(GAZA) — Initial findings in an ongoing Israel Defense Forces investigation found that Israeli tank fire caused damage to a United Nations structure in central Gaza in March, killing one UN staffer and injuring five others.
The incident occurred one day after the ceasefire collapsed, according to a release from the IDF on Thursday. The IDF said it attacked the structure because of “suspicions of enemy presence.”
UN staffer Marin Marinov was killed in the Deir al Balah strike, UN Secretary General Deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq told ABC News in an email in March.
The injured staffers were Neil Arnold, Joel Fournet, Nicolas Berthon, Alexandru Baban and David Petrov, Haq said.
The IDF initially denied involvement in the strike, saying it “did not strike a UN compound in Deir al Balah.” On Thursday, it apologized for “the unintentional harm to the UN employee and share the grief of the family.”
“The IDF continues to conduct thorough investigation processes in order to draw lessons and examine additional steps to prevent incidents of this type,” it said. “The IDF sees great importance in continuing the dialogue with international organizations, as part of efforts to coordinate, draw lessons, and prevent similar incidents in the future.”
The UN has opened its own fact-finding mission to learn more surrounding the circumstances of the strike.
Jorge Moreira da Silva, UN under-secretary-general and UNOPS executive director, responded to the IDF’s latest statement on the incident, saying: “We acknowledge the reported initial findings of the Israeli Defense Forces today that a tank round was the cause of the death of a UNOPS colleague in Deir al Balah. This is consistent with known facts to the UN: this incident was a result of a tank round into a fully deconflicted UNOPS premises. Full accountability must be ensured with respect to the grave violations of international law that have been committed.”
A week after the incident, the UN said it was “comfortable with the assertion” that rounds were fired by an Israeli tank during its initial gathering of security information, Haq told ABC News last month.
The UN secretary general announced that the organization planned to “reduce the Organization’s footprint in Gaza” on March 24, four days after the strike.
“In the past week, Israel carried out devastating strikes on Gaza, claiming the lives of hundreds of civilians, including United Nations personnel, with no humanitarian aid being allowed to enter the Strip since early March,” Stephane Dujarric, a spokesperson for UN secretary general, said in a statement in March. “As a result, the Secretary-General has taken the difficult decision to reduce the Organization’s footprint in Gaza, even as humanitarian needs soar and our concern over the protection of civilians intensifies.”
The Israeli government has blocked the delivery of all goods, food and medical supplies into Gaza for more than eight weeks. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he was blocking aid because Hamas refused to release more hostages in an extension of the U.S.-brokered ceasefire. Fifty-eight hostages remain in Gaza since Oct. 7, 2023.
The March 19 strike brought the number of UN staff members killed in Gaza since Hamas’ surprise attack on southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, to 280 people, the UN secretary general said in March.
The March UN building strike is one of several incidents where the IDF has acknowledged accountability.
It recently took responsibility for misidentifying targets and firing on a convoy of emergency medical vehicles on March 23, killing 15 medical and humanitarian workers.
It’s unclear from the IDF if any Israeli soldiers will be held accountable for deadly UN strike.
(NEW YORK) — Disgraced former U.S. Rep. George Santos was sentenced to more than seven years in federal prison — the maximum he faced — on Friday after pleading guilty to a series of fraudulent schemes.
U.S. District Judge Joanna Seybert sentenced him to 87 months in prison, followed by two years of supervised release.
A tearful Santos told the judge he regrets defrauding the voters who supported his 2022 run for Congress before she handed down the sentence.
“My conduct betrayed my supporters and the institutions I swore to uphold,” he said during his sentencing hearing in a New York federal court.
He began to cry and struggled to get out the words as he tried to express remorse for the crimes he committed.
“I undermined the faith in the very institutions I swore to uphold,” he said. “I cannot rewrite the past but I can control the road ahead.”
He urged Seybert to impose a lenient sentence, arguing he can positively contribute to the community he “robbed.”
Judge rebukes Santos’ repeated lies
Santos, 36, was convicted of wire fraud and aggravated identity theft. He faced a sentence of 75 to 87 months imprisonment, including a mandatory minimum two-year sentence for aggravated identity theft.
Santos did not take any questions from reporters as he arrived at federal court in Central Islip for the Friday morning sentencing hearing.
His attorney, Andrew Mancilla, described his client’s conduct bluntly, arguing the former congressman is “forever stained” by his actions.
