Pennsylvania
Judge convicted of shooting and wounding her ex-boyfriend
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — A magistrate judge in Pennsylvania accused of shooting and wounding her ex-boyfriend in the head as he slept was convicted Wednesday of attempted homicide and aggravated assault charges.
Sonya McKnight was taken away in handcuffs after the trial judge rejected a defense request that she be released. She faces up to 60 years in prison when she’s sentenced May 28.
The shooting occurred in February 2024 at the boyfriend’s home. McKnight had lived there, but the man repeatedly asked her to leave when their relationship ended, authorities said.
Prosecutors argued at trial that McKnight was a jealous partner who “didn’t like” that she had been asked to leave, but her attorney said the ex-boyfriend couldn’t identify the shooter. The ex-boyfriend testified that he couldn’t see after the shooting, but that McKnight was the only other person in the home at the time.
The jury, comprised of Delaware County residents who were bused to Harrisburg for the trial, deliberated for two hours before convicting McKnight on both counts she faced.
McKnight, an elected judge in Dauphin County since 2016, was suspended without pay in mid-November 2023 by the Court of Judicial Discipline, which handles misconduct allegations against judges. The Judicial Conduct Board, which investigates and charges misconduct cases against Pennsylvania judges, alleged in a September filing that McKnight violated judicial probation from a previous misconduct case centered on her actions regarding a 2020 traffic stop involving her son. She was acquitted of criminal charges in that matter.
McKnight was not charged when she shot her estranged husband in 2019 after inviting him over to help her move furniture, Pennlive.com reported. Prosecutors didn’t charge her, citing self-defense.
Massachusetts
Boston councilwoman to plead guilty to federal corruption charges in a kickback scheme
BOSTON (AP) — A Boston city councilor on Tuesday agreed to plead guilty to federal corruption charges after prosecutors accused her of taking most of an inflated bonus that she paid to a relative who worked for her.
Under the agreement, Tania Fernandes Anderson will plead guilty to one count each of wire fraud and theft concerning a program receiving federal funds, the U.S. attorney’s office said in a statement. In exchange, prosecutors dropped four wire fraud counts against the 46-year-old lawmaker, who in 2021 became the first African immigrant and Muslim American elected to the council.
Council President Ruthzee Louijeune, in a statement, said Anderson had agreed to resign.
“Our residents look to elected officials to lead with integrity, and the Boston City Council must continue to do just that,” Louijeune said. “I am coordinating with counsel and staff to ensure that the rule of law and the rules of the body are executed effectively as we continue to receive information.”
Neither Anderson nor her attorney responded to a request for comment on the plea deal or whether she plans to remain in office.
Anderson was going through financial difficulties in 2023, partly because the Massachusetts State Ethics Commission told her it would fine her $5,000 for hiring immediate family members, according to prosecutors. Council members aren’t permitted to hire immediate family members as paid staff.
According to prosecutors, Anderson told her relative that she would give her a $13,000 bonus, which was more than twice as much as the combined bonuses she gave to the rest of the staff. After taxes, the staffer received about $10,000. She withdrew the money in several bank transactions in May and June of 2023 before exchanging texts to meet Anderson in a City Hall bathroom that June 9, where she gave Anderson $7,000 of the money.
The government is seeking a sentence of one year and one day in prison followed by three years of supervised release and restitution in the amount of $13,000. Anderson could have faced up to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 on each of the fraud charges. The theft count carried a penalty of up to 10 years and a fine of up to $250,000.
In a statement after she was charged, Anderson only said she would continue “fight” for her constituents. and refused to step down, despite calls from several colleagues to do so.
Connecticut
Supreme Court declines to hear Alex Jones’ appeal of $1B Sandy Hook verdict
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — The Connecticut Supreme Court has declined to hear conspiracy theorist Alex Jones’ appeal in a defamation case that resulted in a $1.4 billion verdict against him for calling the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting a hoax.
Jones asked the justices to review both the 2022 trial court verdict and a lower appeals court ruling in December that upheld most of the verdict. The Supreme Court turned down his request without explanation Tuesday.
A Connecticut jury and judge awarded relatives of some of the victims of the 2012 school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, more than $1.4 billion in damages for defamation and emotional distress, over Jones’ repeated claims that the massacre never happened. Jones has since acknowledged that the shooting was “100% real.”
Twenty first graders and six educators were killed. Victims’ relatives testified during the defamation trial that they were traumatized by Jones’ conspiracies and threats from his followers.
In December, the state Appellate Court upheld $965 million of the damages. Two other parents who lost a child in the shooting were awarded nearly $50 million in a similar lawsuit in Texas that Jones is appealing.
