Tag: Verdict

  • Read the full jury verdict form from the E. Jean Carroll defamation trial

    [ad_1]

    screenshot 2023 05 09 180432

    A federal jury on Tuesday found that Donald Trump sexually abused and defamed E. Jean Carroll, a writer who accused the former president of attacking her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s.

    The verdict in the civil trial marks the first time that Trump, who has been accused of sexual misconduct by more than two dozen women, has been held legally responsible for sexual assault. And it adds fresh tarnish to the former president’s reputation as he seeks to regain the White House amid a tide of legal troubles.

    [ad_2]
    #Read #full #jury #verdict #form #Jean #Carroll #defamation #trial
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Hill reactions: Several Republicans are unfazed by Trump’s sex abuse verdict

    Hill reactions: Several Republicans are unfazed by Trump’s sex abuse verdict

    [ad_1]

    media cnn trump 84673

    The verdict “creates concern,” Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said, but whether or not it disqualifies the former president from his current presidential bid will be up to the voters.

    But not all Republicans had the same hesitation. Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), who served as ambassador to Japan under Trump, said the verdict was the latest act in the “legal circus” surrounding Trump.

    “I think we’ve seen President Trump under attack since before he became president,” Hagerty said during an interview on Fox News. “This has been going on for years. He’s been amazing in his ability to weather these sorts of attacks and the American public has been amazing in their support through it.”

    “This won’t be the last,” Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), who has endorsed Trump this election cycle, said of the case. “I mean, people are gonna come at him from all angles… People are gonna try and convict him on the papers in Mar-a-Lago. [They] Can’t have him win.”

    The case and the jury were both “a joke,” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said, and Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) said he believes it is “very difficult” for Trump to get a fair trial “in any of these liberal states.”

    House Speaker Kevin McCarthy dodged a question about the verdict during a stakeout with reporters following his meeting with President Joe Biden over the debt limit. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Trump’s foe in the chamber, declined to comment, as did Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), an ardent supporter of Trump, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who has endorsed Trump.

    When it comes to the impact the court’s decision will have on voters, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) said he is “highly skeptical” the case will bring Trump down. And Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) doesn’t think it will change many minds. “People who love him will still support him and people who don’t, won’t,” Cornyn, a McConnell said, adding that it’s “too early to tell” what the effect will be, if any.

    “He has his due process, and the American people will determine who they want as the leader of this country,” said Rep. Tony Gonzalez (R-Texas), who has endorsed Trump for 2024.

    The ruling comes weeks after the former president was charged with 34 felonies related to the alleged role he played in a scheme to bury accusations of extramarital affairs ahead of the 2016 presidential election. Despite his legal battles, the former president remains the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination.

    On Tuesday, Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) said the former president was “unfit to hold office.”

    “The *front runner* for the Republican nomination for President of the United States has just been found liable for sexual abuse,” Moulton said in a tweet. “The more these lawsuits pile up, the more of an aggrieved version of Trump we’ll get. He is unfit to hold office.”

    Moulton wasn’t alone in noting Trump’s mounting legal battles.

    “Donald Trump — the leader of the Republican Party — has now been impeached twice, indicted, and found liable of sexual abuse and defamation,” Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) tweeted. “You’ve hitched your wagon to a real stand-up guy, @HouseGOP.”

    First-term Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.) also turned the verdict on Republicans, criticizing support for Trump.

    “The Republican party will STILL eagerly stand by him to prop him up while they offer their unwavering support. Their subservience is a slap in the face to survivors and all women,” Lee said on Twitter.

    The former president has been accused of sexual misconduct by more than two dozen women, and in the now infamous “Access Hollywood” tape, he was caught saying that when it comes to women, if you’re a star you can “grab them by the pussy.” Tuesday’s verdict was the first time he has faced legal repercussions for sexual assault.

    Trump defended himself on social media Tuesday afternoon, calling the verdict “a disgrace” and “a continuation of the greatest witch hunt of all time!”

    In a statement, Trump’s campaign called the case “bogus” and said Trump was being targeted because of his position as a frontrunner in the presidential race.

    Daniella Diaz and contributed to this report.



    [ad_2]
    #Hill #reactions #Republicans #unfazed #Trumps #sex #abuse #verdict
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • All eyes on the late actress Jiah Khan case verdict today

    All eyes on the late actress Jiah Khan case verdict today

    [ad_1]

    Mumbai: Almost 10 years after actress-model Jiah Khan was found hanging in a Mumbai flat, a Special CBI Court will deliver its verdict in the much-talked-about sensational case — in which Bollywood actor Sooraj Pancholi is an accused — here later on Friday.

    An American citizen, Jiah, 25, was found hanging around the midnight of June 3, 2013 at her flat in Sagar Sangeet Building in the posh Juhu area.