“Everyone hates George Santos,” Mancilla told the court ahead of the sentencing, claiming his client is not the “caricature drawn by the media.”
“He is a 36-year-old gay man with no criminal record who came from a broken family,” Mancilla said. “He built this ego of a man he wanted to be, not who he was.”
But prosecutors argued Santos has shown little remorse for his crimes, has blamed the Department of Justice and committed an “unprecedented” series of crimes.
“He has committed crime after crime after crime,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Ryan Harris said. “He has repeatedly proven he is unable to tell the truth.”
Harris rebuked Santos for suggesting the prosecution was politically motivated and argued the former congressman has demonstrated a “genuine lack of contrition.”
“This case is not the product of so-called lawfare. It is the result of years and years of deceit,” he said.
Seybert agreed, calling out Santos for his repeated lies and lack of remorse.
“It’s incredible that he did not stop with the lies,” she said. “It’s incredible now that he tries to blame the government.”
Before imposing her sentence, Seybert noted she has “sympathy” for Santos, believes he is a talented man and hopes he will eventually contribute to society.
“Mr. Santos, words have consequences,” she said, noting the same words that won him a seat in Congress landed him in court.
“You have a future, and I am sad to say in one sense that it is going to be shortened by the sentence I am about to impose,” she added.
As the sentence was read, Santos covered his face with his hands.
He was not immediately remanded and will report to prison at a future date.
Prosecutors highlight ‘social media blitz’
In a court filing ahead of Friday’s sentencing hearing on Long Island, federal prosecutors requested the maximum possible sentence — amounting to seven years and three months — calling his conduct a “brazen web of deceit” that defrauded donors and misled voters.
They also argued the former New York congressman’s recent “social media blitz” shows he “remains unrepentant for his crimes” in a subsequent filing. In one example, prosecutors pointed to an April 4 post on Santos’ X account that stated, “No matter how hard the DOJ comes for me, they are mad because they will NEVER break my spirit.” The post was made the same day the DOJ filed its initial sentencing recommendation.
Santos, meanwhile, insisted in a letter to Seybert this week that he has “accepted full responsibility” for his crimes. He said he can be both “profoundly sorry” and upset by the Justice Department’s recommendation of a lengthy prison sentence.
“But saying I’m sorry doesn’t require me to sit quietly while these prosecutors try to drop an anvil on my head. True remorse isn’t mute; it is aware of itself, and it speaks up when the penalty scale jumps into the absurd,” Santos’ letter said.
Santos included a selective chart to suggest the government’s sentencing recommendation is out of step with other political prosecutions, citing former Illinois Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. being sentenced to 30 months for misusing $750,000 in campaign funds or ex-New York Rep. Michael Grimm being sentenced to eight months for concealing $900,000 in wages and taxes.
Santos had asked for a two-year prison sentence.
Former campaign treasurer set to be sentenced
Prosecutors alleged Santos, with the help of his former campaign treasurer, Nancy Marks, falsified Federal Election Commission filings, fabricating donor contributions and inflating fundraising totals to meet the $250,000 threshold required to join the National Republican Congressional Committee’s coveted “Young Guns” program.
Marks pleaded guilty to a federal conspiracy charge in 2023 and is awaiting sentencing in May.
Santos pleaded guilty in August 2024. The Republican was expelled from Congress in December 2023.
As part of his plea deal, he agreed to pay nearly $600,000 in restitution and forfeiture.
The judge agreed to delay Santos’ sentencing, which had initially been scheduled for Feb. 7, after Santos asked for more time to make money off of his podcast to satisfy his restitution and forfeiture.
Members of the Concerned Citizens of NY-03, an organization formed in 2023 by voters from across the region Santos once represented in response to his actions, spoke out following the hearing.
“My reaction in sitting in the courtroom was, ‘Cry me a river,’ when he got that sentence,” Jody Kass Finkel, the head of Concerned Citizens of NY-03, said outside the courthouse. “He has betrayed the public trust.”
(MILWAUKEE) — A Milwaukee County circuit judge has been arrested by the FBI over allegedly helping an undocumented immigrant “evade arrest,” according to FBI Director Kash Patel.
Judge Hannah Dugan was arrested on obstruction charges, according to Patel.
