NewzIntel.com

Category: Department of Justice

  • MIL-OSI Security: Bill Allen and Richard Smith, Former Officers of VECO Corporation, Sentenced for Roles in Alaska Public Corruption Scheme

    Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division

    WASHINGTON – Bill J. Allen and Richard L. Smith were each sentenced in separate hearings today for their participation in a corruption scheme in which they provided approximately $395,000 in corrupt payments to public officials from the state of Alaska, announced Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Criminal Division. Allen and Smith were sentenced in U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska by U.S. District Court Judge John W. Sedwick.

    Allen, 72 , the former chief executive officer of VECO Corporation, was sentenced to 36 months in prison, a $750,000 fine and three years of supervised release. Smith, 64 , the former vice president of community and government affairs for VECO Corporation, was sentenced to 21 months in prison, a $10,000 fine and three years of supervised release.

    Both defendants pleaded guilty on May 7, 2007, to three-count informations charging each with bribery; conspiracy to commit bribery, extortion under color of official right, and honest services mail and wire fraud; and conspiracy to defraud the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) of the U.S. Department of the Treasury. According to court documents, Allen and Smith conspired with at least five members of the Alaska legislature to provide illegal financial benefits to several Alaska elected officials in exchange for those officials’ support on legislation pending before the Alaska state legislature. Allen and Smith also pleaded guilty to one substantive count of bribery, and admitted that they provided approximately $395,000 in benefits to public officials from the state of Alaska in connection with the scheme.

    The Allen sentencing was handled by Deputy Chief James M. Trusty of the Criminal Division’s Gang Unit, Trial Attorney Kevin R. Gingras of the Criminal Division’s Appellate Section and Trial Attorney Peter M. Koski of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section. The Smith sentencing was handled by Trial Attorney M. Kendall Day and Deputy Chief Raymond Hulser of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section. The case is being investigated by the FBI and IRS Criminal Investigation.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Justice Department Settles Lawsuit Against Nevada Company to Enforce the Employment Rights of Air Force Reservist

    Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division

    WASHINGTON – The Justice Department announced today that it has reached a settlement that will resolve its suit filed on behalf of former Utah Army National Guardsman and current Air Force Reservist Matthew T. Denning against Stonescape Pavers LLC. The settlement must be approved by the federal court in Las Vegas. The Department’s complaint, filed in June 2009, alleges that Stonescape violated the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) by terminating Denning during his statutorily protected reemployment time period. Under the terms of the settlement, embodied in an agreement that has been submitted to the court, Stonescape must provide Denning with $10,000 to compensate him for his lost wages and benefits as a result of Stonescape’s actions.

    In its complaint, the Justice Department alleged that Denning was a salesman for Stonescape when he was called to active duty to deploy to Iraq with the Utah Army National Guard in January 2006. After he was honorably discharged in June 2006, he was reemployed by Stonescape. According to the complaint, Stonescape terminated Denning without cause in August 2006 during his statutorily-protected reemployment time period. The lawsuit was filed after the Labor Department’s Veterans’ Employment and Training Service completed an investigation of Denning’s complaint. Congress enacted USERRA in 1994 to protect service members from being disadvantaged in their civilian careers due to serving in the uniformed services. Among other things, USERRA prohibits employers from terminating a service member except for cause for 180 days after the employee’s date of reemployment if his or her recent period of uniformed service was more than 30 days but less than 181 days.

    “We all have a duty to ensure the brave men and women who serve our country in uniform can land on their feet after they return from active duty. This settlement demonstrates our vigilant protection of the employment rights of our servicemembers, and our commitment to vigorous enforcement of the laws that protect them,” said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.

    The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division has given a high priority to the enforcement of servicemembers’ rights under USERRA. During 2009, the Civil Rights Division has filed 20 USERRA lawsuits on behalf of service members. Additional information about USERRA can be found on the Justice Department’s Web sites at http://www.justice.gov/crt/emp and http://www.servicemembers.gov/, as well as on the Labor Department’s Web site at http://www.dol.gov/vets/programs/userra/main.htm

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Security News: President Obama Signs the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016

    Source: United States Department of Justice 2

    Today, as we approach the 50th anniversary of the Freedom of Information Act, President Obama has signed into law the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016.

    In our democracy, the FOIA serves as a vital tool to keep citizens informed about the operations of their government. Since its enactment in 1966, the FOIA has been amended on a number of occasions to adapt to the times and changing priorities.  The FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 contains several substantive and procedural amendments to the FOIA, as well as new reporting requirements for agencies.  

    In order to assist agencies in understanding all of the new changes to the FOIA, OIP has added two new resources to its website today. First, agencies and the public can find a detailed summary of all of the changes to the law on the “FOIA Resources” pages of our site. Additionally, OIP is making available a redline version of the FOIA which outlines each of the changes within the law. 

    In the upcoming months, OIP will be issuing guidance to agencies on the implementation of the various new provisions of the law.  Announcements will be made on FOIA Post as new guidance is released. Agencies are encouraged to contact OIP’s FOIA Counselor Service with any questions they may have on implementation of these new statutory provisions.  

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Former West Point Employee Pleads Guilty in $3 Million Embezzlement Scheme

    Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division

    A Highland Falls, N.Y., woman pleaded guilty today for her role in a scheme to defraud and embezzle funds from the U.S. government by authorizing nearly $3 million in payments from the U.S. Military Academy in West Point, N.Y., to a bogus corporation she controlled.

    Bobbie Cyana Ryan, 51, pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly to a three-count information charging her with devising a scheme to defraud, and transmitting funds in interstate commerce for the purpose of executing the scheme; embezzlement and conversion by Ryan of government funds; and executing a financial transaction with criminally derived funds.

    According to court documents filed in U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, Ryan worked in the Information, Education and Technology division in the Office of the Dean at West Point. Ryan was responsible for coordinating information technology training programs for West Point staff. According to court documents, based on irregularities found during a routine audit, U.S. Army investigators discovered that Ryan, acting as the requesting and approving official, used her government purchase card and cards of her unknowing subordinates to authorize approximately $2.9 million in payments to CWG Enterprises. The payments were purportedly for either on-site training instructors or training reference materials when, in fact, no personnel were ever trained and no materials were ever provided.

    U.S. Army investigators subsequently discovered that Ryan conducted financial transactions and identified herself as doing business as CWG Enterprises. Ryan used a rented mail box as the company address for CWG Enterprises. Based on false invoices created by Ryan, transfers of government funds were allegedly made from a bank in Washington to a bank account in the name of “Bobbie C. Ryan dba CWG Enterprises” at a bank in New Windsor, N.Y. Once the funds arrived in the purported CWG Enterprises bank account, Ryan withdrew the funds and paid personal and family expenses.