    Jiah was stated to be in a relationship with Sooraj — the son of veteran actor-couple Aditya Pancholi and Zarina Wahab.

    MS Education Academy

    She apparently left a note, which pointed the needle of suspicion towards Sooraj, who was trying to grab a foothold in Bollywood at that time.

    In a major shocker for Bollywood, Sooraj was booked under IPC Section 306 for allegedly abetting Jiah’s suicide, a week after she ended her life.

    Subsequently, the case was handed over to the CBI after repeated pleas by Jiah’s mother Rabia Khan and directives of the Bombay High Court on 3 July, 2014.

    In her note, Jiah had narrated her ordeal, intimate relationship, physical abuse, mental and physical torture she suffered allegedly at the hands of Sooraj.

    The prosecution in the case had examined 22 witnesses, including Jiah’s mother Rabia, while Advocate Prashant Patil appeared for Sooraj.

    [ad_2]
    #eyes #late #actress #Jiah #Khan #case #verdict #today

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Proud Boys leader, awaiting Jan. 6 sedition verdict, assails Justice Department

    Proud Boys leader, awaiting Jan. 6 sedition verdict, assails Justice Department

    [ad_1]

    capitol riot proud boys 56260

    “I’m the next stepping stone,” Tarrio said in the call, which was broadcast to a freewheeling Twitter Space organized by the Gateway Pundit, a far-right media outlet known for promoting conspiracy theories about Jan. 6 and the government.

    Tarrio’s attorneys used their closing arguments in court Tuesday morning to lay blame for the Jan. 6 Capitol attack at the feet of Donald Trump, who they say bore the ultimate responsibility for riling up supporters and aiming them at Congress. Tarrio praised his legal team but declined to elaborate on their contention.

    But his lawyers’ claim stands at odds with many of Tarrio’s far-right supporters who have, with no evidence, characterized Jan. 6 as a government setup fueled by undercover agents, or the result of left-wing agitators.

    Tarrio also used the call to praise congressional Republicans — including House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan by name — for pursuing investigations about the “weaponization” of government. He said Jordan should call some Jan. 6 defendants to testify about their experiences.

    Tarrio’s decision to speak publicly came two weeks after he opted against taking the stand in the trial. He elaborated on that decision in Tuesday’s call, saying he wanted to avoid a grilling from prosecutors about statements he’s made over the years.

    “What’s happening is, in these cross examinations, they’re bringing things in from years past — things from 2015, 2016, 2017 is fair game,” Tarrio said. “It has nothing to do with January 6th. We were afraid they were going to use old statements, muddy up the waters.”

    Prosecutors have charged Tarrio and four allies with acting as the “tip of the spear” of the mob that overran the Capitol, assembling a group of hundreds of Proud Boys to form a “fighting force” on Jan. 6. Those men surged across police barricades and stoked the crowd’s anger at decisive moments in the melee. One of them — Dominic Pezzola — ignited the breach of the Capitol itself when he smashed a Senate window with a riot shield.

    Tarrio wasn’t present on Jan. 6 — he had been ordered to stay away from Washington due to an arrest for a separate charge two days earlier — but prosecutors say he stayed in contact with other Proud Boys leaders from a hotel in Baltimore and later celebrated their role in the attack.

    Tarrio spoke to supporters and journalists for more than an hour Tuesday, calling into the Twitter broadcast from the cell phone of a friend, Bobby Pickles. He claimed he’s treated as a greater security risk in the Alexandria jail than the Lockerbie bomber, who is housed in the same facility, and he lamented being held in his cell for 23 hours a day.

    Although two of Tarrio’s codefendants — Pezzola and Zachary Rehl — took the stand last week, Tarrio opted against testifying. But in Tuesday’s call, he echoed the arguments defense lawyers made about the Proud Boys, describing their often violent or vulgar language in group chats as “locker room” banter.

    “It’s simple fun,” he said.

    Tarrio also insisted that he never opened or saw a document titled “1776 Returns” that prosecutors featured in the case. The document, sent to Tarrio by a girlfriend a week before Jan. 6, outlines a plan to storm government buildings in order to protest the election results. Defense attorneys in the case argued that there was no evidence Tarrio ever opened the document, though an FBI agent called by prosecutors noted that Tarrio’s Google searches at that time referenced “The Winter Palace,” an analogy to the Russian Revolution that was referenced in 1776 Returns. Tarrio also referred to “The Winter Palace” on the night of Jan. 6 in text messages with Proud Boy Jeremy Bertino.

    Tarrio also used the call to emphasize that he believes the jury in his case can be “fair.” Although many of his allies have been sharply critical of the judge in his case, Tim Kelly, Tarrio described any conflicts with him as simple disagreements over legal issues and said he respects the court’s decisions.