“The FBI arrested Judge Hannah Dugan out of Milwaukee, Wisconsin on charges of obstruction — after evidence of Judge Dugan obstructing an immigration arrest operation last week,” he posted. “We believe Judge Dugan intentionally misdirected federal agents away from the subject to be arrested in her courthouse, Eduardo Flores Ruiz, allowing the subject — an illegal alien — to evade arrest.”
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(DECATUR, Ala.) — An Alabama man died on Tuesday, a week after he was shocked with a stun gun while being arrested, according to a statement from the Decatur Police Department.
Authorities released a nearly-30-minute video from body camera footage of John Scott Jr.’s arrest on the evening of April 15 outside of his mother’s home in Decatur. In a statement last week, authorities said they received a call about concerns over Scott’s
When officers arrived that evening, body camera footage shows a cordial conversation between Scott and the officers. Scott asks officers their names and shakes their hands.
At one point, Scott, who is sweating profusely, appears agitated and uneasy as five officers stand near him telling him to either enter the ambulance or he will be detained by police. Scott refuses to enter an ambulance called to the scene after officers spend about 15 minutes telling him that he needs to receive medical treatment.
Police then proceed to handcuff Scott after he refuses to enter the ambulance. As he resists, it appears that a stun gun is deployed and officers strike him near the head as they attempt to cuff his hands behind his back.
Scott says that he can’t breathe a few times as officers hold him down. After police handcuff Scott and attempt to put him in the police vehicle, he appears to continue to keep struggling. What sounds like spitting can be heard in the footage. One of the officers claims that Scott spit on him in the video. A spit-hood appears to be placed over Scott’s head.
The police department said in a statement last week that officers made a visit earlier that day to the same location after receiving a call that Scott had taken his mother’s cell phone. Scott returned the cell phone before the officers arrived, according to police. Once law enforcement reached the location, Scott’s mother indicated that her son might not be taking his medication and was having a “mental breakdown”, according to authorities.
Lee Merritt, Scott’s family attorney, told ABC News in an interview on Thursday that Scott took medications for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.
Officers believed that Scott exhibited signs of using “illicit substances,” according to a statement from law enforcement last week, but a mental health liaison was called to the scene and determined that Scott was not “an imminent threat of harm to himself or others and did not meet criteria for forced hospitalization,” according to a police statement last week.
It was a second 911 call that day that ended in Scott’s arrest, according to a statement from police last week. When Scott was taken to the Morgan County Jail, it was difficult to place him in a cell due to his “size” and “passive resistance,” according to a follow-up statement from police on Tuesday.
After over an hour in his cell, jail staff noticed Scott exhibited signs of medical distress and he was transported to Decatur Morgan Hospital in an ambulance, according to the Tuesday statement.
Merritt told ABC News that Scott was foaming from his mouth in his cell when inmates notified police of his condition. Scott died after a week in the hospital with no pre-existing physical conditions, according to Merritt. The family will conduct an independent autopsy and are still not aware of his exact cause of death, according to Merritt.
The Morgan County Coroner told ABC News over the phone on Thursday that Scott’s autopsy was completed that day, but he could not release the findings because of the ongoing investigation. The oficial said that the autopsy report could take another two months to be completed after test results are finished.
In a statement last week, the Decatur Police Department said that Scott had an active warrant issued by Morgan County, but Merritt told ABC News that the warrant was for a misdemeanor traffic incident, which he said did not make an arrest necessary.
The Decatur Police Department said in the Tuesday statement that officials have made a request to the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency and the FBI for assistance with the investigation into Scott’s death.
“The FBI is aware of the death of John Scott, Jr. and takes allegations of federal law violations seriously,” the agency told ABC News in a statement on Wednesday. “The FBI reviews allegations of criminal conduct and conducts further investigation if there is evidence of a potential violation of federal law.”
Merritt told ABC News that the Morgan County Sheriff’s Office will take over the investigation and the family plans to file a lawsuit within 30 days of Scott’s death.
The sheriff’s office did not immediately return ABC News’ request for a statement.
Merritt told ABC News that he also represents the family of Steve Perkins, another Black man who died after an altercation with Decatur police. Perkins was shot and died on Sept. 29, according to Huntsville, Alabama, ABC affiliate WAAY. One former officer has been charged in his death.