    At sentencing, scheduled for Feb. 19, 2010, Ryan faces a maximum sentence of 40 years in prison a fine of up to twice the pecuniary gain from the scheme.

    The case is being investigated by the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command, Hartford Fraud Resident Agency. The case is being prosecuted by Senior Trial Attorney Andrew Levchuk of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section. 

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Security News: Agency Training on FOIA Improvement Act of 2016

    Source: United States Department of Justice 2

    Update: This post has been updated to reflect that this event is at capacity.

    OIP will be hosting a training session on the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 on August 8, 2016.  The training will provide agency personnel with an overview of the recent amendments to the FOIA and an opportunity to ask questions to OIP’s Director about the new provisions.  As OIP continues to work on guidance to agencies on the implementation of the specific requirements of the new law, we hope you can join us for this training to address any immediate questions or concerns. The details for this training are:

    FOIA Amendments Training
    Robert F. Kennedy Building – Great Hall
    10th and Constitution Ave NW
    August 8, 2016 – 10am to 12pm     

    This training event is open to agency FOIA professionals and interested agency personnel.

    If you are interested in attending, please e-mail your name and phone number to OIP’s Training Officer at DOJ.OIP.FOIA@usdoj.gov with the subject line “FOIA Amendments Training.” As space for this meeting is limited, registration is required to attend.  You will need a picture ID to enter the building.  If you have any questions regarding this event, please contact OIP’s Training Officer at (202) 514-3642.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Security News: OIP Releases Guidance on the New Requirements for FOIA Response Letters

    Source: United States Department of Justice 2

    On June 30, 2016, President Obama signed into law the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, which contains several substantive and procedural amendments to the FOIA. OIP has prepared a summary of the amendments as well as a redlined version of the statute which shows the changes made by the amendments. Today, OIP has released its first guidance piece addressing the new amendments. The guidance addresses the new requirements for agency response letters and for notices extending the FOIA’s time limits due to “unusual circumstances.” The guidance addresses the:

    • Requirement to notify requesters about the availability of the agency’s FOIA Public Liaison to offer assistance,
    • Requirements to notify requesters of their right to seek dispute resolution services from the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) at NARA, and
    • To afford the requester no less than 90 days from the date of the adverse determination on the request to file an administrative appeal.

    Agencies should update their response letters and notices extending the FOIA’s time limits due to unusual circumstances to include the new requirements from the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016. OIP has prepared an implementation checklist, with sample language, to assist agencies in doing so.

    Guidance on the New Requirements for FOIA Response Letters, Including Affording Ninety Days to File an Administrative Appeal, and New Notification Requirement for Notices Extending FOIA’s Time Limits Due to Unusual Circumstances

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Security News: Inaugural Chief FOIA Officers Council Meeting

    Source: United States Department of Justice 2

    The inaugural meeting of the newly established Chief FOIA Officers Council will be held on July 22, 2016. President Obama recently signed into law the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, which, among other things, established a Chief FOIA Officer Council. The Chief FOIA Officer Council is co-chaired by the Directors of OIP and OGIS and is made up of each agency Chief FOIA Officer and the Deputy Director of Management of OMB. In accordance with the new law, the Council is tasked with developing recommendations for improving FOIA, sharing best practices, and developing and coordinating initiatives.

    The meeting will be held at 2:00pm on July 22, 2016 in Room 430 of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building; 1650 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20502. 

    You can view a livestream of this meeting at www.wh.gov/live beginning at 2pm. You can also follow the meeting through OIP’s Twitter account @FOIAPost and through the hashtag #CFOCouncil.

    A limited number of seats are available for members of the public to attend in person. For security purposes registration is required. Please email DOJ.OIP.FOIA@usdoj.gov with the subject line “CFO Council Meeting – Public” by COB on July 18, 2016 to request a seat. On July 19, we will respond to your email to confirm your attendance and provide a link for you to formally register by July 21 at 12pm.  

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Security News: CFO Council Holds First Meeting at the White House

    Source: United States Department of Justice 2

    On July 22, 2016, the Chief FOIA Officers (CFO) Council, created by the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, held its inaugural meeting at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. The CFO Council is composed of all agency CFOs, plus the Deputy Director for Management from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and is co-chaired by the Directors of OIP and the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS).  Chief FOIA Officers and representatives from over 64 agencies attended, along with several members of the public. The meeting was available via livestream, and the full video recording is available here.      

    OIP Director Melanie Ann Pustay, opened the meeting by providing an overview of the responsibilities of agency CFOs. Next, Andrew Mayock, a Senior Advisor at OMB, emphasized the Administration’s commitment to transparency and open government. Mr. Mayock described the recently-announced Cross-Agency Priority (CAP) Goal for FOIA that will be co-led by OMB, DOJ, and NARA to focus senior leadership attention and drive performance and accountability for improving FOIA administration, and to ensure that Federal departments and agencies are providing sufficient resources toward FOIA responsibilities. He explained that the CAP goal will be publicly posted on Performance.gov, and will have a detailed action plan, including specific metrics and milestones that will be used to gauge progress. Mr. Mayock explained that the initial focus of the CAP goal will be on implementing the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016.  

    Acting Director of OGIS Nikki Gramian also gave opening remarks. She discussed the responsibilities of OGIS and summarized the first meeting of the second term of the FOIA Advisory Committee, which is composed of representatives from both agencies and the requester community. Ms. Gramian indicated that she anticipates the work of the CFO Council and the FOIA Advisory Committee will be complementary, and that she looks forward to keeping the CFO Council informed about the Advisory Committee’s activities. 

    Director Pustay then introduced the Council’s first item for consideration – implementing a “release to one is release to all” presumption for FOIA responses. Director Pustay briefed the Council on OIP’s six-month pilot program conducted with seven volunteer Federal agencies that was designed to assess the viability of a policy that would direct agencies to proactively post online their FOIA responses. The President has directed the CFO Council to consider the lessons learned from the DOJ pilot program and to work to develop a Federal Government policy establishing a “release to one is a release to all” presumptive standard for Federal agencies when releasing records under FOIA. After briefing the Council on the pilot and OIP’s findings, Director Pustay answered questions from the members on a wide range of issues connected with implementation of the policy.  

