Author Topic: Purple Purse  (Read 12266 times)

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #30 on: September 28, 2018, 10:51:20 am »

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #31 on: September 28, 2018, 08:10:48 pm »
Friday, 28 September 2018

The Pernicious Double Standards Around Brett Kavanaugh’s Drinking
by Megan Garber

On Thursday, the testimony delivered by Brett Kavanaugh to the Senate Judiciary Committee took a turn that was at once unexpected and, the past week being what it has been, deeply predictable: Sheldon Whitehouse, the senator from Rhode Island, used a portion of his allotted questioning time to ask the Supreme Court nominee about the definition of the “devil’s triangle.”

For most Americans who came of age in the same rough decades as Brett Kavanaugh, the term—included, along with Kavanaugh’s self-identification as a “Renate Alumnius” and references to kegs and ralphing and boofing, on Kavanaugh’s yearbook page—would seem an obvious reference to a sexual act.

Kavanaugh, however, told the committee that his definition of the term was different. “Devil’s triangle,” he insisted, was merely a drinking game.

“Three glasses in a triangle,” Kavanaugh said. Like quarters.

If “devil’s triangle” is a game that, indeed, involves bouncing coins into cups, there was, as of Thursday afternoon, seemingly no evidence of this on the internet, when people watching Kavanaugh’s hearing, inevitably, checked.

No evidence, that is, until shortly after Kavanaugh testified as to his personalized definition of the term.

At that point, congress-edits, the Twitter bot that tracks updates made to Wikipedia pages from congressional IP addresses, recorded a change made to the Wikipedia entry for “Devil’s Triangle”: “‘Devil’s Triangle’: a popular drinking game enjoyed by friends of Judge Brett Kavanaugh.”

The edit might have been a clumsy joke; it might have been a flimsy attempt to corroborate an explanation of things that, in the context of the rest of Kavanaugh’s sex-suggestive and booze-bragging yearbook page, would seem to defy common sense.

Either way, it was fitting: Thursday’s hearing, in its assorted grotesqueries, was its own kind of clumsy joke, precisely because of its transparent display of reason-defying entitlements.

The event—the raw but measured testimony of Christine Blasey Ford, followed by the rage-fueled indignations of Brett Kavanaugh—was a testament to the corroborative effects of power: the ease with which those who chair committees and run countries can rearrange the facts of the world until they conform to, and allegedly confirm, the tales told by the powerful.

Over the course of the past week, the story that had previously been put forth about the character of Brett Kavanaugh—the carpools and the service projects and the generous mentorship of “Coach K”—has required a necessary addendum: Even a Washington Examiner op-ed conceded that “the Senate Judiciary Committee is witnessing a very different Kavanaugh than the nominee who came before them two weeks ago.”

The choir boy, the carefully crafted story soon had to allow, is also the frat guy—and the latter guy, Kavanaugh said repeatedly on Thursday, really likes drinking. Not just as an activity but also, it seems, as a core element of his very identity.

Drinking as brotherhood.

Drinking as belonging.

It’s drinking that will go unpunished in a world that will gaze upon a young man who is, as a matter of habit, “stumbling drunk,” and “sloppy drunk,” and “incoherently drunk,” and slurringly drunk, and foolishly drunk, and aggressively drunk, and belligerently drunk, and, then, smiling benevolently at his antics, wrap him in its warm protections.

Too much has been invested in you, the world whispers to Brett Kavanaugh; I will keep you safe.

Here is an exchange, from Kavanaugh’s testimony, between the Supreme Court nominee and Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, in which the senator tested the theory that Kavanaugh in fact did what Christine Blasey Ford accused him of, but, being drunk as he did it, simply did not remember: 

Klobuchar: “You’re saying there’s never been a case where you drank so much that you didn’t remember what happened the night before or part of what happened?”
Kavanaugh: “If you’re asking about blackout, I don’t know—have you?”
Klobuchar: “Could you answer the question, judge? ... So, that’s not what happened, is that your answer?”
Kavanaugh: “Yeah, and I’m curious if you have.”
Klobuchar: “I have no drinking problem, judge.”
Kavanaugh: “Nor do I.”

Would You Like To Know More?


Saturday, 29th September 2018

Read the sworn declaration by Kavanaugh accuser Julie Swetnick

Kavanaugh accuser Julie Swetnick alleges he 'spiked' punch at parties so intoxicated women could be raped
by Sarah Fitzpatrick, Rich Schapiro and Adiel Kaplan

Would You Like To Know More?
« Last Edit: September 29, 2018, 07:13:34 am by Battle »

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #32 on: October 14, 2018, 03:28:54 pm »
Sunday, 14th October 2018

Female inmates claim Arizona prison withholding basic hygienic products
by John Bowden

Female inmates at an Arizona prison say that the state's Department of Corrections is withholding sufficient basic hygienic supplies, including toilet paper.

Local news radio station KJZZ reported this week that two inmates at the Arizona State Prison Complex in Perryville wrote to the religious group, American Friends Service Committee, alleging that they were forced to find substitutes for toilet paper for days after prison officials said the facility ran out.