(BOISE, Idaho) — The trial for the man accused of killing four Idaho college students in their beds will continue as a death penalty case, despite the fact that suspect Bryan Kohberger was recently diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, an Idaho judge ruled late Thursday.
Additionally, Fourth District Judge Steven Hippler came down on the side of prosecutors — ruling that the “bulk” of what was said on a 911 call the morning after Kaylee Goncalves, Madison Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin were stabbed to death in November 2022 can be shared with the jury, as can text messages between the two surviving roommates. There will be a few exceptions, he said.
Kohberger has been charged with four counts of first-degree murder and one count of burglary in the murders of the four University of Idaho students. His trial is set to start on Aug. 11 and is expected to last several months.
Autism and the death penalty
Yhe defense attempted to get the death penalty taken off the table on grounds of Kohberger’s autism spectrum disorder, saying that it could make proving his innocence harder. However, in his decision denying the request, Hippler said those concerns could be addressed during jury selection.
“Intellectual impairment — a hallmark of an intellectual disability — is not present in the diagnostic criteria of ASD and no court has ever found the two to be equivalent,” the judge wrote. Kohberger, the judge noted, “has not presented any evidence of a national consensus as to whether the death penalty is a disproportionate punishment for individuals with ASD.”
The judge argued that Kohberger’s lawyers tried to argue with an “apples-to-oranges comparison” of intellectual impairments that ultimately fell flat. And defense lawyers cited no capital case precedent in trying to argue there’s “growing societal sensitivity to mental disorders” and antipathy to executing those who live with them, the judge said.
“No court has ever found ASD to be categorically death-disqualifying diagnosis,” Hippler wrote.
Kohberger may have poor social skills, the judge acknowledged. In fact, Kohberger’s social difficulties, including with personal space, actually “played a role” in his Ph.D. funding being yanked, the judge said, citing a defense expert who interviewed his family, former teachers and peers.
He was never “overtly inappropriate,” but didn’t have a lot of friends — nor insight as to why that might be. He could be rather awkward and “monotone,” using formal and scripted phrases like “Objectively speaking…” and “Mind you…”
But even defense experts did not find him irretrievably impaired, the judge said. Kohberger has an IQ in the 90th percentile for his age, graduated from his master’s degree program with a 4.0 GPA, showed “some typical social behaviors” and could be polite, the judge cited from defense experts.
King Road 911 call
The “bulk” of what was said on the 911 call placed by the surviving roommates of the victims on the morning after they were stabbed to death on Nov. 13, 2022, can be used at trial, Hippler ruled.
He has also ruled in favor of admitting the surviving roommates’ texts to each other, as well as their attempts to reach the victims in those crucial hours the night the killings occurred.
A full breakdown charting out what is and what is not admissible from the call was appended to the end of the judge’s filing.
Explaining why those text messages can be admitted, the judge said that much of it describes what they were seeing, feeling and doing in the moment — and the results of those actions.
“The events are sufficiently startling to both D.M. and B.F for purposes of the excited utterance exception. D.M. and B.F. are young female college students and the self-described ‘scaredy cats of the house,'” the judge wrote. “They were awoken from sleep after a night of drinking with D.M. reporting that she heard noises and saw a masked intruder in their home. None of the other roommates were responding to their calls and texts, further indicating something was amiss.”
“It would be potentially terrifying for anyone, including these young women,” the judge continued. “To argue that they would have run out of the house or called someone else for help had they really been startled unempathetically ignores these circumstances and the trauma and confusion they were evidently experiencing, which likely offset logical thought.”
Among the few items needing redaction is an instance when the person on the phone to the 911 dispatcher describes how one of the roommates had relayed that Xana was “passed out and she was drunk last night and she’s not waking up” and that they “saw some man in their house last night.”
The judge said that person on the call did not have firsthand knowledge and was only telling the dispatcher what they had been told; therefore, that could not be played for the jury.
He also ruled that one of the surviving roommate’s attempts to start a timeline of those early morning hours should be redacted, since it’s not an in-the-moment remark, having come after “several hours to reflect on what she had seen and experienced at 4:00 a.m.”
The latest court filings also provide new information about the moments the surviving roommates came upon the victims, such as when one of them called a friend “to come over and check the house because she was scared.”
The friend and her boyfriend came over and met the two survivors “at the bottom floor of the house,” and together they “started to walk up the stairs to the second floor.”