    In the coming months, the CFO Council will examine issues critical to this policy’s implementation, including assessing the impact on investigative journalism efforts, as well as how best to address technological and resource challenges. At its next meeting, the Council will invite journalists and members of the public to provide feedback about the “release to all” policy, specifically addressing the concerns raised by some journalists about its possible impact on their work.  Details about the next meeting will be available here on FOIA Post.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Security News: FOIA Summer Program Continues with FOIA Public Liaison and FOIA Requester Service Center Training

    Source: United States Department of Justice 2

    Both President Obama and the Department of Justice have stressed the importance of agencies working “in a spirit of cooperation” with FOIA requesters. Since their introduction, agency FOIA Requester Service Centers and FOIA Public Liaisons serve as the voice of the agency and provide two channels for the public to use to interact with agencies during the FOIA request process. On August 15th, OIP, in conjunction with the Office of Government Information Services, will be hosting a specialized training event to assist agency personnel in carrying out their responsibilities in these important roles.

    FOIA Requester Service Centers typically serve as the first contact at agencies for members of the public when they have questions or are seeking information about how the FOIA works or  the status of their requests. The individuals who make up these FOIA Requester Service Centers need to be prepared to discuss their agency’s FOIA process and to provide specific details about any given request. In addition, agencies offer the assistance of FOIA Public Liaisons who are tasked by the statute to be supervisory agency officials with the responsibility for “assisting in reducing delays, increasing transparency and understanding of the status of requests, and assisting in the resolution of disputes.”

    The FOIA Improvement Act of 2016 reinforced the important role played by FOIA Public Liaisons who, in conjunction with agency FOIA Requester Service Centers, provide an all-important human touch to FOIA administration. By engaging with requesters during the FOIA process and providing contacts to help answer questions or resolve issues that may arise, FOIA Requester Service Centers and FOIA Public Liaisons serve important roles in promoting understanding throughout the lifecycle of a FOIA request. 

    We hope that you are able to join us for this training, the details of which are:

    FOIA Public Liaison and FOIA Requester Service Center Training
    Department of Justice Conference Center
    145 N Street, NE
    August 15, 2016 – 10am to 12pm

    This training is open to all FOIA Public Liaisons and FOIA Requester Service Center personnel. Registration is required to attend this training and you will need a picture ID to enter the building.

    If you are interested in attending, please e-mail your name and phone number to OIP’s Training Officer at DOJ.OIP.FOIA@usdoj.gov with the subject line “FOIA Public Liaison & FOIA Requester Service Center Training.” If you have any questions regarding this event, please contact OIP’s Training Officer at (202) 514-3642.

    For those individuals outside of the Washington, DC area who are unable to attend this training, we are planning a teleconference to review the presentation material in the coming weeks. If you are interested in being a part of this teleconference, please send an email to DOJ.OIP.FOIA@usdoj.gov with the subject line “FOIA Public Liaison& FOIA Requester Service Center Training – Teleconference.” 

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Security News: Launch of New Chief FOIA Officer Council Page

    Source: United States Department of Justice 2

    OIP is pleased to announce the launch of a new page on its website dedicated to the work of the Chief FOIA Officer (CFO) Council. Recently established by the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, the CFO Council is composed of all agency CFOs, plus the Deputy Director for Management from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and is co-chaired by the Directors of OIP and the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS). In fulfilling its responsibilities, the Council will meet regularly to develop recommendations for increasing FOIA compliance and efficiency, disseminating information about agency experiences and best practices, and working on initiatives that will increase transparency. Agencies and the public can access resources related to the work of the Council, including agendas and meeting minutes from past meetings as well as details on future meetings, on this dedicated page.    

    As highlighted on FOIA Post, last month the CFO Council held its inaugural meeting on July 22, 2016 in an event held at the White House. A recording of that event, as well as the meeting minutes and presentation materials, is available on this new page. During this meeting, OIP Director Melanie Pustay introduced the first item for the Council’s consideration — implementing a “release to one, release to all” presumption for FOIA responses. To assist in the implementation of this new presumption, OIP asked agency CFOs to answer specific questions about how such a policy might work at their agency. The memorandum and questionnaire from OIP’s Director to all agency CFOs seeking this feedback is also available on this new page. If you would like to submit your own feedback on the “release to one, release to all” presumption, please email ReleaseToAll@usdoj.gov with your thoughts.

    Please be sure to continue checking FOIA Post and the new CFO Council Page for further updates on the Council’s work and details about upcoming meetings.  

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Security News: Second Meeting of the Chief FOIA Officers Council

    Source: United States Department of Justice 2

    UPDATE: This post has been updated with details regarding the livestream of this event.

    The next meeting of the Chief FOIA Officers Council will be held on Thursday, September 15, 2016.  At this meeting, OIP will brief the Council on the feedback received from agencies on the “Release to One is a Release to All” presumption and will provide journalists an opportunity to share their views on the presumption.  The meeting will be held at:

    Second Chief FOIA Officers Council Meeting
    GSA Central Office – Auditorium
    1800 F Street, NW
    Washington, DC 20405 
    September 15, 2016 – 10am to 12pm

    This meeting will be open to the public, and time will be provided for members of the public to address the Council.  If you would like to address the Council at the meeting, either as a journalist or a member of the public, please request this in your registration email.  Written comments pertaining to the “Release to All” presumption policy may be submitted to ReleaseToAll@usdoj.gov. While the “release to one is a release to all” presumption is the first topic being considered by the Council, the Director of OIP will also provide an update on the consolidated FOIA portal in anticipation of further engagement with the Council on that topic.

    For security purposes registration for this meeting is required.  Please email DOJ.OIP.FOIA@usdoj.gov with the subject line “CFO Council Meeting – Public” by 5:00 PM on September 7, 2016. This meeting will also be livestreamed at https://meet.gsa.gov/foiacfomeetingsept2016/. To view this livestream, please visit the URL and select “Enter as a Guest;” you will be prompted to provide your name and then select “Enter Room.”

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Attorney General Merrick B. Garland Announces Appointment of a Special Counsel

    Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division

    Attorney General Merrick B. Garland announced the appointment of a former career Justice Department prosecutor and former U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland Robert K. Hur to serve as special counsel to conduct the investigation of matters that were the subject of the initial investigation by U.S. Attorney John R. Lausch Jr. related to the possible unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or other records discovered at the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement and the Wilmington, Delaware, private residence of President Joseph R. Biden Jr.