The prison later ran out of feminine pads, according to the prisoners' letters.

"I ran out on Saturday 9/30, and although I continually asked for [toilet paper] was told they were out," one woman wrote, according to KJZZ.

"They did have pads that I used as [toilet paper] until Monday 10/1 when they ran out. I then had to use a wash rag until Wed morn."

"[M]any of the officers are indifferent to the fact that we don't have any," wrote another woman.

The station wrote that it had confirmed the identities of the prisoners who wrote the letters, but was not naming the women who said they feared retribution.

A spokesman for the group, which advocates on behalf of prisoners and prison reform, attacked the Arizona Department of Corrections for treating inmates "like animals."

"How do we expect folks to rehabilitate themselves, if we can't even treat them like human beings?"
Joe Watson, the group's spokesman, told WJZZ. "If you treat folks like animals, withholding their basic necessities how do we expect them to come out of prison and feel like they are a part of their community?" he continued.

A spokesman for the Arizona Department of Corrections called the inmates' accusations "patently untrue," while admitting that a shortage of toilet paper existed at the Perryville location.

"All inmates ... have continuous access to toilet paper, at no cost to them," Andrew Wilder told WJZZ.

"The unfortunate reality is that some inmates misuse the toilet paper or misrepresent themselves when asking for more," he added.

"And that can disrupt a unit's ability to maintain a reasonable and reliable supply for all of the inmates."

Elizabeth Berry, a spokesperson for Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey told the station that the state's Department of Corrections "is continuously working to improve their operational protocols to align with a recently revised policy improving access to hygiene products.

We will continue to monitor this issue."

Would You Like To Know More?

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #33 on: December 18, 2018, 05:10:26 am »
Tuesday, 18th December 2018
Idris Elba Says #MeToo Movement Is ‘Only Difficult if You're a Man with Something to Hide'

by Alexia Fernandez

Idris Elba is receiving praise for his support of the #MeToo movement.

In an interview with The Times newspaper in the UK, the 46-year-old actor was asked how hard it was for him as an actor in Hollywood during the #MeToo era.

Elba replied, “It’s only difficult if you’re a man with something to hide.”

Ava DuVernay, 46, quoted his statement in a tweet, writing, “Preach, brother. Preach.“

Shonda Rhimes and Barack Obama‘s former senior advisor, Valerie Jarrett, also praised the star on the Twitter.

“See?” Rhimes, 48, tweeted, while Jarrett, 62, wrote, “Listen up, fellas, ‘It’s only difficult if you are a man with something to hide.” – @idriselba about #MeToo.'”

Elba, who was crowned PEOPLE’s Sexiest Man Alive in November, has been vocal about his support for the movement and women in film.

While promoting his film Molly’s Game in 2017, Elba said the #MeToo movement was “quite poignant.”

“Of course, this is a film that was made a year ago, and probably prepped two or three years ago, but to come out when its coming out now is actually quite amazing when we’re seeing women stand up and have a liberation movement of speaking up against some of their atrocities that [have] happened,” he told Den of Geek.

Would You Like To Know More?‘only-difficult-if-youre-a-man-with-something-to-hide/ar-BBR685m?ocid=spartanntp

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #34 on: December 20, 2018, 07:08:52 am »
Thursday, 20th December 2018

Today's ruling: According to the Associated Press, Judge denies weinstein's motion to dismiss sex crimes, which allows the Harvey Weinstein sex assault case to move forward.

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #35 on: January 08, 2019, 03:39:01 pm »
Tuesday, 7th December 2019
Court date set in Harvey Weinstein criminal sexual assault case
by Shayna Jacobs

A trial date has been set in Harvey Weinstein’s criminal sex assault case for early May, according to a recent court filing.

But the prospective May 6 date has been used as a basis for Weinstein’s lawyers to ask for a delay in a separate case — a class action suit for a pattern of alleged sexual harassment and assault in Manhattan Federal Court brought by numerous women against the disgraced Hollywood mogul.
“An initial stay of seven months would be appropriate in light of the May trial date,” Weinstein civil lawyer Elior Shiloh wrote in the Monday filing.

The stay “would allow Mr. Weinstein to have a full and fair opportunity to defend himself against the criminal charges,” the attorney added.

The date has never been announced openly in Manhattan Supreme Court, where Weinstein’s charges have been pending since last May. Trial dates in state criminal court are routinely postponed.

It is unclear how firm the May 6 date is considered by the judge and the parties.
The date is “unofficial and tentative,” a court spokesman told the Daily News.

Weinstein stands charged with sexually assaulting a production assistant in 2006 and with raping another woman at a Doubletree Hotel in 2013.

He denies any non-consensual activity.

He faces a minimum of 10 years behind bars on the top count of predatory sexual assault, which relates to a pattern of abusive conduct.

Would You Like To Know More?