Jones raised free speech rights, other constitutional questions and procedural issues in the Connecticut appeal.
“We had a very strong appeal in Connecticut,” he said, expressing frustration on his Infowars show Wednesday.
The Associated Press sent emails seeking comment to Jones’ lawyers Wednesday. A U.S Supreme Court appeal is possible.
Alinor Sterling, a lawyer for the Sandy Hook families, said in a statement that the state Supreme Court’s decision “brings the Connecticut families another step closer to their goal of holding Alex Jones accountable for the harms he caused and will enable them to press forward with collections proceedings against him.”
Jones filed for personal bankruptcy protection in late 2022 after the Connecticut and Texas verdicts. The case remains pending and legal wrangling continues over the proposed liquidation of many of Jones’ and Infowars’ assets.
Minnesota
Judge rejects new trials for 2 convicted of human smuggling in death of family of 4 from India
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A federal judge on Tuesday rejected requests for new trials for two men convicted on human smuggling charges in the deaths of four members of a family from India who froze to death while trying to cross the Canadian border into Minnesota during a blizzard in 2022.
U.S. District Judge John Tunheim declined to set aside the guilty verdicts that a jury returned last November against Harshkumar Ramanlal Patel and Steve Anthony Shand. His order clears the way for the two defendants to take their cases to a federal appeals court after he sentences them on May 7.
Attorneys for both men argued that the evidence was insufficient.
The judge found that there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find both Shand and Patel guilty on all four counts. He said the failure of prosecutors until late in the trial to disclose a prior disciplinary action against a Border Patrol agent who testified, while troubling, had a minimal impact on the overall case. He also stood by his decision to try the defendants together rather than separately.
Prosecutors said during the trial that Patel, an Indian national who prosecutors say went by the alias “Dirty Harry,” and Shand, an American from Florida, were part of a sophisticated illegal operation that brought increasing numbers of Indians into the U.S.
They said the victims, 39-year-old Jagdish Patel; his wife, Vaishaliben, who was in her mid-30s; their 11-year-old daughter, Vihangi; and 3-year-old son, Dharmik, froze to death just north of the border between Manitoba and Minnesota on Jan. 19, 2022. The family was from Dingucha, a village in the western Indian state of Gujarat. The couple were schoolteachers, local news reports said. Seven other members of their group survived the foot crossing. Patel is a common Indian surname, and the victims were not related to the defendant.
The most serious counts carry maximum sentences of up to 20 years in prison. But federal sentencing guidelines rely on complicated formulas, and prosecutors have not yet said what they will recommend for sentences.
Louisiana
Federal court: Lawsuit alleging environmental racism in parish may proceed
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A civil rights lawsuit alleging a south Louisiana parish engaged in racist land-use policies by placing polluting industries in majority-Black communities can move forward, a federal appellate court says.
On Thursday, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled that a trio of faith-based community groups could proceed with a lawsuit alleging racial discrimination in the petrochemical buildout in St. James Parish, a region in the heart of Louisiana’s heavily industrialized Chemical Corridor. It is often referred to by environmental groups as “Cancer Alley” for its high levels of pollution.
The lawsuit calls for a moratorium on the construction and expansion of petrochemical plants in St. James Parish. When the lawsuit was filed in March 2023, 20 of the 24 industrial facilities were in two sections of the parish with majority-Black populations.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency found in a 2003 report that St. James Parish ranked higher than the national average for certain cancer deaths. Both majority-Black sections of the parish are ranked as having a high risk of cancer from toxic pollutants according to an EPA screening tool based on emissions reported by nearby facilities, the lawsuit notes.
“We have been sounding the alarm for far too long that a moratorium is needed to halt the expansion of any more polluting industries in our neighborhoods, and too many lives have been lost to cancer,” said Gail LeBoeuf, a lifelong parish resident and co-founder of Inclusive Louisiana. She is a plaintiff in the case.
The case will now go back to the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Louisiana, which had previously ruled the lawsuit was filed too late by Inclusive Louisiana and other community groups because the allegations centered on a 2014 parish land-use plan.
But the federal court said the complaint was filed on time and noted that the lawsuit was “replete with allegations of discriminatory land use decisions” in the parish, of which the 2014 plan was just one example.
The court also recognized that the groups had a right to sue the parish for authorizing industrial development which “desecrates, destroys, and restricts access” to the cemeteries of their enslaved ancestors in the parish. Many of the petrochemical facilities in Louisiana are built on former plantations, and few of the burial sites of the enslaved have been preserved.
“I think it’s a real vindication of their struggle,” said Pamela Spees, a lawyer with the Center of Constitutional Rights representing the plaintiffs. “This is a case about long-running ongoing discrimination and now we get to deal with the claims on their merits.”