    Related:

    Appointment of a Special Counsel

    Statement of Special Counsel Robert K. Hur

    Attorney General Merrick B. Garland Delivers Remarks on the Appointment of a Special Counsel

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Eye Surgery Practices Agree to Pay $1 Million and End Discriminatory Policies Towards People with Disabilities

    Source: United States Department of Justice

    The Justice Department announced today that it has filed a proposed consent decree with Barnet Dulaney Perkins Eye Centers (BDP) and American Vision Partners (AVP), to resolve its lawsuit alleging that the eye care practices violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. The lawsuit alleged that BDP and AVP refused to operate on certain patients who needed assistance transferring from their wheelchairs for surgery and required other such patients to pay for third-party medical transport and transfer assistance. Medical providers routinely offer this type of assistance to patients who need help transferring from a wheelchair to an examination or surgical table for surgery and exams.

    “The Americans with Disabilities Act requires health care providers to offer equal access to their services,” said Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “Patients with disabilities must not be denied crucial medical services or forced to pay surcharges because they need transfer assistance. The Justice Department is fully committed to protecting the civil rights of individuals with disabilities to get the medical care they need.” 

    “This agreement reflects an important step in obtaining equal access to health care services for Arizonans with disabilities,” said U.S. Attorney Gary Restaino for the District of Arizona. “The U.S. Attorney’s Office will continue to work closely with the Civil Rights Division to ensure that all Arizonans are afforded equal opportunity to access health care services in our state.”

    Under the decree, BDP and AVP will end their policies of denying surgery and prohibiting staff from providing transfer assistance to people with mobility disabilities. BDP operates eye care facilities throughout Arizona, and AVP, one of the largest eye care practice management organizations in the country, partners with eye care providers in Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada and Texas, including BDP, Southwestern Eye Center, M & M Eye Institute, Retinol Consultants of Arizona, Abrams Eye Institute, Southwest Eye Institute, Aiello Eye Institute, Havasu Eye Center, Visage Aesthetics and Plastic Surgery and Moretsky Cassidy Vision Correction. These eye care providers will also train staff on the new policy requirements and on safe transfer techniques, and pay $950,000 to patients and prospective patients who were harmed by its policies and a civil penalty of $50,000.

    For more information on the Civil Rights Division, please visit http://www.justice.gov/crt. For more information on the ADA, please call the department’s toll-free ADA information line at 800-514-0301 (TDD 800-514-0383) or visit www.ada.gov. ADA complaints may be filed online at http://www.ada.gov/complaint.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Community Violence Intervention & Prevention Initiative Grantee Convening: Welcoming Remarks

    Source: United States Department of Justice

    Attorney General Merrick B. Garland provided welcoming remarks during the Community Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative Grantee Convening in St. Louis, Missouri.

    The conference marks the inaugural convening of communities funded under the department’s Community Based Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative, a first-of-its-kind federal grant program tailored to support community-driven safety solutions and reduce gun violence.

    The Justice Department invested $100 million to support community violence interventions that are working to expand the role of community partners as a complement to law enforcement. The grants, funded in part by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, include support for 47 sites nationwide to implement community-driven efforts that rely on cross-sector partnerships and trusted messengers to interrupt violence, expand opportunity, and save lives. The conference will host approximately 400 invited attendees, including representatives from grantee sites and training and technical assistance provider organizations.

    Related:

    Attorney General Merrick B. Garland Delivers Remarks at the Community Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative Grantee Convening

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Security News: Community Violence Intervention & Prevention Initiative Grantee Convening: Welcoming Remarks

    Source: United States Department of Justice 2

    Attorney General Merrick B. Garland provided welcoming remarks during the Community Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative Grantee Convening in St. Louis, Missouri.

    The conference marks the inaugural convening of communities funded under the department’s Community Based Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative, a first-of-its-kind federal grant program tailored to support community-driven safety solutions and reduce gun violence.

    The Justice Department invested $100 million to support community violence interventions that are working to expand the role of community partners as a complement to law enforcement. The grants, funded in part by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, include support for 47 sites nationwide to implement community-driven efforts that rely on cross-sector partnerships and trusted messengers to interrupt violence, expand opportunity, and save lives. The conference will host approximately 400 invited attendees, including representatives from grantee sites and training and technical assistance provider organizations.

    Related:

    Attorney General Merrick B. Garland Delivers Remarks at the Community Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative Grantee Convening

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Speech by SJ at forum titled Hong Kong: The Common Law Gateway for Vietnamese Businesses to China and Beyond in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (English only)