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #36 on: February 18, 2019, 12:42:50 pm »
Monday, 18th February 2019
Game of Thrones’s Lena Headey Says Her Career Was Hurt After Rejecting Harvey Weinstein
by Lisa Ryan

In the fall of 2017, Game of Thrones star Lena Headey was among dozens of women to accuse former Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein of sexual harassment and assault.

Now, in a new interview with the Sunday Times, Headey is speaking out about how rejecting Weinstein may have ended up harming her career for a decade.
Monday, 18th February 2019

Lena Headey Says Her Career Was Hurt After Rejecting Harvey Weinstein
by Lisa Ryan

Headey, who plays Cersei Lannister on the HBO program, publicly shared her Weinstein story in a series of tweets in October of 2017. She wrote that she first met Weinstein at the Venice Film Festival, where he made sexually inappropriate comments.
Years later, she says he manhandled her during a meeting in L.A. after she turned down his advances.
“I got in my car and I cried,” she tweeted.

Speaking with the Times, Headey says that she has realized that rejecting Weinstein had a negative impact on her career.

“After he was discovered to be a slimeball, on a grander scale than me just knowing it, I did start thinking, ‘F---, maybe because I didn’t sh-g him, that’s impacted a decade of my working life,’” she told the Times.

“Because I did two jobs for Miramax before those incidents, and after that there was nothing.”

Heady is among many women who have come forward to accuse Weinstein of harassing or assaulting them when he was a power player in Hollywood.

The allegations led to a major reckoning in Hollywood and other industries, as a number of powerful men have since been accused of sexual misconduct.
Weinstein currently faces five counts for allegedly nonconsensual encounters with two women, and has a Manhattan court date set for May.

Would You Like To Know More?

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #37 on: April 26, 2019, 03:58:38 pm »
Friday, 26th April 2019
Harvey Weinstein’s Rape Trial Postponed to September
by Gene Maddaus

Harvey Weinstein’s rape trial has been postponed to September 9  2019, a judge ruled on Friday.

The disgraced producer had been set to go on trial on June 3 2019, but Justice James Burke agreed to give the defense additional time to prepare.

Weinstein is accused of five counts of rape and sexual assault, involving two victims, and could face life in prison if convicted.

Earlier Friday, Burke ordered the courtroom closed for an argument on a prosecution motion to allow additional women to testify in the case.

Robert Balin, an attorney representing more than a dozen media outlets, protested that the hearing should be open to the public, and vowed to appeal Burke’s ruling.

The media was allowed back into the courtroom on Friday afternoon for a discussion of scheduling matters.

The prosecution expects its portion of the case to take about three weeks, while defense attorney Jose Baez estimated he would need one week to put on a defense.

Jury selection is expected to take about two weeks.

Weinstein was originally supposed to go on trial in May, but he fired his lead attorney, Ben Brafman, in January, causing a delay.

Weinstein is accused of sexually assaulting Mimi Haleyi, a former production assistant, at his home in 2006.

He is also accused of raping an unidentified woman at a hotel room in Manhattan in 2013.

Prosecutors want to call additional women with similar allegations to help establish a pattern of misconduct.

The number and identities of those women has been kept secret.

The defense has argued that calling such witnesses would prejudice the case, and asked the court to close Friday’s hearing on the subject to avoid tainting the jury pool. The prosecution also asked that the hearing be closed, in part to protect the witnesses’ identities.

Burke’s decision, if he made one, was not disclosed.

The two sides also discussed discovery issues on Friday, as the defense sought access to a witness’s cell phone records.

Would You Like To Know More?

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #38 on: April 29, 2019, 06:17:18 pm »
Saturday, 6th April 2019
Judge Who Asked Woman in Sexual Assault Case if She Closed Her Legs Faces Suspension
by Mihir Zaveri

A New Jersey judge who asked a woman if she had closed her legs to try to prevent an alleged sexual assault should be suspended without pay for three months, a state committee has recommended.

The recommendation in March was based on the committee’s finding that John F. Russo Jr., a superior court judge in Ocean County, violated the code of judicial conduct on four occasions, including during the exchange with the woman, who was not identified.

This week, the New Jersey Supreme Court ordered that a hearing be held in July about the recommendation from the state’s Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct.

A lawyer for Judge Russo declined to comment on Friday night.

“Judge Russo looks forward to a public hearing in which he will be able to respond to the allegations against him,” the lawyer, David F. Corrigan, told NBC4 in March of last year, after a complaint was filed.

“We have respect for the process as well as the advisory committee on judicial conduct, and therefore won’t comment further.”

A 45-page report from the committee detailed four counts of alleged misconduct.

The first focused on an exchange between Judge Russo and the woman who said she had been sexually assaulted, at a hearing in May 2016.

The woman was seeking a restraining order against her alleged assailant, a man who she said had also threatened her life and made inappropriate comments to their child.

“Do you know how to stop somebody from having intercourse with you?” Judge Russo asked the woman.

“Yes,” she replied.

“How would you do that?” the judge asked.

The woman said she would try to physically harm the attacker and say “no,” to which Judge Russo asked, “What else?”