“When they reached the second floor, H.J. went to the kitchen to grab a kitchen knife. When he came backout, D.M. ‘saw Xana again for a split second. And I just started bawling because I thought she had just like – I don’t even know. I thought maybe she was still just drunk and all asleep on the floor,'” the judge quoted from grand jury transcripts.
“H.J. told D.M. and B.F. to ‘get out,'” the judge quoted. “E.A., who had started up the stairs, also turned around after H.J. instructed her not to come any further. They both went outside.”
“Shortly afterwards, H.J. exited the house and told them to call 911. He was pale white and mentioned something about someone being unconscious,” the judge continued.
Expert witnesses
Siding with prosecutors, the judge ruled Thursday that expert witnesses on a range of fronts will be able to testify.
Those include an FBI special agent who helped analyze Kohberger’s cellphone records — something his lawyers have repeatedly pushed back on.
Defense lawyers said Kohberger was driving around alone on the night the killings occurred, and they wanted to call to the stand a cellphone data expert to back that up. The special agent is expected to counter that data expert’s argument.
Experts also include a forensic accountant for the FBI who can talk about how Kohberger spent his money — including how he only made ATM withdrawals around and after the killings and totally stopped using his debit card just a couple days before the killings — whereas prior, debit card use had been a regular habit.
They also include a supervisor at Amazon.com, expected to speak specifically to Kohberger’s click history and other online shopping data. Prosecutors have alleged that eight months before the killings, Kohberger bought a knife and sheath that could have been the murder weapon.
DNA matching Kohberger’s was found on a KA-BAR knife sheath by one of the victim’s bodies, prosecutors have said — a linchpin in an otherwise largely circumstantial case. No murder weapon has been found.
Prosecutors can also call a detective who can testify that stabbing to death all four students could have been achieved in mere minutes — and that just one person would have needed no help.
“Depending on the suspect’s pace and route, he could have carried out the crimes in approximately two to four minutes,” the judge said in his ruling.
The judge acknowledged that the detective could potentially be called as a rebuttal witness if the defense tries to argue, as they have suggested, that Kohberger’s ASD deficits make it “not possible” for him to have “acted with the speed and coordination required to commit the crimes in the time frame alleged.”
(NEW YORK) — Hours before Luigi Mangione’s arraignment in federal court, federal prosecutors submitted formal notice that they intend to seek the death penalty if he’s convicted, citing, in part his alleged desire “to provoke broad-based resistance to the victim’s industry” by killing United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson.
Mangione is expected to plead not guilty when he appears Friday for his arraignment on a four-count indictment that charged him, among other things, with murder through the use of a firearm — a death-eligible offense.
Attorney General Pam Bondi already signaled that President Donald’s Trump administration’s intended to execute Mangione as part of the president’s push to reinstate capital punishment.
The “notice of intent to seek the death penalty” is the government’s formal step to inform the court and lay out the reasons.
Federal prosecutors said Mangione deserves the death penalty because of “the impact of the victim’s death upon his family, friends and co-workers.”
They also said “he expressed intent to target an entire industry and rally political and social opposition to that industry, by engaging in an act of lethal violence.”
Prosecutors stated that Mangione’s choice of site and victim made clear he sought “to amplify an ideological message, maximize the visibility and impact of the victim’s murder, and to provoke broad-based resistance to the victim’s industry.”
Defense attorneys have already called the decision to seek the death penalty “barbaric” and a “political stunt.”
(NEW YORK) — Government lawyers say officers with Immigration and Customs Enforcement Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) did not have a warrant for Columbia University activist Mahmoud Khalil’s arrest when they took him into custody last month, according to a filing submitted in the case.
Khalil’s lawyers say the admission contradicts what officers told Khalil and his lawyers at the time of his arrest and in a subsequent arrest report.
In the filing, lawyers for the Department of Homeland Security said Khalil, a green card holder and permanent legal resident, was served with a warrant once he was brought into an ICE office in New York after his arrest.
The officers “had exigent circumstances to conduct the warrantless arrest, it is the pattern and practice of DHS to fully process a respondent once in custody with an I-200 (warrant) as part of that intake processing,” government lawyers wrote.
DHS claimed its officers were not required to obtain a warrant for Khalil’s arrest, in part, because they had reasons to believe it was likely “he would escape before they could obtain a warrant.”