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

         Following are the opening remarks by the Secretary for Justice, Mr Paul Lam, SC, at the forum titled Hong Kong: The Common Law Gateway for Vietnamese Businesses to China and Beyond in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, today (September 24):Vice President Vo (Vice President of the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry Mr Vo Tan Thanh), distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,     Good afternoon, xin chào buổi trưa. Firstly, a very warm welcome, a very big thank you to all of you joining our forum this afternoon co-organised by the Department of Justice of Hong Kong, the Hong Kong Economic and Trade Office in Singapore and the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry. The theme of today’s forum is “Hong Kong: The Common Law Gateway for Vietnamese Businesses to China and Beyond”.     In my opening remarks, I simply wish to try to answer two questions, two very obvious questions that I suppose you have in mind. Firstly, who we are; secondly, why are we here.     For the purpose of this forum, I have a very big delegation consisting not simply of government lawyers from my Department. The Department of Justice of Hong Kong is in fact quite similar to the Ministry of Justice in Vietnam. So, a lot of people would think I will be responsible for criminal prosecutions, giving advice to the Government. But perhaps not so well known is that, it is also one of my duties to promote legal services in Hong Kong to friends outside the jurisdiction. Apart from my colleagues from the Department of Justice, I am very fortunate to have the support of about 15 legal practitioners from Hong Kong. They are very experienced legal practitioners specialised in different areas. And in fact we have all together, if I recall correctly, six supporting organisations. And you can tell from the nature of the organisations to have some idea as to who these legal practitioners are representing. We have representatives from the two legal professional bodies in Hong Kong, the Hong Kong Bar Association and the Law Society of Hong Kong. In Hong Kong, we still adopt the British system, we still have a divided legal profession. We have barristers who go to the courts to do advocacy work, and then we have solicitors handling all sorts of legal matters from non-contentious commercial matters to dispute resolution. So the representatives from two legal professional bodies, and then we have representatives from the main arbitration institutions in Hong Kong, including the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, HKIAC, which is the main arbitration institute in Hong Kong. We also have the South China International Arbitration Center (Hong Kong), which is also a very important institution. And then we have the AALCO, Asian African Legal Consultative Organization, with a regional arbitration centre in Hong Kong. We also have a representative from eBRAM which provides electronic services, not just for dispute resolution, but also for deal making. So from looking at the nature of these organisations, I hope you will be convinced that we have a wide spectrum of legal practitioners who are going to share their experiences and their knowledge about Hong Kong legal services to you in due course.     Having told you very briefly who we are, the second question perhaps is even more relevant and important: Why are we here? What do we aim to achieve in the next couple of hours? We have two hours for the forum. We decided to share with you some of the things about Hong Kong which you may be interested in for the two hours. And I believe many of you will join our dinner after the forum, so it will be around four hours. A lot can be achieved within four hours.     As I said earlier, I come across this question quite often. People wonder, in my capacity as the Secretary for Justice, I should be responsible for legal matters. It is not really my responsibility to promote trade and finance. I am not a minister of commerce. So what on earth am I doing here? To answer this very pertinent question, I think we should remind ourselves of the very close relationship between Vietnam and Hong Kong. I think we have to set the scene, we have to put things in context first.     As a matter of fact. I am sure you would agree that Hong Kong and Vietnam share very close ties both as a matter of history and also at present. Now we are in the beautiful city of Ho Chi Minh City. Ho Chi Minh is the founding father of Vietnam, and I am sure you would remember that Mr Ho Chi Minh actually founded the Communist Party of Vietnam in Hong Kong in the early 1930s. I had a very quick chat with Vice President Vo just a moment ago. He reminded me that in the last century, from the 60s, 70s, all the way up to 90s, a lot of trade concerning Vietnam actually went through Hong Kong for a lot of reasons. And then fast forward, what is the position as at today?     At the moment, I think there are more than 7 000 Vietnamese settling in Hong Kong, because I attended the national day celebration held by the Consul-General of Vietnam last week, so I got all the figures. There are more than 7 000 Vietnamese settling in Hong Kong. We have a lot of good Vietnam restaurants. I like the pho and banh mi. But more than that, we have roads and streets in Hong Kong named after places in Vietnam. We have the Saigon Street, Hanoi Road, so on and so forth.     Last October, the Hong Kong Government has relaxed some immigration regulations, and as a result, it is much easier and convenient for Vietnamese talent to come to work in Hong Kong. In addition, the criteria for taking multiple visas, either as tourists or on business, have also been relaxed. And a little bit closer to today, about two months ago, the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Government came to Vietnam. I think he held a forum exactly in this particular venue. On that occasion, I was told that altogether 22 co-operation agreements have been signed between business people in Ho Chi Minh City and Hong Kong, covering a wide range of areas. And you look at the figures, look at the statistics, Vietnam is Hong Kong’s second-largest trading partner within ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) countries. I don’t remember the exact figures, but the amount is huge. And in terms of direct investment in Vietnam, the Vice President also confirmed to me that Hong Kong ranks among the top five.     So plainly, if you put the matter in context, the relationship between Vietnam and Hong Kong has always been very close. And we look to the future. The Permanent Deputy Prime Minister of Vietnam actually paid a visit to Hong Kong about two weeks ago to attend the Belt and Road Summit. And he gave a very inspiring speech touching upon the relationship between Vietnam and Hong Kong. He mentioned the development plan of “Two Corridors, One Belt”, which is a very important development plan of Vietnam. He said he is hoping that we can connect the Vietnamese “Two Corridors, One Belt” plan with the Belt and Road Initiative proposed by China. So these two plans actually can have a sort of very good synergy. So this is the background that I would like to remind ourselves.     But still you might think, well, I haven’t answered the very pertinent question yet, because so far I did not mention the word “law” very often. So how is legal service, how are lawyers in Hong Kong relevant to what I have said to the future relationship between the jurisdictions? I think the answer must be obvious, because most of you are very successful, very influential business people in Vietnam, and most of you will be engaged in international commercial investment transactions. And you must recognise that no matter how much you hate lawyers, in particular the fees that they are charging you, lawyers are indispensable from the moment you decided to set up a business in a foreign place to the point you have to negotiate or conclude a contract with a foreign party; when it comes to how to manage your risk when you set up a business in a particular place, including: should I be concerned about the labour law there, tax or whatsoever; and in the im
    portant event that you run into dispute with your business partner or other people that clearly you will require legal service to assist you to resolve dispute. So the point that I wish to make is that, in the whole business cycle, I would use the analogy “from cradle to grave” but need to be more precise in the context from the inception of a business to the termination, to the point when you rip your profit from your joint venture, at each and every stage, legal service would be indispensable. But that still doesn’t answer the question. Assuming legal service is indispensable, obviously you have to consider who should I instruct? Legal services of which jurisdiction would be to my advantage, would serve my best interest?     Now, here comes the ultimate objective of today’s event. I am hoping that after four hours, you will be convinced that Hong Kong will be your best choice. I am not suggesting that Hong Kong is the only choice because the choice is yours, but I am assisting you to make an informed choice. We will be trying our best to persuade you that among all the options, Hong Kong is the best choice. Why? Because Hong Kong is a common law gateway for Vietnamese businesses to China and beyond.     This is my short answer. We do have a long answer, but I am afraid that the long answer is not going to be given by me. It is going to be provided by my eminent friends coming from Hong Kong. They will speak from their own area of practices, from their experiences to substantiate the point that I wish to make. And of course, after they share their experiences and what they wish to tell you, at dinner time, I am hoping that most of you would join the dinner, I will have the chance to speak to you again, just to do my closing submission. I will wait for your verdict at the end of your dinner.     On this note, I hope you all have a very enjoyable afternoon and a very fruitful afternoon. And I hope that I will be able to convince you, because the duty of a lawyer is to convince people. I will be failing my duty if I am unsuccessful in this respect. I need your support and I am very optimistic because I have very good friends with me doing the job together with me. Thank you very much.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Parents with disabilities have faced discrimination for years in the US, but new rules will help ensure that child welfare systems treat them more fairly

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Elizabeth Lightfoot, Distinguished Professor of Social Policy, School of Social Work, Arizona State University

    Parents with disabilities have new legal protections. Westend61/Getty Images

    Parents with any kind of disability are much more likely to have some type of interaction with the child welfare system than other parents. This means they are more likely than other parents to be reported for child abuse and neglect and more likely to have abuse or neglect substantiated by child welfare workers. They are also more likely to have their children placed in foster care and more likely to permanently lose their parental rights.

