news

People of a certain age will remember the Menendez brothers, Lyle and Erik. In 1989, when they were 21 and 17 years old, they shot and killed their parents in the family’s Beverly Hills mansion. Prosecutors alleged that they wanted their parents’ money, while the defense contended that the shootings were motivated by the brothers’ fear of sexual abuse at the hands of their father. I was living in California then and I remember the media frenzy. My wife was Lyle’s college classmate. So in our house, we have followed with interest the recent developments in the brothers’ cases. Both are serving life terms without the possibility of parole, and by all accounts, have been model inmates. They have habeas petitions pending alleging newly-discovered evidence that supports their claims of being victims of sexual abuse, including a letter allegedly written by one of the brothers eight months before the murders. Simultaneously, Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon has moved for resentencing, contending that a reduced term that would render the brothers parole eligible immediately would be in the interests of justice in light of their ages at the time of the crimes and the abuse that they allegedly suffered. Both the habeas petition and the resentencing request are due to be heard in the next month or two, and of course, both are controversial. ABC News has more details here. Read on for more news.

Read more

Regular readers know that I am interested in the criminal prosecution of Sam Bankman-Fried, who is currently serving 25 years in federal prison for fraudulent activity related to his operation of failed cryptocurrency exchange FTX. I reviewed Michael Lewis’s book about Bankman-Fried and have posted several times about the case. There are now several new developments to report. First, Bankman-Fried has appealed. Reuters reports here that his principal claim is that the trial judge erred by excluding evidence that FTX actually had – at all relevant times – sufficient assets to cover all customer deposits. (The bankruptcy trustee has, in fact, recovered more assets than necessary to pay all creditors, including customers, in full.) Second, Lewis has posted this “personal verdict” about the case, which assuredly will not change the opinions of those who see Lewis as an apologist for Bankman-Fried. Third, Caroline Ellison, Bankman-Fried’s business partner and sometime girlfriend turned prosecution witness, is soon to be sentenced herself. Her presentence report says that under the United States Sentencing Guidelines, her guideline sentence is life without parole. Remarkably, the report recommends probation based on her cooperation. Sentencing Law and Policy has more here, including some interesting details about what Ellison is doing to stay busy while awaiting her (next) day in court. Keep reading for more news.

Read more

In national news, prosecutors filed a superseding indictment in the federal criminal case against Donald Trump after the Supreme Court granted former presidents substantial immunity. Court papers say the new indictment “reflects the Government’s efforts to respect and implement the Supreme Court’s holdings and remand instructions.” Last month, the Supreme Court ruled that former presidents have absolute immunity from prosecution for official acts that fall within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” and are presumptively entitled to immunity for all official acts. But that wasn’t the end of the story – on the election subversion charges, the Court sent the case back to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to “carefully analyze” whether the allegations involve “official conduct” for which the former president would be immune from prosecution. It appears after weeks of consulting with other officials in the Justice Department, special counsel Jack Smith sees a way to proceed in the case, consistent with the Supreme Court’s ruling. Read on for more criminal law news.

Read more

Last week, the Department of Defense announced that 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammad and two co-defendants had reached plea deals. Generally, the defendants would plead guilty to various charges before the military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay and accept life in prison, and in exchange would be spared the death penalty. Then the Department of Defense announced that the deals are off. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin issued a memo revoking the deals and reserving to himself the authority to enter into plea agreements. Some families of 9/11 victims have cheered Austin’s decision while others support the deals. The defendants assert that a deal’s a deal and that Austin can’t nix them. Litigation is sure to ensue, further extending cases that have lasted more than two decades already. Keep reading for more news.

Read more