    Tarrio also said he and his codefendants “are in a good place.”

    “We’re very positive,” he said. “We haven’t given up on each other.”

    [ad_2]
    #Proud #Boys #leader #awaiting #Jan #sedition #verdict #assails #Justice #Department
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • ‘Modi surname’ case: Rahul moves Guj HC against sessions court verdict

    ‘Modi surname’ case: Rahul moves Guj HC against sessions court verdict

    [ad_1]

    Ahmedabad: Congress leader Rahul Gandhi has moved the Gujarat High Court challenging the Surat Sessions court verdict that rejected his plea seeking a stay on his conviction in the 2019 criminal defamation case over the ‘Modi surname’ remark.

    The hearing in the case is likely this week.

    A Surat court on April 20 rejected Rahul Gandhi’s plea seeking a stay on his conviction in the 2019 criminal defamation case.

    MS Education Academy

    The Congress had said that Rahul Gandhi will move the High Court against the verdict.

    In his judgement, Additional sessions judge Robin P Mogera had cited Gandhi’s stature as an MP and former chief of the country’s second-largest political party and said he should have been more careful. He cited prima facie evidence and observations of the trial court and said it transpires that Gandhi made certain derogatory remarks against Prime Minister Narendra Modi apart from comparing people with the same surname with thieves.

    Mogera said the surname of the complainant in the case, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) lawmaker Purnesh Modi, is also Modi. “…the complainant is [also an] ex-minister and involved in public life and such defamatory remarks would have certainly harmed his reputation and caused him pain and agony in society,” he said.

    Mogera cited the disqualification criteria under the Representation of the People Act and added that removal or disqualification as MP could not be termed irreversible or irreparable loss or damage to Gandhi.

    Earlier on April 3, the Sessions Court granted bail to the Congress leader.

    While granting bail to the former MP, the court had issued notices to Purnesh Modi and the state government.

    It heard both parties and then reserved the order for April 20.

    Rahul Gandhi was a Lok Sabha MP from Wayanad but was disqualified after a lower court in Surat sentenced him to two years in jail on March 23 under sections 499 and 500 (defamation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in a case filed by Purnesh Modi.

    The case pertained to a remark Rahul Gandhi made using the surname ‘Modi’ while addressing a campaign event ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections.

    At a rally in Karnataka’s Kolar in April 2019, Rahul, in a dig at Prime Minister Narendra Modi, said, “How come all the thieves have Modi as the common surname?”.

    Following his conviction, Rahul was disqualified as an MP on March 24, as per a Supreme Court ruling in 2013. Under the ruling, any MP or MLA is automatically disqualified if convicted and sentenced to two years or more. (ANI)

    [ad_2]
    #Modi #surname #case #Rahul #moves #Guj #sessions #court #verdict

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Naroda Gam massacre case verdict

    Naroda Gam massacre case verdict

    [ad_1]

    Naroda Gam massacre case verdict



    [ad_2]
    #Naroda #Gam #massacre #case #verdict

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Modi surname case: Court verdict today on Rahul Gandhi’s plea against conviction

    Modi surname case: Court verdict today on Rahul Gandhi’s plea against conviction

    [ad_1]

    Surat: A Surat court will pronounce its verdict today on Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s plea, seeking a stay on his conviction in the criminal defamation case over his ‘Modi surname’ remark.

    On April 3, the Surat Sessions Court granted bail to the Congress leader, who had filed an appeal following his conviction in the case.

    While granting bail to the former MP, the court also issued notices to complainant Purnesh Modi and the state government on the Congress leader’s plea for a stay on his conviction. It heard both parties and then reserved the order for April 20.

    MS Education Academy

    Rahul Gandhi was a Lok Sabha MP from Wayanad but was disqualified after a lower court in Surat sentenced him to two years in jail on March 23 under sections 499 and 500 (defamation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in a case filed by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MLA Purnesh Modi.

    The case pertained to a remark Rahul Gandhi made using the surname ‘Modi’ while addressing a campaign event ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections.

    At a rally in Karnataka’s Kolar in April 2019, Rahul, in a dig at Prime Minister Narendra Modi, said, “How come all the thieves have Modi as the common surname?”.

    Following his conviction, Rahul was disqualified as an MP on March 24, as per a Supreme Court ruling in 2013. Under the ruling, any MP or MLA is automatically disqualified if convicted and sentenced to two years or more.