The woman said she would ask the person to stop, to which Judge Russo again asked, “What else?”

She then said she would run away.

“Run away, get away,” he said. “Anything else?”

“Block your body parts?” Judge Russo added. “Close your legs? Call the police? Did you do any of those things?”

The woman said she did not call the police until later.

Judge Russo continued to question her about whether she had asked the man to stop, whether she tried to leave and how he had prevented her from leaving, as she had alleged he had done.

The judicial conduct committee said Judge Russo’s “questioning of the plaintiff in this manner, to include hypotheticals, was wholly unwarranted, discourteous and inappropriate” and could “re-victimize the plaintiff.”

In its second count of alleged misconduct, the committee said Judge Russo had abused his office by asking a family division manager to help change the scheduling of a guardianship hearing for the judge’s son, who has disabilities.

The committee’s third count said Judge Russo should have recused himself from a hearing involving a man he knew from high school, whose pizza parlor the judge admitted to frequenting.

The fourth count involved a nine-minute phone conversation about paternity testing that Judge Russo had with a woman when the father, who was the plaintiff in the case, was not present.

The committee’s recommendation said Judge Russo had admitted wrongdoing in the last two counts but denied it in the first two.

The panel also recommended that Judge Russo receive additional training on “appropriate courtroom demeanor,” according to the Supreme Court.

Would You Like To Know More?

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #39 on: June 26, 2019, 12:37:29 pm »
Wednesday, 26th June 2019
U.S. Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Sex Offender
by Melissa Quinn

Justice Neil Gorsuch voted with the liberal wing of the Supreme Court on Wednesday in favor of a sex offender sentenced to additional prison time after violating the terms of his supervised release.

The divided court found unconstitutional a federal law that requires a judge to impose a five-year mandatory minimum on a registered sex offender found to have violated release conditions.

The ruling reaffirmed the right to a trial by jury.

Gorsuch was joined in his opinion by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan in ruling the application of the law violated defendant Andre Haymond’s right to a trial by jury, while Justice Stephen Breyer concurred in judgment.

“Only a jury, acting on proof beyond a reasonable doubt, may take a person’s liberty.

That promise stands as one of the Constitution’s most vital protections against arbitrary government,” Gorsuch wrote in his opinion.

“Yet in this case a congressional statute compelled a federal judge to send a man to prison for a minimum of five years without empaneling a jury of his peers or requiring the government to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”

“As applied here,” Gorsuch said,

“we do not hesitate to hold that the statute violates the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.”

Haymond in 2010 was found guilty by a jury of possessing child pornography.

He was sentenced to 38 months in prison and 10 years of supervised release.

But during his supervised release, Haymond was found again with what appeared to be child pornography, and the government accused him of violating the terms of his release.

He subsequently appeared before a district court judge but no jury, and the judge found him guilty by a preponderance of evidence.

Because Haymond committed a crime covered under a federal law that requires a judge to impose a five-year mandatory minimum, he was sentenced to an additional five years in prison.

The judge, however, said it was “repugnant” that the statute imposed a “mandatory five-year sentence in such a case where the defendant does not have the opportunity to ask for a jury or to be tried under what should be the legal standard that is beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Haymond challenged the constitutionality of his new sentence, and the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found the law violated the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.

In his opinion, Gorsuch noted that the Supreme Court has “long recognized that penalties for supervised release violations arise from and are treated as part of the sentence for the original criminal offense.”

“Consider the alternative,” he said.

“If the government were correct, you could be convicted of even a modest crime and put on supervised release for the rest of your life. Then a judge, acting without a jury and under a preponderance of the evidence standard, could convict you of a violation and sentence you to just about anything. That cannot be right.”

But Justice Samuel Alito, who was joined in his dissent by the three other conservative justices, warned that under the court’s ruling, it would be impossible for the federal courts to impanel enough juries to adjudicate alleged violations of supervised release.

“In short, under the plurality opinion, the whole system of supervised release would be like a 40-ton truck speeding down a steep mountain road with no brakes,” Alito said.

The ruling from the high court Wednesday marked the second time this week Gorsuch joined his liberal colleagues in a case involving crime.

In a 5-4 ruling Monday, he split from his conservative colleagues in striking down a federal law authorizing heightened penalties for a person who uses, carries, or possesses a firearm in certain crimes of violence.

Would You Like To Know More?

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #40 on: July 08, 2019, 05:49:55 pm »
Monday, 8th July 2019
puppetine’s Kentucky Campaign Chair Pleads Guilty to Child Sex Trafficking
by Jake Shepherd

One of acting-president’s loudest supporters will likely spend the rest of his life in jail after the conclusion of his child sex trafficking case.

71-year-old Timothy Nolan — a former Campbell County District Judge who was chair of the puppetine campaign in Kentucky according to court documents —  entered guilty pleas on all 21 counts against him in court on Friday.

A press release issued by the office of Kentucky Attorney General Andy Beshear listed a multitude of charges, including human trafficking of adults, human trafficking of minors, and unlawful transaction with minors.