    More than one-third of mothers with intellectual and developmental disabilities have an interaction with the child welfare system within four years of their child’s birth, and about one-fifth of all children in foster care have a parent with some type of disability.

    However, there is little evidence that parents with disabilities abuse or neglect their children at higher rates than anyone else. Instead, there’s evidence that many young adults raised by a parent with a disability have very positive childhood experiences.

    New rules that went into effect in July 2024 provide the first federal protections specifically for parents with disabilities. These new rules ban discrimination against parents and caregivers with disabilities throughout the child welfare system.

    Government is changing these rules

    I’m a social work policy researcher who has studied policies affecting parents with disabilities since 2007.

    In 2010, I found that three-quarters of states had laws which said that a parent’s disability could be used as the grounds for terminating their parental rights. Most of these state laws focused on parents with intellectual and developmental disabilities or mental health disabilities, though some listed physical disabilities and other types as well.

    Many of these laws were vague and used outdated language such as “mental deficiency.”

    Parental disability is the only grounds for termination of parental rights that focuses on a condition of the parent. The rest focus on behaviors. For example, parental poverty is not listed as grounds for termination of parental rights in any state, but neglect – a behavior – is.

    State laws were only one of the issues parents with disabilities encountered related to child protection. For years, there had been confusion as to how the Americans with Disabilities Act, the federal law banning disability discrimination, applied to parents in the child welfare system. Until 2015, most state courts denied ADA claims by parents with disabilities who believed they were discriminated against.

    In addition, most child welfare workers do not receive formal training on working with parents with disabilities. They are not trained in how to assess parenting skills or how to make accommodations to services that they typically provide, such as providing in-home parent training or conveying information in plain language. They might not know about the overwhelming evidence that parents with intellectual disabilities can learn parenting skills.

    This has historically led many child welfare workers to make decisions based on stereotypes or speculation.

    One of the main biases that parents with disabilities face is the “presumption of unfitness bias.” This is a widespread bias that parents are unable to parent solely because of their disability.

    This bias can lead child welfare workers to not consider that parents with disabilities can rely on “parental supports” to assist them in parenting, ranging from adaptive cribs and baby monitors to in-home helpers. It also can result in parents with disabilities being held to a higher standard than others.

    State laws specifically naming parental disability as a for termination of parental rights, the lack of federal protection, and widespread biases left parents with disabilities vulnerable in encounters with the child welfare system.

    Gaining national attention

    Two federal actions in the early 2010s brought national attention to parents with disabilities.

    First, the National Council on Disability, the independent federal agency that advises the federal government on disability issues, released a report in 2012 called Rocking the Cradle. That report focused on the widespread discrimination faced by parents with disabilities; highlighted and called for changing the state child protection laws; and called for the application of ADA protections in child welfare cases involving parents with disabilities.

    This report received a lot of media attention and led to more awareness of the plight of these parents.

    Then, in 2015, Justice Department and the Department of Health and Human Services released guidance directing child welfare agencies to protect parents with disabilities from discrimination. This was the first federal action indicating that the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act applied to child protection services.

    This guidance followed the departments’ investigation of the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families’ removal of a newborn baby from Sara Gordon, a new mother with a developmental disability, in 2012. The Department of Justice and the Department of Health and Human Services found that the state agency had made assumptions that Gordon was unable to take care of her child and unable to learn parenting skills. The state agency had also failed to take into account that Gordon had support systems in place. She lived with her parents, and her mother had quit her job to assist with parenting.

    Making progress for parents with disabilities

    The momentum for protecting parental rights has led to some positive changes.

    A few states changed their own child protection laws to address some of these problems before the federal government took action by providing new protections for parents with disabilities. In addition, the Department of Justice and Department of Health and Human Services have reached agreements with state agencies in Oregon, Georgia and Massachusetts related to discrimination against parents with disabilities.

    Despite this progress, parents with disabilities are still discriminated against by the child welfare system in many parts of the country.

    At the same time, I have no doubt that the federal government’s revision of the rules of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is a major step forward for parents with disabilities.

    In particular, it is promising that Section  84.60 of the rule clarifies that disability discrimination is not allowed in any part of the child welfare process. Child welfare agencies throughout the United States now must ensure that they are not making decisions based on speculation, stereotypes or generalizations.

    Thanks to changes in the federal rule, when a child welfare agency evaluates how a child is being parented, the tools it uses must be backed by research. The evaluations must be conducted by a qualified professional and tailored to the needs of the individual parent. Agencies must ensure that parents with disabilities can participate in any services they provide. These services include parent-child visitation, parenting skills programs, family reunification services and child placements in foster care settings or in the care of another relative.

    Disability advocacy groups applauded this new rule when it went into effect in the summer of 2024.

    I believe these new rules will protect parents with disabilities when interacting with child protection authorities. They will also make it easier for child welfare agencies and state courts to recognize disability discrimination when it appears in their caseloads or on their dockets.

    Elizabeth Lightfoot receives funding from the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research and the Arizona Developmental Disabilities Planning Council.

    – ref. Parents with disabilities have faced discrimination for years in the US, but new rules will help ensure that child welfare systems treat them more fairly – https://theconversation.com/parents-with-disabilities-have-faced-discrimination-for-years-in-the-us-but-new-rules-will-help-ensure-that-child-welfare-systems-treat-them-more-fairly-238185

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Ernst Demands Action to Stop Iranian Crime on U.S. Soil

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA)

    WASHINGTON – Following reports indicating Iran is paying criminal organizations to carry out violent plots—including assassinations—against their critics within the United States, Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) joined a bipartisan group of her colleagues in demanding the Department of Justice (DOJ) stop this criminal activity.  
    “We write to request information regarding how the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is prosecuting criminals who commit or attempt to commit acts of violence in the United States on behalf of foreign adversaries, and what statutory changes to the criminal code would help DOJ to robustly prosecute these crimes,” wrote the senators.
    “An…example includes a plot, allegedly ordered by individuals in Iran, to use members of an Eastern European criminal organization who refer to themselves as ‘Thieves-In-Law’ in an attempt to murder a prominent critic of Iran—who is a United States citizen—within the United States,” continued the senators. “The attempted assassination followed a prior plot by Iranian intelligence officials to abduct the same critic from within the United States for rendition to Iran.”
    The senators requested DOJ share efforts that foreign governments have undertaken to enlist criminal actors to commit crimes in the United States, identify if there has been any increase in these activities, explain their strategy in thwarting foreign government activity, and answer whether there would be changes to the criminal code to deter these illicit actors.
    Read the full letter here.
    Background:
    Ernst introduced the PUNISH Act to enforce “maximum pressure” sanctions on Iran until the State Department can certify that Iran has not supported any attempt in the last five years to kill a U.S. citizen or a former or current U.S. official. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada announces judicial appointments in the province of Quebec

    Source: Government of Canada News

    September 23, 2024 – Ottawa, Ontario – Department of Justice Canada  

    The Honourable Arif Virani, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, today announced the following appointments under the judicial application process established in 2016. This process emphasizes transparency, merit, and the diversity of the Canadian population, and will continue to ensure the appointment of jurists who meet the highest standards of excellence and integrity.

