The other was scrutinised for allegedly misrepresenting his previous interactions with the justice system.

But jury selection quickly got back on track — and a process that sometimes can stretch for weeks was wrapped up in a couple of hours, with seven more jurors picked for the 12-person panel.

Then, it was time for the lawyers and the presiding judge, Juan Merchan, to turn their attention to the alternates.

Merchan has indicated he plans to have six alternate jurors for Trump’s trial, in case any of the principal members of the jury needs to be replaced. By the end of Thursday, one had been sworn in, with five more slated to be picked as early as Friday.

Trump stands accused of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, in relation to hush-money payments he allegedly made to the adult film star Stormy Daniels in the run-up to the 2016 elections. He has pleaded not guilty.

Selecting a jury to render a fair and impartial verdict has been a key hurdle in the proceedings so far. Here are the highlights from day three of the historic trial:

Former President Donald Trump attends the start of the court proceedings on April 18 [Jeenah Moon/Pool via AP Photo]

A full panel of jurors

The defence and prosecution quickly whittled down a second batch of 96 potential jurors on Thursday, with many being promptly dismissed after saying they could not be fair and impartial.

The rest filled out the 42-point questionnaire, asking them about their employment, their educational background and their media consumption habits.

The prosecution and defence then had an opportunity to speak and question the potential jurors in a process called “voir dire”. Both sides reminded the jury pool about their responsibilities to the court.

“The problem with biases is they colour the way you look at the world. What you may believe and may not,” said Susan Necheles, a lawyer for Trump’s defence. “We wouldn’t allow someone who has a strong dislike for a certain type of people to sit on a jury of that type of person.”

Ultimate, seven more jurors were selected, filling out the 12-member jury. One alternate was named.

Another group of prospective jurors was sworn in before the end of the day, in anticipation of Friday’s continued search for alternates.

A courtroom sketch shows defence lawyer Todd Blanche whispering to Donald Trump in court on April 18  [Jane Rosenberg/Reuters]

First dismissed juror describes public pressure

But Thursday’s additions to the jury panel came after some losses.

A nurse who had been previously selected to serve on the jury earlier this week was dismissed after she explained that friends, coworkers and family members had deduced her identity from media reports.

The jury in the Trump trial is supposed to be anonymous. But the woman explained she had started to face questions from her contacts about her participation in the trial.

“I don’t believe at this point that I can be fair and unbiased and let the outside influences not affect my decision-making in the courtroom,” the juror said.

Judge Merchan ultimately excused her from the jury panel. He reiterated that “after sleeping on it overnight, she had concerns about her ability to be fair and impartial in this case”.

Judge Juan Merchan is presiding over Donald Trump’s criminal trial in New York City [File: Seth Wenig/AP Photo]

Questions raised about second dismissed juror

But the nurse was only the first of two seated jurors from Tuesday to be dismissed. The second faced questions about the veracity of the information he provided to the court.

Prosecutors early in the day raised concerns that the juror, identified in media reports as an IT professional, may have misrepresented himself when answering a question about whether he had ever been accused or convicted of a crime.

He had answered he had not. But on Thursday, prosecutors noted that a man with the same name had been arrested in the 1990s for tearing down political posters in Westchester County, a suburban area north of New York City.

Without offering details, Judge Merchan ultimately excused the juror. “He does not need to come back and should not come back Monday morning,” he told the court.

With that, the original seven jurors seated on Tuesday dropped down to five.

Assistant Manhattan District Attorney Joshua Steinglass led the prosecution’s ‘voir dire’ on Thursday [File: John Minchillo/AP Photo]

Warnings about protecting the jury pool’s identity

With one of the formerly seated jurors citing privacy concerns as a reason for leaving, Judge Merchan issued a stern warning to the court about protecting the jury pool’s anonymity.

“There’s a reason that this is an anonymous jury,” Merchan said. “It kind of defeats the purpose of that when so much information is put out there that it is very easy for anyone to identify who the jurors are.”

Last month, Merchan ruled that the jury would not be publicly named, given the sensitivity of the case — and the risk of jurors being harassed or intimidated.

Aside from the judge and court administrators, only the prosecution and the defence are allowed to know certain personal details about the candidates, in order to make informed decisions about jury selection.

But that creates a dilemma for media outlets covering the trial, as they seek to document other details about the jury candidates — without divulging their identities.

On Thursday, Judge Merchan tightened the restrictions further, calling on journalists to stop reporting on the physical appearance of potential jurors, as well as specifics about their employment history.

“We just lost what probably would have been a very good juror,” the judge said of the woman who had been previously seated on the jury. “She said she was afraid and intimidated by the press, all the press.”

Defence lawyer Susan Necheles, centre left, is seen at the entrance of the Manhattan criminal courthouse on April 18 [Jeenah Moon/Pool via AP Photo]

A literal chill falls over the courtroom

The comfort of the jury pool cropped up in a different sense later in the day, as the judge addressed the chilly conditions in the courtroom.