Nolan will serve 20 years in jail and pay restitution of $110,000, with a bulk of the fine going toward the Human Trafficking Victims Fund, which the Kentucky General Assembly established in 2013.

Nolan will be eligible for parole in 2022, according to the Cincinnati Enquirer.

If he had not entered guilty pleas, Nolan would have faced up to 100 years in prison.

The New York Daily News reported that Nolan had a total of 19 victims dating back to 2004.

While the victims’ information has not been publicly released, some of them included children below the age of 18.

Judge Kathleen Lape said Nolan threatened arrest and eviction to force women and girls to have sex with him.

Nolan also apparently paid the women and juveniles with heroin and painkillers, and gave alcohol to a minor on more than one occasion.

In a statement following the pleas, Nolan’s attorney, Margo Grubbs, argued that what Nolan did would have been seen as legally acceptable under the laws of a different day and age.

“[Nolan] took full personal responsibility for these acts that in his potential day and generation would not necessarily be considered to rise to the level of human trafficking,” Grubbs said.

Some of Nolan’s pleas were Alford v. North Carolina pleas, meaning that the plea was given to avoid trial due to overwhelming evidence, but that Nolan still maintains his innocence.

Would You Like To Know More?

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #41 on: August 22, 2019, 10:16:39 pm »
Thursday 22nd August 2019
Harvey Weinstein Faces New Indictment for Alleged Sexual Assault
by Ryan Parker

The disgraced movie mogul will be arraigned Monday, according to the Manhattan District Attorney's office.

Weinstein is expected to attend the hearing.

The victim in the case is reportedly  Sopranos actress Annabella Sciorra, who said she was attacked by Weinstein in her Gramercy Park apartment in 1993, The New York Times reported.

The allegation was too old to be prosecuted under state law, but the district attorney is now using the Sciorra's report to further Weinstein's previous indictment on sex crimes, The Times reported.

Once among the most powerful men in Hollywood, Weinstein has become a total pariah after the numerous allegations of sex crimes against him in part started the #MeToo movement.

Weinstein has maintained his innocence and pleaded not guilty to all charges.

His trial begins Sept. 9 2019.

Would You Like To Know More?

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #42 on: September 27, 2019, 10:56:07 am »
Thursday, 27th September 2019
Equal Justice Under Law?
Prove it.
Investigate Kavanaugh.
by Kamala Harris

Our society is littered with glaring examples of the rich and powerful facing minimal consequences for their actions – often until their secrets are unearthed and public outcry ensues.

In some cases, the rich and powerful not only escape accountability altogether, but are handed even more power despite what they have done.

It should come as no surprise then that many Americans have lost faith in our democracy and in our system of justice.

No person, no matter how rich or powerful, should be above the law or escape accountability.

But, that is not the example we see.

This contrast in attaining power at the cost of truth and accountability is nowhere more stark than at the heart of our justice system itself:

the Supreme Court of the United States.

Inside the legendary marble building permanently etched with the words “Equal Justice Under Law,” two sitting Associate Justices—a full one-third of the men on the Court—were confirmed despite serious, credible allegations of sexual misconduct or assault.

And, in both cases, brave women came forward to testify before the U.S. Senate, only to have their accounts dismissed by the World’s Greatest Deliberative Body.

After allegations of sexual assault surfaced during Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings, I saw up close that the hearings and FBI investigation were not a serious pursuit of truth or justice.

What we saw instead was a process that failed to properly acknowledge and believe the survivors of sexual assault and misconduct.

That process ultimately failed people across the country, especially women.

If we want to live in a country where women are believed and given access to the justice they deserve, we must roll up our sleeves and get to work holding our leaders accountable—especially those who serve on the highest court in our land.

We need to get to the truth about Kavanaugh.

And I believe the best path to truth and accountability is through a formal impeachment process.

That’s why I called on the House Judiciary Committee to open an impeachment inquiry and take a serious look at whether Kavanaugh lied under oath during his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

As a co-equal branch of government, the United States Congress has a responsibility to do its part to protect the public trust, safeguard the legitimacy of our institutions, and follow the facts wherever they may lead.

While the House Judiciary Committee is rightfully busy with its oversight of the president and his administration, we shouldn’t let a crowded schedule stand in the way of justice.

There is precedent for the committee to dedicate resources and establish structures to help lead impeachment inquiries, such as creating a task force or retaining outside counsel.

We have a responsibility not just as public servants, but as mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers, and fellow humans to hold people accountable for wrongdoing.

Failure to do so sends a message to little girls and boys – and women and men – about the value of truth and honesty, and about their right to safety and autonomy.

If we stand idly by, we are telling them that our country values the easy way out over doing the right thing.

There are some who will say that articles of impeachment against Kavanaugh will go nowhere in the United States Senate, which is controlled by Republicans who have repeatedly coddled the misbehavior of the president and his allies.

And, yes, that may be the end result for political purposes.

But, restoring faith in our justice system requires meaningful accountability and transparency.

This should have been given to the American people before Kavanaugh was confirmed to a lifetime seat on our highest court.

