Connect with us

Published

on

New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s latest moves suggest prosecutors are nearing a decision about charging former President Trump in connection with a $130,000 hush payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 presidential election. 

The Manhattan district attorney’s office this week escalated the fight by empaneling another grand jury in the case and presenting witnesses.  

Legal experts and a former colleague of Bragg’s said the Democratic attorney’s actions indicate prosecutors are edging closer to possible charges against Trump. 

“If they actually are presenting witnesses, the first thing I said is, ‘Oh, this is real. They’re going for it,’” said Catherine Christian, a former financial fraud prosecutor in Bragg’s office who was not involved in the investigation. 

Trump has downplayed the development in a series of Truth Social posts, arguing Bragg should focus on fighting crime in New York.  

The former president painted the investigation as a witch hunt and warned about statutes of limitations, referring to the time window in which prosecutors can bring charges. 

“Some Radical Left crazies, coupled with ‘ratings crushed’ and failing Fake News, are trying to get [Bragg] to go the prosecutorial misconduct route, and take on certain very weak cases which are dead anyway based on the Statute of Limitations. FIGHT VIOLENT CRIME!” Trump posted on Wednesday. 

Trump attorney Ronald Fischetti and Bragg spokeswoman Danielle Filson did not return requests for comment for this story.  

The controversy surrounding Trump and Daniels began when Trump’s longtime personal attorney, Michael Cohen, made a $130,000 payment to Daniels in October 2016 to stop her from publicly alleging she had an affair with Trump. Trump has denied the affair. 

Cohen later pleaded guilty to federal campaign finance violations. He claimed that Trump directed him to make the payment and that Trump reimbursed him in monthly installments that included a bonus, even presenting one of the purported checks to lawmakers at a 2019 committee hearing. 

Bragg could attempt to bring state charges of falsifying business records against the former president if prosecutors can show that Trump, with an intent to defraud, was personally involved in unlawfully designating Cohen’s reimbursements a legal expense.

That misdemeanor would carry up to a year in jail, but a felony version of the crime could carry up to four years.  

For prosecutors to pursue the charge, they would additionally need to show the fraud included an intent to commit another crime.  

Legal experts suggest that could involve breaking state campaign finance or tax laws, but they questioned if a federal campaign finance violation would suffice. 

Prosecutors would also need to grapple with the five-year statute of limitations on most New York felonies. Many known allegations involve transactions in 2016 and 2017. 

Christian insisted Bragg wouldn’t have moved forward with the grand jury if he was too late, suggesting a legal doctrine might be in play that allows prosecutors to bring charges after the deadline in certain circumstances, known as tolling. 

“I assume — these are very competent people — they found a reason why it was tolled in this case, possibly because he’s been out of the jurisdiction,” said Christian, who is now a partner at Liston Abramson. 

If the case gets to the merits, proving either charge could also heavily rely on the testimony of Cohen, a convicted felon. 

“I do think Michael Cohen comes with some credibility, given his current track record of cooperation. But we’ll see. He’ll definitely be attacked,” said William “Widge” Devaney, a former assistant U.S. attorney in New Jersey who is now a partner at Baker & McKenzie. 

Cohen said on Wednesday that he recently spoke to Bragg’s office and provided his cellphone, describing it as a “reinvigorated” investigation. 

“I’ve said all along that I thought the DA’s case is by far the simplest to prove, and it is the most destructive to Donald Trump individually, and to his business as well,” Cohen told CNN’s Don Lemon. “I do believe that he will see repercussions for the first time in almost his entire life.” 

The grand jury could also end without bringing any charges, as did one earlier in the investigation. 

Cyrus Vance Jr., Bragg’s predecessor and the one who began the probe, convened a previous grand jury as the investigation expanded from the hush payment to an additional prong of whether Trump and his businesses unlawfully manipulated asset values for tax and loan benefits. 

After Bragg took over, that grand jury expired without levying any charges against the former president. 

At the time, the investigation seemed to lose steam. Two top prosecutors who expressed a desire to charge Trump resigned, indicating that Bragg had stopped pursuing the indictment. 

In the months since, Bragg has secured convictions for the Trump Organization and its former chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg, on charges related to executive perks. Five things Biden is likely to say and not say in the State of the Union Abbott issues disaster declaration following Texas ice storm

Now, the hush payment and the president himself have reemerged as a focus in just one of multiple legal battles involving the former president. Trump could become the first former president to face an indictment.

Federal investigations into the mishandling of classified records at Mar-a-Lago and efforts to block the 2020 transition of power also continue. A district attorney in Georgia is investigating Trump’s actions following the 2020 election, and the New York attorney general is also pursuing a civil lawsuit against the former president. 

“On one level, I think Bragg doesn’t want to be left out of the party if there are going to be additional criminal charges brought against Trump,” said Devaney.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Strictly Come Dancing star arrested on suspicion of rape

Published

on

By

Strictly Come Dancing star arrested on suspicion of rape

A Strictly Come Dancing star has been arrested on suspicion of rape.

The unnamed man, who is in his 30s, was also detained over a separate allegation of “non-consensual intimate image abuse”.