    Mathieu Piché-Messier, Partner and National Business Leader in Commercial Litigation at Borden Ladner Gervais LLP in Montréal, is appointed a Judge of the Superior Court of Quebec for the district of Montréal. Justice Piché-Messier replaces Justice P.H. Bélanger (Montréal), who resigned effective May 24, 2024.

    Lysane Cree, Administrative Judge at the Tribunal administratif de déontologie policière in Montréal, is appointed a Judge of the Superior Court of Quebec for the district of Montréal. Justice Cree replaces Justice M. Lachance (Montréal), who was elevated to the Court of Appeal effective June 17, 2024.

    Horia Bundaru, Partner at Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP in Montréal, is appointed a Judge of the Superior Court of Quebec for the district of Montréal. Justice Bundaru replaces Justice K. Kear-Jodoin (Montréal), who elected to become a supernumerary judge effective July 16, 2024.

    Quote

    “I wish Justices Piché-Messier, Cree, and Bundaru every success as they take on their new roles. I am confident they will serve Quebecers well as members of the Superior Court of Quebec.”

    —The Hon. Arif Virani, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

    Biographies

    Justice Mathieu Piché-Messier was born and raised in Montreal. He obtained his Bachelor of Civil Law from the Faculty of Law of the Université de Sherbrooke in 1997. He was admitted to the Barreau du Québec in 1998.

    Since 2000, Justice Piché-Messier has practised commercial litigation at Borden Ladner Gervais, where, after being named partner in 2006, he headed the Montreal Commercial Litigation Group for seven years, before being appointed National Business Leader—Commercial Litigation. His practice focused on extraordinary remedies and commercial litigation in the fields of anti-fraud, high technology, industrial espionage, privacy and identity theft, international arbitration, aeronautics, defamation, as well as intellectual property. As a litigator, author, and lecturer, he was inducted as a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers in 2018 and a Fellow of Litigation Counsels of America in 2021; he also received the Advocatus Emeritus (Ad. E.) distinction from the Barreau du Québec in 2022. He has been recognized by his peers for appearing in editions of Chambers, The Best Lawyers, and Benchmark Litigation as one of Canada’s top 50 litigators.

    Justice Piché-Messier was a member of the board of directors of the Barreau du Québec, the Montreal Bar, and the Canadian Bar Association—specifically the Quebec Branch. He was also President of the Centre d’accès à l’information juridique du Québec (CAIJ) and of the Young Bar Association of Montreal. Active in the Montreal community, he has been a member on the board of directors of Cirque Éloize, Les Ballets Jazz de Montréal, Enfants-retour, and Make-a-Wish.

    Justice Piché-Messier and his wife, Natacha Lavoie, are the proud parents of Vincent and Victoria.

    Justice Lysane Cree is from the Kanien’kéhaka (Mohawk) Nation and obtained a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science with a minor in Northern Studies from McGill University in 1996, before obtaining a Bachelor of Civil Law and a Bachelor of Common Law from McGill University in 2000. She was admitted to the Barreau du Québec in 2003 and subsequently, to the New York State Bar in 2012 and the Law Society of Ontario in 2020.

    Justice Cree began her practice at Hutchins Legal Inc. and focused solely on indigenous law matters and working with First Nations governments in several provinces and occasionally in the State of New York for sixteen years. While still in private practice, she began working on a part-time basis in police ethics with the Comité de déontologie policière (now Tribunal), hearing cases involving indigenous police services in the province of Quebec. She then worked as a decision-maker at the Comité de discipline de la Chambre de la sécurité financière from 2019 to 2021 before becoming a full-time administrative judge at the Tribunal administratif de déontologie policière. During this time, she was involved with the Canadian Council of Administrative Tribunals, as a member of both the Tribunal Excellence Committee and the Truth & Reconciliation Committee.

    Justice Cree is an avid equestrian and enjoys spending time with her horses.

    Justice Horia Bundaru immigrated to Canada at the age of eleven with his parents and younger sister. He obtained a B.C.L./LL.B. from the Faculty of Law of McGill University in 2005, and he was admitted to the Barreau du Québec in 2006.

    Justice Bundaru has spent his entire career at Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP, where he became a partner in 2016 and where, at the time of his appointment, he headed the Litigation Group in Montreal. A renowned litigator, his practice focused on commercial litigation, construction law and energy law. Since 2016, he has taught civil procedure and drafting at the École du Barreau.

    Justice Bundaru has chaired the Quebec Branch of the Canadian Bar Association, the Liaison Committee of the Montreal Bar with the Superior Court of Quebec in the Civil Division, along with the Salon VISEZ DROIT. At the time of his appointment, he was President of the Liaison Committee with the Court of Appeal and a member of the Conseil de la magistrature du Québec. He is listed in the Canadian Legal Lexpert Directory, Benchmark Litigation Canada as a “Litigation Star,” Thomson Reuters Stand-out Lawyers, The Legal 500 Canada and Best Lawyers in Canada. In 2022, he was named a Fellow of the Canadian College of Construction Lawyers.

    Justice Bundaru is passionate about literature, and he is an avid cross-country skier and tennis player. He and his wife Maya—also a lawyer—have two daughters: Ariane and Éloïse.

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada announces a judicial appointment to the Federal Court of Appeal

    Source: Government of Canada News

    September 23, 2024 – Ottawa, Ontario – Department of Justice Canada 

    The Honourable Arif Virani, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, today announced the following appointment under the judicial application process established in 2016. This process emphasizes transparency, merit, and the diversity of the Canadian population, and will continue to ensure the appointment of jurists who meet the highest standards of excellence and integrity.

    The Honourable Panagiotis Pamel, a Judge of the Federal Court, is appointed a Judge of the Federal Court of Appeal. Justice Pamel replaces Justice Y. de Montigny, who was appointed Chief Justice on November 8, 2023.

    Quote

    “I wish Justice Pamel every success as he takes on his new role. I am confident he will serve Canadians well as a member of the Federal Court of Appeal.”