Judge convicted of shooting and wounding her ex-boyfriend
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — A magistrate judge in Pennsylvania accused of shooting and wounding her ex-boyfriend in the head as he slept was convicted Wednesday of attempted homicide and aggravated assault charges.
Sonya McKnight was taken away in handcuffs after the trial judge rejected a defense request that she be released. She faces up to 60 years in prison when she’s sentenced May 28.
The shooting occurred in February 2024 at the boyfriend’s home. McKnight had lived there, but the man repeatedly asked her to leave when their relationship ended, authorities said.
Prosecutors argued at trial that McKnight was a jealous partner who “didn’t like” that she had been asked to leave, but her attorney said the ex-boyfriend couldn’t identify the shooter. The ex-boyfriend testified that he couldn’t see after the shooting, but that McKnight was the only other person in the home at the time.
The jury, comprised of Delaware County residents who were bused to Harrisburg for the trial, deliberated for two hours before convicting McKnight on both counts she faced.
McKnight, an elected judge in Dauphin County since 2016, was suspended without pay in mid-November 2023 by the Court of Judicial Discipline, which handles misconduct allegations against judges. The Judicial Conduct Board, which investigates and charges misconduct cases against Pennsylvania judges, alleged in a September filing that McKnight violated judicial probation from a previous misconduct case centered on her actions regarding a 2020 traffic stop involving her son. She was acquitted of criminal charges in that matter.
McKnight was not charged when she shot her estranged husband in 2019 after inviting him over to help her move furniture, Pennlive.com reported. Prosecutors didn’t charge her, citing self-defense.
Massachusetts
Boston councilwoman to plead guilty to federal corruption charges in a kickback scheme
BOSTON (AP) — A Boston city councilor on Tuesday agreed to plead guilty to federal corruption charges after prosecutors accused her of taking most of an inflated bonus that she paid to a relative who worked for her.
Under the agreement, Tania Fernandes Anderson will plead guilty to one count each of wire fraud and theft concerning a program receiving federal funds, the U.S. attorney’s office said in a statement. In exchange, prosecutors dropped four wire fraud counts against the 46-year-old lawmaker, who in 2021 became the first African immigrant and Muslim American elected to the council.
Council President Ruthzee Louijeune, in a statement, said Anderson had agreed to resign.
“Our residents look to elected officials to lead with integrity, and the Boston City Council must continue to do just that,” Louijeune said. “I am coordinating with counsel and staff to ensure that the rule of law and the rules of the body are executed effectively as we continue to receive information.”
Neither Anderson nor her attorney responded to a request for comment on the plea deal or whether she plans to remain in office.
Anderson was going through financial difficulties in 2023, partly because the Massachusetts State Ethics Commission told her it would fine her $5,000 for hiring immediate family members, according to prosecutors. Council members aren’t permitted to hire immediate family members as paid staff.
According to prosecutors, Anderson told her relative that she would give her a $13,000 bonus, which was more than twice as much as the combined bonuses she gave to the rest of the staff. After taxes, the staffer received about $10,000. She withdrew the money in several bank transactions in May and June of 2023 before exchanging texts to meet Anderson in a City Hall bathroom that June 9, where she gave Anderson $7,000 of the money.
The government is seeking a sentence of one year and one day in prison followed by three years of supervised release and restitution in the amount of $13,000. Anderson could have faced up to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 on each of the fraud charges. The theft count carried a penalty of up to 10 years and a fine of up to $250,000.
In a statement after she was charged, Anderson only said she would continue “fight” for her constituents. and refused to step down, despite calls from several colleagues to do so.
Connecticut
Supreme Court declines to hear Alex Jones’ appeal of $1B Sandy Hook verdict
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — The Connecticut Supreme Court has declined to hear conspiracy theorist Alex Jones’ appeal in a defamation case that resulted in a $1.4 billion verdict against him for calling the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting a hoax.
Jones asked the justices to review both the 2022 trial court verdict and a lower appeals court ruling in December that upheld most of the verdict. The Supreme Court turned down his request without explanation Tuesday.
A Connecticut jury and judge awarded relatives of some of the victims of the 2012 school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, more than $1.4 billion in damages for defamation and emotional distress, over Jones’ repeated claims that the massacre never happened. Jones has since acknowledged that the shooting was “100% real.”
Twenty first graders and six educators were killed. Victims’ relatives testified during the defamation trial that they were traumatized by Jones’ conspiracies and threats from his followers.
In December, the state Appellate Court upheld $965 million of the damages. Two other parents who lost a child in the shooting were awarded nearly $50 million in a similar lawsuit in Texas that Jones is appealing.
Jones raised free speech rights, other constitutional questions and procedural issues in the Connecticut appeal.