It didn’t, and it was a national travesty.

But, it is within the power of the United States Congress to do it now.

We still have a chance to get it right.

We have a chance to send a message that we should not just believe survivors, but also offer help through their trauma and treat them with respect.

I often say it is up to each of us to speak truth.

That truth requires that we never give up on the fight for justice and our effort to hold government accountable to the people.

Let’s fight for our ideals and values.

Let’s fight for women and accountability.

Let’s do better this time.

Kamala Harris is a United States Senator from California and a 2020 presidential candidate.

Would You Like To Know More?

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #43 on: December 26, 2019, 05:14:02 am »
Thursday, 26th Decmber 2019
Los Angeles DA considers charging Harvey Weinstein as investigation expands

by Stacy Perman and Richard Winton

(LOS ANGELES, California) — More than two years after the Los Angeles and Beverly Hills police departments launched sexual assault investigations into Harvey Weinstein, the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office has escalated its review into the disgraced filmmaker and is considering filing criminal charges again him, law enforcement sources said.

In all, eight cases are under review by the DA’s office, a spokesperson for the department said.

Four of the cases are from the Los Angeles Police Department and four are from the Beverly Hills Police Department, sources said.

The DA’s office could act in the new year, before Manhattan prosecutors complete their criminal trial of the once high-flying movie producer, set to begin in January, said people familiar with the investigation who were not authorized to comment.

Sources have confirmed to the Los Angeles Times that the DA’s sex crimes division has intensified contact with at least two alleged victims and have also broadened their review to include several other women across the country that have accused Weinstein of sexual misconduct.

This stepped-up investigation could open up a second plank of prosecution for the embattled mogul, who faces four criminal sex crimes charges involving three women in New York.

A spokesperson for Weinstein declined to comment.

The former film producer has pleaded not guilty to the charges. He has denied all allegations of non-consensual sex.

A spokesman for the Los Angeles district attorney’s office declined to comment.

Two of the key cases prosecutors are weighing involved separate alleged sexual assaults that occurred at a pair of local hotels during the same week in February 2013.

In October 2017, Los Angeles police Capt. Billy Hayes confirmed that the department had opened an investigation into Weinstein after an Italian model-actress filed a police report, claiming that Weinstein raped her at the Mr. C Beverly Hills hotel in 2013.

This was the first case related to Weinstein to be reported in Southern California.

The actress said she met and briefly spoke with the producer during the Los Angeles Italia Film, Fashion and Art Fest that year, after which he “bullied” his way into her hotel room.

The actress described the alleged incident in an earlier interview with The Times.

“Once inside, he asked me questions about myself, but soon became very aggressive and demanding and kept asking to see me naked.”

Crying, she said that she begged him to go away; showing him pictures of her children.

“He grabbed me by the hair and forced me to do something I did not want to do,” she said, saying that Weinstein forced her to perform oral sex on him.

“He then dragged me to the bathroom and forcibly raped me.”

According to law enforcement sources, the actress did not report the alleged incident.

However, she did tell three individuals what happened to her, including her priest.

Investigators traveled to Italy, where she lived at the time of the alleged assault, and independently verified their accounts of the alleged assault.

Since the allegation first surfaced, Weinstein’s attorneys have vigorously denied that he was at Mr. C Beverly Hills that night.

He has also denied ever being alone with the accuser.

“My client is fully cooperating with law enforcement and the DA’s office,” said David Ring, the attorney for the Italian actress.

“She will appear and tell the jury how Weinstein raped her in a Beverly Hills hotel room in 2013. … It will be difficult and stressful for her, but she knows it must occur in order to convict Weinstein, who continues to buy time with delaying tactics.”

A second woman who alleges that Weinstein assaulted her on February 19th, 2013 — several hours before the Italian actress alleged she was raped, also in Beverly Hills — may testify in the New York trial as a witness to his prior behavior.

According to a source familiar with the investigation, this second victim, who is described in court documents in New York, contacted the NYPD about a separate incident of sexual assault involving Weinstein and a Beverly Hills hotel.

The NYPD referred the case to Beverly Hills police for investigation, according to the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity in order to discuss the matter candidly.

Beverly Hills police have declined to make public any details of their investigations into Weinstein.

The district attorney’s sex crimes unit has ramped up its inquiry into allegations of sexual assault allegations in other jurisdictions against Weinstein in recent months, sources told The Times.

Aaron Filler, the attorney representing actress Paz de la Huerta in a civil suit against Weinstein for sexual battery, said that he received a telephone call from Deputy District Attorney Paul Thompson, head of the sex crimes unit, about a month ago, requesting an interview with his client.

De la Huerta alleges that Weinstein raped her twice in December 2010, in her New York City apartment.

According to Filler, Thompson told him that L.A. was starting its own prosecution of Harvey Weinstein.

“My impression was that they are commencing a wide ranging criminal investigation and at this point are reaching out to every victim they can identify and try and do telephone interviews around the country,” Thompson said.