In the filing, DHS attorneys said agents approached Khalil inside the foyer of his Columbia-owned apartment building and claimed that, while his wife went to retrieve his identification, Khalil told them he was going to leave the scene.
“The HSI supervisory agent believed there was a flight risk and arrest was necessary,” the filing stated.
Khalil’s lawyers have pushed back on the claim that he was uncooperative with authorities.
In a sworn declaration submitted in court last month, attorney Amy Greer, who was on the phone with Khalil’s wife at the time of his arrest, said an agent at the scene told her they had an administrative warrant.
“I asked the basis of the warrant, and he said the U.S. Department of State revoked Mahmoud’s student visa,” Greer said. “When I told Agent Hernandez that Mahmoud does not have a student visa because he is a green card holder and permanent resident in the U.S., he said DHS revoked the green card, too,” she wrote in the declaration.
Khalil’s lawyers say the warrantless arrest is one of the reasons he should be released.
“That night, I was on the phone with Mahmoud, Noor, and even the arresting agent,” Greer said in a statement. “In the face of multiple agents in plain clothes who clearly intended to abduct him, and despite the fact that those agents repeatedly failed to show us a warrant, Mahmoud remained calm and complied with their orders. Today we now know why they never showed Mahmoud that warrant – they didn’t have one.
The statement went on to say: “This is clearly yet another desperate attempt by the Trump administration to justify its unlawful arrest and detention of human rights defender Mahmoud Khalil, who is now, by the government’s own tacit admission, a political prisoner of the United States.”
An immigration judge earlier this month ruled that Khalil, a leader of Columbia’s encampment protests in the spring of 2024, could be deported on grounds that he threatens foreign policy, as alleged by the Trump administration.
(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration’s attempt to make federal funding to schools conditional on them eliminating any DEI policies erodes the “foundational principles” that separates the United States from totalitarian regimes, a federal judge said on Thursday.
In an 82-page order, U.S. District Judge Landya McCafferty partially blocked the Department of Education from enforcing a memo issued earlier this year that directed any institution that receives federal funding to end discrimination on the basis of race or face funding cuts.
“Ours is a nation deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, which is of transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the teachers concerned,” Judge McCafferty wrote, adding the “right to speak freely and to promote diversity of ideas and programs is…one of the chief distinctions that sets us apart from totalitarian regimes.”
“In this case, the court reviews action by the executive branch that threatens to erode these foundational principles,” she wrote.
The judge stopped short of issuing the nationwide injunction, instead limiting the relief to any entity that employs or contacts with the groups that filed the lawsuit, including the National Education Association and the Center for Black Educator Development.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.
Barry Williams/New York Daily News/Tribune News Service via Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — Lawyers with the Department of Justice accidentally filed a document overnight that outlined a series of legal flaws with the Trump administration’s plan to kill New York City’s congestion pricing tolls.
In an 11-page letter to the Department of Transportation, lawyers with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York wrote that Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy’s attempt to terminate congestion pricing faces “considerable litigation risk” and is “unlikely” to be accepted by the court.
“As discussed below, there is considerable litigation risk in defending the Secretary’s February 19, 2025 decision against plaintiffs’ claims under the Administrative Procedure Act, that the decision was contrary to law, pretextual, procedurally arbitrary and capricious, and violated due process,” the letter said.
According to DOJ lawyers, both of Duffy’s arguments for canceling the program — that the tolls raise revenue rather than prevent congestion and that the program does not offer a toll-free option — are unlikely to convince the court.
DOJ lawyers instead proposed an alternative justification to defend canceling the program, urging the Department of Justice to use regulations set by the Office of Management and Budget to say the program was canceled “as a matter of changed agency priorities.”
“Importantly, DOT can seek termination of the agreement pursuant to the OMB regulations in addition to, and not in place of, defending the rationale laid out in the Secretary’s letter,” the letter said.
In a letter to the judge overseeing the lawsuit challenging congestion pricing, DOJ lawyers on Thursday morning acknowledged the document was “plainly filed in error” and asked to permanently seal the record. They argued the internal legal guidance included in the letter is privileged and should not be considered in the ongoing lawsuit.
A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York said the filing was an “honest error.”
“Unfortunately, an attorney-client privileged document was erroneously filed on the public docket last night,” the spokesperson said in a statement Thursday. “This was a completely honest error and was not intentional in any way. Upon realizing the error, we immediately took steps to have the document removed. We look forward to continuing to vigorously advocate in the best interest of our clients, the DOT and FHWA, in this matter.”