The Manhattan criminal courthouse where the trial is unfolding is an Art Deco building that is more than 80 years old: Construction was completed in 1941.

Judge Merchan cited the older infrastructure in brushing aside a request from Trump lawyer Todd Blanche to raise the thermostat.

“There’s no question it’s cold, but I’d rather be a little cold than sweat,” the judge said.

But complaints continued, notably from Trump himself. As he left for lunch, the former president stopped by the rows of reporters seated in the courtroom and asked, “Is it cold enough?”

The frosty temperatures were enough to merit a second comment from Judge Merchan later in the day.

“I want to apologise that it’s chilly in here,” Merchan said, earning chuckles from the court. “We’re trying to do the best we can to control the temperature, but it’s one extreme or the other.”

Former US President Donald Trump speaks to reporters about articles covering his New York criminal trial [Timothy A Clary/Pool via Reuters]

Witnesses under wraps

In one of the final moments before Thursday’s proceedings ended, Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche asked the prosecution for the names of the first witnesses it planned to call.

But a lawyer for the prosecution, Joshua Steinglass, declined to provide the names, pointing out that Trump had a habit of bashing witnesses on his social media account.

Blanche maintained that Trump could “commit to the court and the people” that he would not write posts about any witnesses.

Judge Merchan, however, cast doubt on that argument. “That he will not tweet about any witnesses? I don’t think you can make that representation,” he said before the proceedings adjourned for the day.

Trump left the courtroom, and when he appeared outside, he carried a stack of articles to show reporters.

“These are all stories over the last few days from legal experts,” he said, flipping through the thick bunch of pages. “All of these stories are from legal experts saying how this is not a case. The case is ridiculous.”

Trump is currently facing a total of four criminal indictments, including the New York case. April’s proceedings make him the first US president, past or present, to stand trial on criminal charges.

The former president has denied wrongdoing in all the cases. He is also running for re-election this November.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Police make multiple arrests in ‘largest gold theft in Canadian history’ | Crime News

Police say five suspects arrested, three more being sought over theft of 6,600 gold bars at Toronto airport last year.

Police in Canada have arrested multiple people accused of stealing thousands of gold bars worth more than 20 million Canadian dollars ($14m), in what authorities say was the largest gold heist in the country’s history.

Last year’s theft at a Toronto Pearson International Airport facility was orchestrated by a “well-organised group of criminals”, Peel Regional Police Chief Nishan Duraiappah told reporters on Wednesday.

“This particular theft has become the largest gold theft in Canadian history, and it’s one of the largest, for that matter, in North America.”

The shipment of 6,600 gold bars weighed 400kg (882 pounds) and came from a refinery in Switzerland. That cargo, along with 2.5 million Canadian dollars ($1.8m) in foreign bank notes, was stolen from an Air Canada facility on April 17, 2023.

On Wednesday, police named nine suspects in the heist and detailed the charges they face.

Five of the suspects were arrested in Canada and released on bail pending trial, police said.

One additional suspect, originally from Brampton, Ontario, was arrested in the state of Pennsylvania after being discovered with dozens of illegal firearms. That person remains in custody in the United States.

Canada-wide arrest warrants have been issued for the remaining three suspects.

Chief of Peel Regional Police Nishan Duraiappah speaks in front of the truck used for the heist, at a news conference in Brampton, Ontario, April 17 [Carlos Osorio/Reuters]

The accused include two Air Canada employees and a jewellery store owner, as well as the alleged getaway driver.

According to authorities, the stolen gold was initially offloaded from a plane and then securely stored in a cargo holding facility.

Two and a half hours later, a man driving a truck arrived at the loading dock with a fraudulent air waybill to claim the cargo. The document he used to track the international shipments had been printed at the Air Canada cargo facility.

In the aftermath of Wednesday’s announcement, Air Canada said it had suspended one cargo division employee charged in the theft. The other, who worked in the same department at the time of the heist, had left the airline before the charges were announced.

“As this is now before the courts, we are limited in our ability to comment further,” Air Canada said in a statement.

Authorities said they believe some of the suspects were also involved in illegal firearms trafficking.

Police added that they seized 430,000 Canadian dollars ($312,000) believed to be profits from the sale of the gold, and six “crudely made” gold bracelets worth an estimated $89,000 Canadian dollars ($65,000).

They are still searching for the rest of the gold.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Woman, seeking loan, wheels corpse into Brazilian bank | Crime

NewsFeed

A woman wheeled the corpse of an elderly man into a bank in Brazil, hoping to get a sign-off on a loan. Suspicious, concerned, and confused bank staff in Rio de Janeiro questioned the man’s well-being before calling police, leading to the woman’s arrest on fraud charges.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Exit mobile version