“They have more leeway to reach out to more victims in more jurisdictions and bring them into a courtroom than in New York.”

Unlike New York, California law allows for “Me Too” evidence of sexual harassment and discrimination described by other employees to be presented at trial.

In other words, prosecutors here could have multiple alleged victims who are not plaintiffs testify against Weinstein.

In addition to the New York criminal case, there is a class-action suit and at least 18 women with individual suits against Weinstein, alleging sexual misconduct, assault or harassment.

According to Filler, De la Huerta, who lives in New York, had a brief telephone conversation with Thompson but prefers to meet with him in person.

To date, they have not yet scheduled a meeting.

An attorney representing an accuser in her suit against Weinstein, alleging that the producer raped her, said that he also received a request from Thompson to talk with his client within the last month.

Although his client declined to speak with Thompson, saying the civil suit has “put her through the ringer,” the attorney characterized his conversation with the assistant district attorney saying,

“It sounded like they are moving forward.”

In the two years since The New York Times and The New Yorker first detailed decades of sexual misconduct allegations against Weinstein, criminal investigations have opened in Los Angeles, London and New York.

However, only the New York District Attorney’s office has pursued criminal charges against the fallen movie mogul.

Two years ago, L.A. Country District Attorney Jackie Lacey formed a special taskforce dedicated to investigating allegations of sexual assault roiling Hollywood; assigning a group of veteran sex crimes prosecutors to “ensure a uniformed approach to the legal review and possible prosecution of any case that meets both the legal and factual standards for criminal prosecution.”

However, to date, the task force has yet to charge any of the more than two dozen men subject to probes by law enforcement.

Many of those allegations were too old to prosecute and in other cases there was insufficient evidence; they include allegations involving the actors Steven Seagal and Kevin Spacey.

Lacey, who is running for a third term as district attorney, faces a slew of challengers and renewed pressure for declining to prosecute several high profile sex abuse cases.

Meanwhile, Weinstein’s legal woes continue to mount.

Last week a former teen model Kaja Sokola filed a lawsuit against the producer under the Child Victims Act, alleging the former filmmaker sexually assaulted her at his New York City apartment in 2002 when she was 16.

Sokola was initially part of a federal class-action suit filed in December 2017 against the filmmaker.

Weinstein and his former film studio’s board have reached a controversial $47 million settlement with several women who have accused him of sexual misconduct, according to attorneys involved in the negotiations.

About $25 million will be allocated to the accusers, $7.3 million to unsecured creditors and former Weinstein Co. employees, and about $12.2 million will be earmarked to pay legal fees of the studio’s directors and officers, according to a copy of the settlement term sheet obtained by The Times.

The Weinstein Co. filed for bankruptcy protection in March 2018.

Weinstein, the producer behind such Oscar-winning hits as “Shakespeare in Love,” “Chicago” and “The King’s Speech,” was fired from his company in October 2017 after dozens of women accused him of sexual misconduct.

Last week, Weinstein was widely criticized for calling himself “the forgotten man” in an interview with the New York Post and citing how many women he helped during his career.

The comments triggered a swift backlash, including a formal statement signed by 23 of his accusers.

Would You Like To Know More?

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9854
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Purple Purse
« Reply #44 on: February 24, 2020, 10:53:27 am »
Monday, 24th February 2o2o
by Associated Press

(NEW YORK CITY) — Harvey Weinstein was convicted Monday at his sexual assault trial, sealing his dizzying fall from powerful Hollywood studio boss to archvillain of the #MeToo movement.

He was found guilty of criminal sex act for assaulting production assistant Mimi Haleyi at his apartment in 2006 and third-degree rape of a woman in 2013.

The jury found him not guilty on the most serious charge, predatory sexual assault, that could have resulted in a life sentence.

The verdict followed weeks of often harrowing and excruciatingly graphic testimony from a string of accusers who told of rapes, forced oral sex, groping, masturbation, lewd propositions and that’s-Hollywood excuses from Weinstein about how the casting couch works.

The conviction was seen as a long-overdue reckoning for Weinstein after years of whispers about his behavior turned into a torrent of accusations in 2017 that destroyed his career and gave rise to #MeToo, the global movement to encourage women to come forward and hold powerful men accountable for their sexual misconduct.

The jury of seven men and five women took five days to find him guilty.

The case against the once-feared producer was essentially built on three allegations: that he raped an aspiring actress in a New York City hotel room in 2013, that he forcibly performed oral sex on Haleyi and that he raped and forcibly performed oral sex on “Sopranos” actress Annabella Sciorra in her apartment in the mid-1990s.

Three additional women who said they, too, were attacked by Weinstein also testified as part of an effort by prosecutors to show a pattern of brutish behavior on his part.

The Associated Press does not typically identify people who say they are victims of sex crimes unless they grant permission, as Haleyi and Sciorra did.

Jurors signaled their struggles with the Sciorra charges four days into deliberations.

On Friday, after reviewing sections of her testimony and related evidence, they sent a note to the judge indicating they were deadlocked on the counts but had reached a unanimous verdict on the others.

After some debate in the courtroom, the judge ordered jurors to keep deliberating.

While Weinstein did not testify, his lawyers contended that any sexual contact was consensual and that his accusers went to bed with him to advance their careers.

The defense seized on the fact that two of the women central to the case stayed in contact with Weinstein through warm and even flirty emails — and had sex with him — well after he supposedly attacked them.

The hard-charging and phenomenally successful movie executive helped bring to the screen such Oscar winners as “Good Will Hunting,” “Pulp Fiction,” “The King’s Speech” and “Shakespeare in Love” and nurtured the careers of celebrated filmmakers like Quentin Tarantino and Kevin Smith.

Weinstein now faces charges in Los Angeles.

In that case, announced just as the New York trial was getting under way on January 6th, authorities allege Weinstein raped one woman and sexually assaulted another on back-to-back nights during Oscars week in 2013.

One of those women testified as a supporting witness at the New York trial.

The trial was the first criminal case to arise from a barrage of allegations against Weinstein from more than 90 women, including actresses Gwyneth Paltrow, Salma Hayek and Uma Thurman.

Most of those cases were too old to prosecute.

During the trial, Weinstein regularly trudged into the courthouse stooped and unshaven, using a walker after recently undergoing back surgery — a far cry from the way he was depicted in court as a burly, intimidating figure whose eyes seemed to turn black with menace when his anger flared.

Many of Weinstein’s accusers described him as a “Jekyll and Hyde” character who could be incredibly charming at first, making jokes and showing interest in using his immense power to help their careers.

But that was an act, they said, meant to gain their trust and get them to a place — often a hotel room or an apartment — where he could violate them.

“If he heard the word ‘no,’ it was like a trigger for him,” his rape accuser testified.

Several women testified that Weinstein excused his behavior as the price for getting ahead in Hollywood.

One said that when she laughed off his advances, he sneered, “You’ll never make it in this business. This is how this industry works.”

The jury heard lurid testimony that Weinstein injected himself with a needle to get an erection, that his genitals appeared disfigured, that he sent Sciorra a box of chocolate penises and that he once showed up uninvited at her hotel room door in his underwear with a bottle of baby oil in one hand and a video in the other.

The prosecution’s task was made more complicated because two of the women at the very center of the case didn’t just abandon Weinstein after the alleged encounters:

Haleyi testified that she had sex with him two weeks later, while the rape accuser whose name was withheld said she had a sexual encounter with him more than three years afterward.

Like Haleyi, she sent Weinstein friendly and sometimes flirtatious emails, such as “Miss you big guy” and “I love you, always do. But I hate feeling like a booty call.”

During a cross-examination from Weinstein’s lawyers so exhaustive that she broke down in tears on the stand, the woman said she sent him flattering emails and kept seeing him because she was afraid of his unpredictable anger and “I wanted him to believe I wasn’t a threat.”

To blunt that line of questioning, prosecutors called to the witness stand a forensic psychiatrist who said that most sexual assault victims continue to have contact with their attackers and that they hope what happened to them “is just an aberration.”

During closing arguments, Weinstein lawyer Donna Rotunno charged that Weinstein had become “the target of a cause and a movement” — #MeToo — and asked the jury to ignore “outside forces.”

“This is not a popularity contest,” she said.

She said the case against Weinstein amounted to “regret renamed as rape,” arguing that the women exercised their free will to try to further their careers.

Prosecutor Joan Illuzzi-Orbon told the jury that Weinstein considered himself such a big shot in Hollywood that he thought he could get away with treating women as “complete disposables.”

“The universe is run by me and they don’t get to complain when they get stepped on, spit on, demoralized and, yes, raped and abused by me — the king,” she said, mimicking Weinstein.

Rumors about Weinstein’s behavior swirled in Hollywood circles for a long time, but he managed to silence many accusers with payoffs, nondisclosure agreements and the constant fear that he could crush their careers if they spoke out.

Weinstein was finally arrested and led away in handcuffs in May 2018, seven months after The New York Times and The New Yorker exposed his alleged misconduct in stories that would win the Pulitzer Prize.

Among other men taken down by the #MeToo movement since the scandal broke: news anchors Matt Lauer and Charlie Rose, actor Kevin Spacey and Senator Al Franken.

Weinstein, the product of a working-class family from Queens, achieved success at two movie studios he created with his brother Bob: Miramax — named for their parents, Miriam and Max — and then the Weinstein Co.

The Weinstein Co. went bankrupt after his disgrace. A tentative settlement was reached last year to resolve nearly all lawsuits stemming from the scandal.

It would pay Weinstein’s alleged victims about $25 million. Under the proposed deal, Weinstein would not have to admit any wrongdoing or personally pay anything; the studio’s insurance companies would cover the cost.

Weinstein’s efforts to silence his accusers and thwart journalists who sought to expose his secrets included hiring Black Cube, an Israeli spy agency staffed by former Mossad agents.

Asked one day as he left court why he hired that firm, Weinstein turned to a reporter and said:

“For days like this.”