“We had a very strong appeal in Connecticut,” he said, expressing frustration on his Infowars show Wednesday.
The Associated Press sent emails seeking comment to Jones’ lawyers Wednesday. A U.S Supreme Court appeal is possible.
Alinor Sterling, a lawyer for the Sandy Hook families, said in a statement that the state Supreme Court’s decision “brings the Connecticut families another step closer to their goal of holding Alex Jones accountable for the harms he caused and will enable them to press forward with collections proceedings against him.”
Jones filed for personal bankruptcy protection in late 2022 after the Connecticut and Texas verdicts. The case remains pending and legal wrangling continues over the proposed liquidation of many of Jones’ and Infowars’ assets.
Minnesota
Judge rejects new trials for 2 convicted of human smuggling in death of family of 4 from India
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A federal judge on Tuesday rejected requests for new trials for two men convicted on human smuggling charges in the deaths of four members of a family from India who froze to death while trying to cross the Canadian border into Minnesota during a blizzard in 2022.
U.S. District Judge John Tunheim declined to set aside the guilty verdicts that a jury returned last November against Harshkumar Ramanlal Patel and Steve Anthony Shand. His order clears the way for the two defendants to take their cases to a federal appeals court after he sentences them on May 7.
Attorneys for both men argued that the evidence was insufficient.
The judge found that there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find both Shand and Patel guilty on all four counts. He said the failure of prosecutors until late in the trial to disclose a prior disciplinary action against a Border Patrol agent who testified, while troubling, had a minimal impact on the overall case. He also stood by his decision to try the defendants together rather than separately.
Prosecutors said during the trial that Patel, an Indian national who prosecutors say went by the alias “Dirty Harry,” and Shand, an American from Florida, were part of a sophisticated illegal operation that brought increasing numbers of Indians into the U.S.
They said the victims, 39-year-old Jagdish Patel; his wife, Vaishaliben, who was in her mid-30s; their 11-year-old daughter, Vihangi; and 3-year-old son, Dharmik, froze to death just north of the border between Manitoba and Minnesota on Jan. 19, 2022. The family was from Dingucha, a village in the western Indian state of Gujarat. The couple were schoolteachers, local news reports said. Seven other members of their group survived the foot crossing. Patel is a common Indian surname, and the victims were not related to the defendant.
The most serious counts carry maximum sentences of up to 20 years in prison. But federal sentencing guidelines rely on complicated formulas, and prosecutors have not yet said what they will recommend for sentences.
Louisiana
Federal court: Lawsuit alleging environmental racism in parish may proceed
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A civil rights lawsuit alleging a south Louisiana parish engaged in racist land-use policies by placing polluting industries in majority-Black communities can move forward, a federal appellate court says.
On Thursday, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled that a trio of faith-based community groups could proceed with a lawsuit alleging racial discrimination in the petrochemical buildout in St. James Parish, a region in the heart of Louisiana’s heavily industrialized Chemical Corridor. It is often referred to by environmental groups as “Cancer Alley” for its high levels of pollution.
The lawsuit calls for a moratorium on the construction and expansion of petrochemical plants in St. James Parish. When the lawsuit was filed in March 2023, 20 of the 24 industrial facilities were in two sections of the parish with majority-Black populations.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency found in a 2003 report that St. James Parish ranked higher than the national average for certain cancer deaths. Both majority-Black sections of the parish are ranked as having a high risk of cancer from toxic pollutants according to an EPA screening tool based on emissions reported by nearby facilities, the lawsuit notes.
“We have been sounding the alarm for far too long that a moratorium is needed to halt the expansion of any more polluting industries in our neighborhoods, and too many lives have been lost to cancer,” said Gail LeBoeuf, a lifelong parish resident and co-founder of Inclusive Louisiana. She is a plaintiff in the case.
The case will now go back to the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Louisiana, which had previously ruled the lawsuit was filed too late by Inclusive Louisiana and other community groups because the allegations centered on a 2014 parish land-use plan.
But the federal court said the complaint was filed on time and noted that the lawsuit was “replete with allegations of discriminatory land use decisions” in the parish, of which the 2014 plan was just one example.
The court also recognized that the groups had a right to sue the parish for authorizing industrial development which “desecrates, destroys, and restricts access” to the cemeteries of their enslaved ancestors in the parish. Many of the petrochemical facilities in Louisiana are built on former plantations, and few of the burial sites of the enslaved have been preserved.
“I think it’s a real vindication of their struggle,” said Pamela Spees, a lawyer with the Center of Constitutional Rights representing the plaintiffs. “This is a case about long-running ongoing discrimination and now we get to deal with the claims on their merits.”