The Metropolitan Transit Authority’s congestion pricing program, the first of its kind in the nation, went into effect in January. Weeks later, with Donald Trump now in office, the Federal Highway Administration terminated approval of the plan, with Duffy saying at the time that the “scope of this pilot project as approved exceeds the authority authorized by Congress.”
In February, the Metropolitan Transit Authority sued over the Trump administration’s attempt to rescind the agreement between the Federal Highway Administration and MTA that authorized the collection of the congestion toll. Lawyers for the MTA argued the termination was unlawful, contradicts the DOT’s own publicly stated policies and seeks to end a program that benefits the public.
“The region’s subways, buses, and commuter railroads — vital lifelines for so many New Yorkers who live in the New York City metropolitan area and beyond — are already benefiting from substantial investments that have been made as a result of the Program,” they argued. “New Yorkers support the Program because it is working.”
New York officials have said they will not turn off the tolls without a court order.
The congestion pricing plan charges passenger vehicles $9 to access Manhattan below 60th Street during peak hours as part of an effort to ease congestion and raise funds for the city’s public transit system. During peak hours, small trucks and charter buses are charged $14.40 and large trucks and tour buses pay $21.60.
(HIGHLAND PARK, Ill.) — Robert Crimo III, the gunman who killed seven people and injured dozens in a mass shooting in Highland Park, Illinois, on July 4, 2022, was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole on Thursday.
Crimo was sentenced to seven consecutive life sentences, Judge Victoria A. Rossetti announced on Thursday.
“This court hopes this sentence hopes brings a sense of justice and an end to the continued horror,” Rossetti said.
The sentencing hearing, which began Wednesday, finished Thursday morning after the court heard from multiple survivors and relatives of those killed in the shooting at the Independence Day parade.
Crimo decided to not appear in court on Wednesday or Thursday. The shooter’s parents, who have attended most court proceedings, were also not present.
The victims, who expected to address Crimo at the sentencing hearing, still shared the impact Crimo’s attack had on their lives.
Leah Sundheim, daughter of victim Jacqueline Sundheim, said Crimo “threw the balance of this world off” by killing her mother.
“I hope you wake in the middle of the night, gasping air you don’t deserve,” Sundheim said in court on Wednesday.
Sundheim also read a statement on behalf of her father, Bruce Sundheim, who said their family’s lives have been destroyed by Crimo’s “violent tantrum.”
Marcia Moran, whose husband was shot by Crimo, said she has been in therapy for over two years due to the emotional trauma. Her family has since moved out of Highland Park and is now living in Tennessee.
“The shooter doesn’t get to take anything more from me,” Moran said in court via Zoom.
In March, Crimo pleaded guilty to 21 counts of first-degree murder, three counts for each person killed, and dozens of attempted murder charges.
Survivor Ashbey Beasley, who fled the parade with her son when the gunfire broke out, said in March the plea brought an “immense amount of relief.”
“Every single time I see [Crimo], it’s stressful,” she told reporters back in March. “I think it’s upsetting for everyone…Just knowing that his plea has been entered and we will not have to see him again is what we all need.”
Crimo appeared ready to accept a guilty plea last June during a hearing, only to reject the deal in front of devastated members of the victims’ families. He was expected to plead guilty to seven counts of murder and 48 counts of aggravated battery with a firearm at the hearing at the time, according to the AP.
“We have Fourth of July coming up and it will be two years,” Sundheim said at a news conference at the time. “All I wanted was to be able to fully grieve my mom without the looming trial, knowing that he was going to spend the rest of his life in jail. And instead, we were yet again shown [Crimo’s] complete and blatant disregard for humans.”
Crimo told police he wore women’s clothing during the shooting and used makeup to hide his facial tattoos and blend in with the crowd during the chaos, prosecutors said. Crimo was apprehended hours later and prosecutors said he confessed to the shooting.
Crimo’s father, Robert Crimo Jr., pleaded guilty last year to reckless conduct, admitting to signing the Firearm Owner’s Identification card for his son to apply for gun ownership.
The younger Crimo was 19 at the time and too young to get a FOID card on his own. Illinois at the time required people ages 18, 19 or 20 to have parent or guardian authorization.