    [ad_2]
    #Modi #surname #case #Court #verdict #today #Rahul #Gandhis #plea #conviction

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • 2002 Gujarat riots: Special Court to pronounce verdict today in Naroda Gam case

    2002 Gujarat riots: Special Court to pronounce verdict today in Naroda Gam case

    [ad_1]

    Ahmedabad: A special court in Ahmedabad will pronounce its verdict today in the Naroda Gam case in which former BJP MLA Maya Kodnani and several other right-wing leaders are among the accused involved in the killing of 11 people from the minority community during the 2002 post-Godhra riots.

    Eleven persons were killed in communal violence in Naroda Gam area of Ahmedabad city on February 28, 2002, during a ‘bandh’ called to protest the Godhra train burning a day before in which 58 passengers, returning from Ayodhya, were killed.

    Along with Kodnani, other prominent accused are former Bajrang Dal leader Babu Bajrangi and Vishwa Hindu Parishad leader Jaydeep Patel.

    MS Education Academy

    On April 16, the court of principal sessions Judge SK Baxi had fixed April 20 as the date for the verdict in the case and had also directed the accused to remain present in the court.

    Notably, all the accused in the case are currently out on bail. Out of the total 86 accused in the case, 18 died in the intervening period. Around 182 prosecution witnesses were examined during the trial.

    Apart from rioting and murder, Kodnani, 67, has also been charged with criminal conspiracy and attempted murder in the Naroda Gam case.

    It is pertinent to note that Union Home Minister Amit Shah had also appeared as a defence witness for Kodnani in September 2017.

    [ad_2]
    #Gujarat #riots #Special #Court #pronounce #verdict #today #Naroda #Gam #case

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Allahabad HC reserves verdict on Abdullah Azam Khan’s plea seeking stay on conviction

    Allahabad HC reserves verdict on Abdullah Azam Khan’s plea seeking stay on conviction

    [ad_1]

    Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict on a plea filed by Mohammad Abdullah Azam Khan seeking a stay on his conviction by a Moradabad court in a 2008 criminal case.

    Justice Rajiv Gupta reserved the order after hearing the counsel for Abdullah Azam Khan and state government’s counsel.

    During the hearing, the counsel for the applicant submitted that on the date of the incident the applicant was a juvenile, as such his conviction be stayed by this court.

    MS Education Academy

    A criminal case was registered in 2008 against Abdullah Azam Khan and his father and Samajwadi Party leader Azam Khan at Chhajlet police station in Moradabad under sections 341 (wrongful restraint) and 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

    It is alleged that they had blocked traffic after their vehicle was stopped by the police for checking in Moradabad.

    The additional chief judicial magistrate (ACJM) on February 13, 2023 sentenced Azam Khan and his son Abdullah Azam Khan to two years of imprisonment and also imposed a fine of Rs 3,000 each.

    Later, they were granted bail after submitting the required surety.

    Two days after the conviction and sentence, Abdullah Azam Khan, an SP MLA, was disqualified from the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly. He represented the Suar assembly constituency of Rampur.

    Subscribe us on The Siasat Daily - Google News

    [ad_2]
    #Allahabad #reserves #verdict #Abdullah #Azam #Khans #plea #seeking #stay #conviction

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Pakistan cabinet rejects top court’s verdict in election delay case

    Pakistan cabinet rejects top court’s verdict in election delay case

    [ad_1]

    Islamabad: The Pakistan Federal Cabinet on Tuesday rejected the Supreme Court’s unanimous verdict on the case pertaining to the postponement of elections in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP).

    The development came during the Cabinet’s meeting, chaired by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, held after a three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan and Justice Munib Akhtar as members announced the apex court’s verdict on the matter which it had reserved a day earlier, Geo News reported.

    Announcing the verdict on a plea filed by the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), the top court declared the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP) decision to postpone polls in Punjab and KP from April 30 to October 8 as “null and void”.

    MS Education Academy

    The Supreme Court, in its verdict, states that the ECP’s order dated March 22, 2023, is declared to be unconstitutional, without lawful authority or jurisdiction, void ab-initio, of no legal effect, and is hereby quashed, Geo News reported.

    “The Supreme Court’s decision is a minority verdict, which is why the cabinet rejects it,” the sources in the federal cabinet said.

    The top court’s decision, as per the sources, is not enforceable, Geo News reported.

    The government would raise its voice in parliament regarding the verdict, the sources added. It was also decided in the meeting that the ruling coalition’s parties will talk about the apex court’s decision in parliament, they added, Geo News reported.

    In the meeting, the cabinet decided to present its position on the verdict.

    On the SC decision, Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz (PML-N) Senior Vice-President and Chief Organiser Maryam Nawaz took to Twitter and wrote that today’s verdict is the last blow of the conspiracy which began by “rewriting the Constitution and presenting the Punjab government on a plate” to the bench’s blue-eyed boy, Imran Khan.

    [ad_2]
    #Pakistan #cabinet #rejects #top #courts #verdict #election #delay #case

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )