The Jim Bakker Show

Black Lives Matter leaders sued over Baton Rouge police shooting

An East Baton Rouge Sheriff vehicle is seen with bullet holes in its windows near the scene where police officers were shot, in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, U.S. July 17, 2016. REUTERS/Jonathan Bachman

(Reuters) – A police officer wounded in a shooting rampage in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, last year that left three officers dead sued Black Lives Matter movement leaders on Friday, accusing them of inciting violence that spurred the attack.

The lawsuit filed in a U.S. district court in Louisiana named DeRay McKesson and four other Black Lives Matter leaders as defendants and sought at least $75,000 in damages.

It came on the one-year anniversary of one of the deadliest days in modern U.S. history for law enforcement. On July 7, 2016, a black man angered by what he saw as deadly racial bias in U.S. policing launched a downtown Dallas sniper attack, killing five officers deployed at a protest decrying police shootings of black men.

McKesson was not immediately available for comment and Black Lives Matter leaders have denied accusations that their movement promotes violence against police.

About 10 days after the Dallas shooting, a decorated ex-U.S. Marine sergeant opened fire on police in Baton Rouge, killing three officers.

Baton Rouge had been hit by waves of protests after two police officers earlier that month killed a black man, Alton Sterling, under questionable circumstances. The incident was caught on video and sparked national debate.

The officer wounded in Baton Rouge, who was not named in the lawsuit, was shot by “a person violently protesting against police, and which violence was caused or contributed to by the leaders of and by ‘BLACK LIVES MATTER’,” the filing said.

Gavin Long, the black gunman who killed the Baton Rouge officers and was later shot dead, identified himself as a member of an African-American offshoot of the anti-government, mostly white Sovereign Citizen Movement, documents showed.

Last year, McKesson and two other activists sued the Baton Rouge police department and other officials over the arrests of nearly 200 demonstrators during mostly peaceful protests over police killings.

(Reporting by Jon Herskovitz in Austin, Texas and Bryn Stole in Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Editing by Andrew Hay)

Florida ‘Stand Your Ground’ law revisions unconstitutional, judge rules

By Letitia Stein

TAMPA, Fla. (Reuters) – A Florida state court judge ruled on Monday that recent changes to the state’s “stand your ground” law are unconstitutional, finding that legislators overstepped when making it easier for defendants to argue self-defense to obtain immunity for violent acts.

Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Milton Hirsch said courts, not lawmakers, should set the process by which defendants can claim they were protecting themselves with an act of violence, according to the ruling posted online by the Miami Herald.

The revision shifted the burden of proof during pretrial hearings to prosecutors, rather than defendants, to show whether force was used lawfully. Supporters saw the changes backed by the National Rifle Association, the powerful U.S. gun lobby, as bolstering civilians’ rights to protect themselves.

Advocates predicted the ruling would be reversed on appeal.

“It is the role of the legislature to write the laws that govern how Floridians may exercise their statutory and constitutional rights,” Richard Corcoran, the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, said in a statement. “The Florida House will continue to stand with ordinary citizens who exercise their right to self-defense.”

Florida’s “stand your ground” law, passed in 2005, received wide scrutiny and inspired similar laws in other states. It removed the legal responsibility to retreat from a dangerous situation and allowed the use of deadly force when a person felt greatly threatened.

This spring’s changes were adopted over outcry that gun owners could be emboldened to shoot first.

Critics cited the 2012 death of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin in the Orlando area, which spurred national protests and the Black Lives Matter movement. The neighborhood watchman who killed him, George Zimmerman, was acquitted of murder after the law was included in jury instructions.

Monday’s ruling in Miami circuit court is not binding on other state trial courts, the Miami Herald reported.

(Reporting by Letitia Stein; Editing by David Gregorio)

Facebook beats privacy lawsuit in U.S. over user tracking

By Jonathan Stempel

(Reuters) – A U.S. judge has dismissed nationwide litigation accusing Facebook Inc of tracking users’ internet activity even after they logged out of the social media website.

In a decision late on Friday, U.S. District Judge Edward Davila in San Jose, California said the plaintiffs failed to show they had a reasonable expectation of privacy, or that they suffered any “realistic” economic harm or loss.

The plaintiffs claimed that Facebook violated federal and California privacy and wiretapping laws by storing cookies on their browsers that tracked when they visited outside websites containing Facebook “like” buttons.

But the judge said the plaintiffs could have taken steps to keep their browsing histories private, and failed to show that Menlo Park, California-based Facebook illegally “intercepted” or eavesdropped on their communications.

“The fact that a user’s web browser automatically sends the same information to both parties,” meaning Facebook and an outside website, “does not establish that one party intercepted the user’s communication with the other,” Davila wrote.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs did not immediately respond on Monday to requests for comment. Facebook did not immediately respond to a similar request.

Davila said the plaintiffs cannot bring their privacy and wiretapping claims again, but can try to pursue a breach of contract claim again. He had dismissed an earlier version of the 5-1/2-year-old case in October 2015.

The case is In re: Facebook Internet Tracking Litigation, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 12-md-02314.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Bill Rigby)

Sarah Palin sues New York Times for defamation

FILE PHOTO - Sarah Palin speaks at the Western Conservative Summit in Denver, Colorado, U.S., July 1, 2016. REUTERS/Rick Wilking

By Riham Alkousaa

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin has sued the New York Times for defamation because of an editorial that linked her rhetoric to a 2011 shooting that killed six people and seriously wounded a U.S. congresswoman.

The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on Tuesday said the Times deliberately “acted with actual malice” toward Palin and that the editorial was “false and defamatory.” It claims the Times violated its policies and procedures.

Palin, the former Alaska governor was Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s running mate in an unsuccessful 2008 campaign, is seeking in excess of $75,000 for compensatory, special and punitive damages.

On June 14 the Times published an editorial commenting on the mass shooting at a Virginia baseball field that injured four people, including Republican Representative Steve Scalise, saying the attack was probably evidence of how vicious American politics has become.

The editorial board then recalled a shooting in Arizona in 2011 that targeted U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords and killed six people.

“Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs,” the editorial said.

The newspaper issued a correction saying the editorial “incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric” and the Giffords shooting. It also corrected its description of the map, saying it depicted electoral districts, not Giffords and individual Democratic lawmakers, beneath cross hairs.

The lawsuit called the corrections insufficient and said Palin wanted the Times to remove the article from the newspaper’s website, where it still appears with the amended correction.

“We will defend against any claim vigorously,” the Times said in a statement on Wednesday.

Theodore Boutrous, a Los Angeles lawyer and constitutional law expert, said Palin was unlikely to succeed because she is a public figure.

“The First Amendment protects newspapers and others in terms of speaking out and writing and expressing opinions on important and public issues and that’s what The New York Times was doing,” Boutrous said.

(Reporting By Riham Alkousaa; Editing by Daniel Trotta and Bill Trott)

Suspect in Michigan airport stabbing to make court appearance

By Steve Friess

FLINT, Mich. (Reuters) – A man charged with stabbing an airport police officer in an attack federal investigators are probing as an act of terrorism is expected to appear in a Michigan federal court on Wednesday.

Amor Ftouhi, 49, of Quebec, Canada, was charged in federal court with violence at an international airport for stabbing officer Jeff Neville at the Bishop International Airport in Flint on June 21. Neville underwent surgery and has left the hospital, local media reported.

Ftouhi, originally from Tunisia and who holds dual Tunisian-Canadian citizenship, is expected to appear before U.S. Magistrate Judge Stephanie Dawkins Davis at the federal courthouse in Flint on Wednesday morning.

Ftouhi legally entered the United States from Lake Champlain, New York, on June 16 before making his way to Flint, the Federal Bureau of Investigation said. Officials said Ftouhi targeted a city with an international airport, but declined to say why Flint was chosen.

Ftouhi, who was not on the radar of U.S. or Canadian authorities before the attack, was in Michigan as early as June 18, the FBI said. U.S. and Canadian investigators are probing his travel before the attack.

According to the criminal complaint, Ftouhi yelled in Arabic “Allahu akbar” (God is greatest) before stabbing Neville.

He also said something to the effect of “You have killed people in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, and we are all going to die,” the complaint said.

Ftouhi attempted to buy a gun before the attack, but was unable to do so, the FBI said.

FBI officials declined to provide details on where Ftouhi attempted to buy the gun or what type of gun he tried to purchase. The 12-inch, serrated knife Ftouhi used in the attack was bought in the United States.

(Additional reporting and writing by Timothy Mclaughlin in Chicago; Editing by Andrew Hay)

Anthem to pay record $115 million to settle U.S. lawsuits over data breach

The office building of health insurer Anthem is seen in Los Angeles, California February 5, 2015. REUTERS/Gus Ruelas

By Brendan Pierson

(Reuters) – Anthem Inc <ANTM.N>, the largest U.S. health insurance company, has agreed to settle litigation over hacking in 2015 that compromised about 79 million people’s personal information for $115 million, which lawyers said would be the largest settlement ever for a data breach.

The deal, announced Friday by lawyers for people whose information was compromised, must still be approved by U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California, who is presiding over the case.

The money will be used to pay for two years of credit monitoring for people affected by the hack, the lawyers said. Victims are believed to include current and former customers of Anthem and of other insurers affiliated with Anthem through the national Blue Cross Blue Shield Association.

People who are already enrolled in credit monitoring may choose to receive cash instead, which may be up to $50 per person, according to a motion filed in California federal court Friday.

“We are very satisfied that the settlement is a great result for those affected and look forward to working through the settlement approval process,” Andrew Friedman, a lawyer for the victims, said in a statement.

The credit monitoring in the settlement is in addition to the two years of credit monitoring Anthem offered victims when it announced the breach in February 2015, according to Anthem spokeswoman Jill Becher, who said the company was pleased to be resolving the litigation.

The Indianapolis-based company did not admit wrongdoing, and there was no evidence any compromised information was sold or used to commit fraud, Becher said.

Anthem said in February 2015 that an unknown hacker had accessed a database containing personal information, including names, birthdays, social security numbers, addresses, email addresses and employment and income information. The attack did not compromise credit card information or medical information, the company said.

More than 100 lawsuits filed against Anthem over the breach were consolidated before Judge Koh.

The breach is one of a series of high-profile data breaches that resulted in losses of hundreds of millions of dollars to U.S. companies in recent years, including Target Corp <TGT.N>, which agreed to pay $18.5 million to settle claims by 47 states in May, and Home Depot Inc <HD.N>, which agreed to pay at least $19.5 million to consumers last year.

(Reporting by Brendan Pierson in New York; Editing by Lisa Shumaker)

Judge in Michigan blocks deportation of 100 Iraqis

Protesters rally outside the federal court just before a hearing to consider a class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of Iraqi nationals facing deportation, in Detroit, Michigan, U.S., June 21, 2017. REUTERS/Rebecca Cook

By Dan Levine

(Reuters) – A U.S. judge on Thursday temporarily blocked the deportation of about 100 Iraqi nationals rounded up in Michigan in recent weeks who argued that they could face persecution or torture in Iraq because they are religious minorities.

U.S. District Judge Mark Goldsmith in Michigan issued an order staying the deportation of the Iraqis for at least two weeks as he decides whether he has jurisdiction over the matter. Goldsmith said it was unclear whether the Iraqis would ultimately succeed.

The arrests shocked the close-knit Iraqi community in Michigan. Six Michigan lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives urged the government to hold off on the removals until Congress can be given assurances about the deportees’ safety.

The Michigan arrests were part of a coordinated sweep in recent weeks by immigration authorities who detained about 199 Iraqi immigrants around the country. They had final deportation orders and convictions for serious crimes.

The roundup followed Iraq’s agreement to accept deportees as part of a deal that removed the country from President Donald Trump’s revised temporary travel ban.

Some of those affected came to the United States as children and committed their crimes decades ago, but they had been allowed to stay because Iraq previously declined to issue travel documents for them. That changed after the two governments came to the agreement in March.

A U.S. Department of Justice spokeswoman could not immediately be reached for comment on the ruling.

Lee Gelernt, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union representing the Iraqis in Michigan, said: “The court’s action today was legally correct and may very well have saved numerous people from abuse and possible death.”

The U.S. government has argued that the district court does not have jurisdiction over the case. Only immigration courts can decide deportation issues, which can then only be reviewed by an appeals court, it said.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has said that people with convictions for murder, rape, assault, kidnapping, burglary and drugs and weapons charges were among the Iraqis arrested nationwide.

The ACLU argued that many of those affected in Michigan are Chaldean Catholics who are “widely recognized as targets of brutal persecution in Iraq.”

Some Kurdish Iraqis were also picked up in Nashville, Tennessee. In a letter on Thursday, Tennessee Representative Jim Cooper, a Democrat, asked the Iraqi ambassador whether Iraq would be able to ensure safe passage for them if they were returned.

(Reporting by Dan Levine in San Francisco and Eric Walsh in Washington; Editing by David Alexander and Cynthia Osterman)

Three arrested at Trump inauguration sue DC over ‘police abuse’

File Photo - Protesters demonstrating against U.S. President Donald Trump take cover as they are hit by pepper spray by police on the sidelines of the inauguration in Washington, DC, U.S. on January 20, 2017. REUTERS/Adrees Latif/File Photo

(Reuters) – The American Civil Liberties Union sued police in the nation’s capital on Wednesday on behalf of three people detained during the U.S. presidential inauguration, claiming they were subjected to unconstitutional arrests, excessive force and police abuse.

More than 200 people were arrested in Washington in January after some black-clad activists among those protesting Donald Trump’s swearing-in clashed with police a few blocks from the White House, in an outburst of violence rare for an inauguration.

The lawsuit against the Metropolitan Police Department, the District of Columbia and individual officers claims the plaintiffs broke no laws at the protests and endured abuses including being pepper-sprayed and denied food and water for hours.

The plaintiffs include two individuals who came to the District of Columbia to express their views concerning the inauguration and a photojournalist who covered the demonstrations.

“The MPD’s extreme tactics against members of the public, including journalists, demonstrators, and observers, were unjustifiable and unconstitutional,” Scott Michelman, senior staff attorney for the ACLU-DC, said in a statement.

Since Trump’s election win, a number of demonstrations in U.S. cities have highlighted strong discontent over his comments and policy positions toward a wide range of groups, including Mexican immigrants, Muslims, the disabled and environmentalists.

Washington’s police department said in a statement “all instances of use of force by officers and allegations of misconduct at the inauguration will be fully investigated,” and that it will support the legal process.

It added officers worked diligently to protect the rights of thousands who came to the inauguration to peacefully express their views.

“Unfortunately, there was another group of individuals who chose to engage in criminal acts, destroying property and hurling projectiles, injuring at least six officers. These individuals were ultimately arrested for their criminal actions,” it said.

The lawsuit says photojournalist Shay Horse was pepper-sprayed while taking photographs and subjected to unjustified, invasive body probes.

It also said demonstrator Elizabeth Lagesse was peacefully protesting when she was arrested and handcuffed so tightly that her wrists bled.

(This story corrects number of people suing Washington D.C. in headline and paragraphs 1 and 4.)

(Reporting by Jon Herskovitz in Austin, Texas; Editing by Colleen Jenkins and Matthew Lewis)

Anti-abortion activists lose bid to dismiss California privacy case

FILE PHOTO: Anti-abortion activist David Daleiden, waits outside Superior Court in San Francisco, California, U.S., May 3, 2017. REUTERS/Lisa Fernandez/File Photo

By Lisa Fernandez

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – Two anti-abortion activists charged with felony eavesdropping for secretly filming abortion providers in California lost their bid for dismissal of the case on Wednesday, but the judge ordered prosecutors to amend a criminal complaint he deemed too vague.

San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Christopher Hite gave the state attorney general’s office until mid-July to file a revised complaint that describes the accusations in greater detail, including specific dates, alleged victims and circumstances.

Hite ruled the identities of alleged victims would remain under court seal and admonished lawyers to keep that information confidential, after the defense team for one defendant, David Daleiden, was found to have posted videos and other identifying material online.

The judge declined to take disciplinary action against Daleiden’s lawyers, as urged by prosecutors, and also denied the defense’s request to toss out the case.

Daleiden, 28, and Sandra Merritt, 64, appeared in court on Wednesday, but they are not expected to enter a plea until the arraignment on July 17, the deadline set for the amended complaint.

Each is charged with conspiracy and 14 counts of invasion of privacy for creating false identities as representatives of a fetal-tissue procurement company to infiltrate a 2014 National Abortion Federation meeting, then videotaping conference participants and others without their consent.

Daleiden and Merritt have cast themselves as targets of a politically motivated prosecution for their roles in “sting” operations that exposed Planned Parenthood and related groups to unwelcome scrutiny by conservatives in Congress during the run-up to the 2016 elections.

Defense lawyers say Daleiden and Merritt acted as “citizen journalists” employing well-worn undercover tactics of the news media.

Prosecutors counter that Daleiden and Merritt engaged in computer hacking and criminal fraud to create false IDs and a sham corporate entity to gain access to private meetings – behavior that bona fide journalists would avoid as unethical.

Daleiden became an anti-abortion movement hero in 2015 after his group, the Center for Medical Progress, circulated videos purporting to show Planned Parenthood officials trying to profit from the sale of aborted fetal tissue in violation of federal law.

The organization said Daleiden’s heavily edited videos distorted its lawful and ethical practice of seeking reimbursement only to cover costs associated with such donations.

Daleiden and Merritt were indicted in January 2016 for using illegal government IDs to covertly film a Planned Parenthood facility in Texas, but that case was dropped.

FILE PHOTO: Anti-abortion activist, Sandra Merritt, waits outside Superior Court in San Francisco, California, U.S., May 3, 2017. REUTERS/Lisa Fernandez/File Photo

(Writing by Steve Gorman; Editing by Bill Trott and Leslie Adler)

Jury quirk in U.S. meningitis outbreak case could bring stiffer sentence

FILE PHOTO: Barry Cadden, the former president of New England Compounding Center, exits the federal courthouse in Boston, Massachusetts, U.S., March 22, 2017. REUTERS/Nate Raymond/File Photo

By Nate Raymond

BOSTON (Reuters) – Prosecutors on Monday said a quirk in the trial verdict of a Massachusetts pharmacist cleared of murder for selling fungus-ridden steroids that killed 64 people in 2012 meant that a judge could still consider the murder allegations at his sentencing.

A federal jury in March found Barry Cadden, the co-founder and ex-president of New England Compounding Center, guilty on racketeering and fraud counts but cleared him of the most serious charges, second-degree murder, for his role in a meningitis outbreak that sickened 753 people in 20 states, killing 64.

But when the 12 jurors filled out their verdict slip, rather than just checking findings of “guilty” or “not guilty,” they filled in numbers that prosecutors now say reflected vote counts showing a majority found Cadden guilty on 21 of 25 murder counts.

The U.S. Attorney’s office in Massachusetts argued in a motion filed on Monday that the verdict form showed jurors believed Cadden was guilty of murder and want the judge to consider that fact in determining his sentence on June 26.

Former prosecutors said they had never seen a verdict slip quite like it.

“While they failed to reach unanimity on these racketeering acts, the jury’s verdict confirmed that the murder racketeering acts were proven by a preponderance of the evidence in this case, and can be properly considered at sentencing,” prosecutors wrote in the filing.

Their argument might work since judges at sentencing can consider conduct proven by a standard lower than what jurors are instructed to follow to convict someone, said David Schumacher, former deputy chief of the health care fraud unit of the U.S. Attorney’s office.

“They have a very good argument,” he said. “They actually have documentary evidence prosecutors never have in criminal cases.”

A conviction on any of the 25 acts of second-degree murder Cadden faced under a racketeering law could have exposed him to life in prison. He could still face decades behind bars.

A lawyer for Cadden did not respond to a request for comment. In court papers, his lawyers have disputed that the jury did not clearly acquit him and said prosecution claims to the contrary were “wishful thinking.”

Cadden, 50, was one of only two out of 14 people indicted in 2014 connected to the scandal at the Framingham, Massachusetts-based New England Compounding Center to face murder charges. The other murder defendant, former supervisory pharmacist Glenn Chin, is scheduled go on trial on Sept. 19. He has pleaded not guilty.

Prosecutors said that in 2012, the compounding pharmacy sent out 17,600 vials of steroids labeled sterile that were contaminated with mold to 23 states and that Cadden ignored the rules and put profits before patients. Cadden denied wrongdoing.

(Adds missing word “care” to 7th paragraph.)

(Reporting by Nate Raymond; editing by Scott Malone and Tom Brown)

Sign up for Jim Bakker Show