The Met Police said an arrest was made in east London on Friday in a joint investigation with Hertfordshire Constabulary, following a “third-party allegation of sexual and drug-related offences”.

It is understood the arrest is not related to the upcoming production of Strictly Come Dancing – the 23rd series, which is in the rehearsal stage and is due to launch in September.

“On Friday 22 August, officers arrested a man in his 30s in east London on suspicion of rape and non-consensual intimate image abuse,” a spokesperson for the Met said in a statement.

The investigation is in its early stages and inquiries are ongoing, the spokesperson added.

The man was released on bail on Saturday until a date in November, the force said, according to BBC News.

Hertfordshire Constabulary did not add anything further.

A spokesperson for the BBC said: “It would not be appropriate to comment on an ongoing police investigation.”

Earlier this month, it was reported the broadcaster had called in lawyers to investigate following claims two of its stars had used cocaine.

Continue Reading

UK

Nigel Farage’s deportation plan relies on these conditions – legal expert explains if it could work

Published

on

By

Nigel Farage's deportation plan relies on these conditions - legal expert explains if it could work

Explaining how they plan to tackle what they described as illegal migration, Nigel Farage and his Reform UK colleague Zia Yusuf were happy to disclose some of the finer details – how much money migrants would be offered to leave and what punishments they would receive if they returned.

But the bigger picture was less clear.

How would Reform win a Commons majority, at least another 320 seats, in four years’ time – or sooner if, as Mr Farage implied, Labour was forced to call an early election?

How would his party win an election at all if, as its leader suggested, other parties began to adopt his policies?

Politics latest: Starmer ‘angry’ about Farage’s language on migrant hotels

Highly detailed legislation would be needed – what Mr Farage calls his Illegal Migration (Mass Deportation) Bill.

But Reform would not have a majority in the House of Lords and, given the responsibilities of the upper house to scrutinise legislation in detail, it could take a year or more from the date of an election for his bill to become law.

Reform’s four-page policy document says the legislation would have to disapply:

The United Nations refugee convention of 1951, extended in 1967, which says people who have a well-founded fear of persecution must not be sent back to a country where they face serious threats to their life or freedom

The United Nations convention against torture, whose signatories agree not expel, return or extradite anyone to a country where there are substantial grounds to believe the returned person would be in danger of being tortured

The Council of Europe anti-trafficking convention, which requires states to provide assistance for victims

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Farage sets out migration plan

According to the policy document, derogation from these treaties is “justified under the Vienna Convention doctrine of state necessity”.

That’s odd, because there’s no mention of necessity in the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties – and because member states can already “denounce” (leave) the three treaties by giving notice.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈

It would take up to a year – but so would the legislation. Only six months’ notice would be needed to leave the European Convention on Human Rights, another of Reform’s objectives.

Read more:
Women and children will be detained under Farage plans
Far right ’emboldened’ says MP as Starmer faces mounting pressure over immigration

Mr Farage acknowledged that other European states were having to cope with an influx of migrants. Why weren’t those countries trying to give up their international obligations?

His answer was to blame UK judges for applying the law. Once his legislation had been passed, Mr Farage promised, there would be nothing the courts could do to stop people being deported to countries that would take them. His British Bill of Rights would make that clear.

Courts will certainly give effect to the will of parliament as expressed in legislation. But the meaning of that legislation is for the judiciary to decide. Did parliament really intend to send migrants back to countries where they are likely to face torture or death, the judges may be asking themselves in the years to come.

They will answer questions such as that by examining the common law that Mr Farage so much admires – the wisdom expressed in past decisions that have not been superseded by legislation. He cannot be confident that the courts will see the problem in quite the same way that he does.

Continue Reading

UK

Six injured after Leicestershire dog attacks

Published

on

By

Six injured after Leicestershire dog attacks

Six people are believed to have been injured after dog attacks in Leicestershire, police have said.

Officers received two calls regarding dog attacks in the area of Beveridge Lane, Bardon Hill, on Thursday morning – one at 6.30am and the other at 7.44am.

Leicestershire Police said that in the first call to police, a person reported seeing a man being attacked by two dogs.

Upon arrival, no dogs were located, but a victim was identified.

Later, in the second call to the force, three people were reported to have been bitten in the same location.

Two dogs – confirmed to be Caucasian shepherds – were then discovered after firearms officers, a police dog and its handler were deployed.

The force added that both dogs were safely removed and are now being held in secure kennels.

In an update on Tuesday, officers said that two further people had come forward to report they were bitten by a dog in the same location at the time, bringing the total to six.

Read more from Sky News:
‘Headphone dodgers’ targeted by new TfL campaign
Epping migrant hotel resident appears in court

Women and children will be detained under Farage deportation plans

Two people, a girl aged 17 and a man aged 47, were arrested on suspicion of being in charge of a dangerously out of control dog in a public place.

The man was also arrested for a further two offences under the Animal Welfare Act. Both have been released under investigation.

Leicestershire Police also said it made a referral to the Independent Office for Police Conduct because of a prior report made about the dogs.

Continue Reading

Trending