    —The Hon. Arif Virani, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

    Biography

    Justice Panagiotis Pamel was appointed to the Federal Court in 2019. After obtaining his Bachelor of Commerce (Finance) from Concordia University in 1983, he attended McGill University, graduating in 1987 with degrees in both civil and common law. He was admitted to the Quebec Bar in 1988.

    Prior to his appointment to the Federal Court, Justice Pamel practised at McMaster Meighen, a predecessor firm of Borden Ladner Gervais (BLG). Apart from a short stint in industry, he practised in the area of maritime law at BLG for over 30 years. He acted as counsel in several landmark decisions of the Federal Court, Federal Court of Appeal, and Supreme Court of Canada in the area of maritime law.

    Justice Pamel was a founding member of BLG`s Team North and past chair of the Arctic Issues Committee of the Canadian Maritime Law Association. He is a contributor to Canadian Maritime Law, 2nd edition, and has participated in numerous articles in the areas of maritime law and arctic navigation.

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada announces a judicial appointment to the Federal Court

    Source: Government of Canada News

    September 23, 2024 – Ottawa, Ontario – Department of Justice Canada  

    The Honourable Arif Virani, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, today announced the following appointment under the judicial application process established in 2016. This process emphasizes transparency, merit, and the diversity of the Canadian population, and will continue to ensure the appointment of jurists who meet the highest standards of excellence and integrity.

    Benoit Duchesne, an Associate Judge of the Federal Court in Ottawa, is appointed a Judge of the Federal Court. Justice Duchesne replaces Justice P. Pamel who was elevated to the Federal Court of Appeal effective September 20, 2024.

    Quote

    “I wish Justice Duchesne every success as he takes on his new role. I am confident he will serve Canadians well as a member of the Federal Court.”

    —The Hon. Arif Virani, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

    Biography

    Justice Benoit Duchesne was born in Montreal and raised in Ottawa.  He obtained a Bachelor of Social Sciences degree (minors in Economics and Music) in 1993, a Licentiate in Civil Law (LL.L.) in 1996, and a Bachelor of Laws (LL.B.) degree in 2000, all from the University of Ottawa.  He was admitted to the Barreau du Québec in 1998 and to the Law Society of Ontario in 2001. 

    Justice Duchesne is fluently bilingual. He was appointed Associate Judge of the Federal Court in 2022. He presided over case management conferences, motions, mediations, pre-trial and trial management conferences, and trials in proceedings across the Court’s jurisdiction. Prior to his appointment as an Associate Judge, he was a partner with Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP in Ottawa. Justice Duchesne enjoyed a broad bilingual and bijural practice primarily in civil, corporate and commercial, administrative, and municipal litigation before various tribunals and all Ontario, Quebec, and Federal courts including the Supreme Court of Canada. He was named to the Best Lawyers in Canada list by his peers and was a Lexpert ranked lawyer in recognition for his expertise in corporate and commercial litigation. He was also a part-time professor of civil procedure at the University of Ottawa from 2012 to 2022. 

    Justice Duchesne is grateful for the love and support of his spouse Jennifer and of his daughter Alexandra.

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: McAllen Man Sentenced for Receiving Images of Child Pornography

    Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) State Crime Alerts (c)

    McALLEN, Texas – A 27-year-old local man has been sentenced for receiving images and video files containing child pornography, announced U.S. Attorney Alamdar S. Hamdani.

    Gabriel Alejandro Morales pleaded guilty March 22, 2023.

    Chief U.S. District Judge Crane has now ordered Morales to serve 120 months in federal prison. At the hearing, the court heard additional information that Morales not only received child pornography but also engaged in the distribution of child pornography. In handing down the prison term, the court noted that engaging in the consumption of child pornography increases the demand, often leading to the production of new child pornography. Morales was further ordered to pay $3,000 in restitution to a known victim and will serve five years on supervised release following completion of his prison term. During that time, he will have to comply with numerous requirements designed to restrict his access to children and the internet. Morales will also be ordered to register as a sex offender.

    In January 2022, law enforcement learned of a group chat on a third-party messaging application that was identified as sharing child pornography. Morales had engaged in the receipt and distribution of approximately nine videos of child pornography on that site.

    Morales admitted to the use of the third-party messaging application on his cellular phone to engage in the receipt and distribution of child pornography. He further acknowledged possessing additional child pornography on other electronic devices.

    The images included sadistic/masochistic content and the depiction of prepubescent children engaged in sexual acts. Authorities ultimately found a total of 77 video files of child sex abuse materials, an additional 52 video files and 11 images attributable to Morales.

    Morales will remain in custody pending transfer to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.

    The FBI conducted the investigation.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Cahal P. McColgan and Alexa D. Parcell prosecuted the case, which was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood (PSC), a nationwide initiative the Department of Justice (DOJ) launched in May 2006 to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section leads PSC, which marshals federal, state and local resources to locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who sexually exploit children and identifies and rescues victims. For more information about PSC, please visit DOJ’s PSC page. For more information about internet safety education, please visit the resources link on that page.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General Bonta Sues ExxonMobil for Deceiving the Public on Recyclability of Plastic Products

    Source: US State of California

    The first-of-its-kind lawsuit seeks to hold one of the largest petrochemical companies in the world accountable for misleading the public on plastic’s recyclability and polluting California’s environment and communities 

    SAN FRANCISCO — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced the filing of a lawsuit against ExxonMobil for allegedly engaging in a decades-long campaign of deception that caused and exacerbated the global plastics pollution crisis. In a complaint filed in the San Francisco County Superior Court, the Department of Justice alleges that ExxonMobil has been deceiving Californians for half a century through misleading public statements and slick marketing promising that recycling would address the ever-increasing amount of plastic waste ExxonMobil produces. Through this lawsuit, the Attorney General seeks to compel ExxonMobil, which promotes and produces the largest amount of polymers—essentially the building blocks used to make single-use plastic—that become plastic waste in California, to end its deceptive practices that threaten the environment and the public. Attorney General Bonta also seeks to secure an abatement fund, disgorgement, and civil penalties for the harm inflicted by plastics pollution upon California’s communities and the environment.

    “Plastics are everywhere, from the deepest parts of our oceans, the highest peaks on earth, and even in our bodies, causing irreversible damage—in ways known and unknown—to our environment and potentially our health,” said Attorney General Bonta. “For decades, ExxonMobil has been deceiving the public to convince us that plastic recycling could solve the plastic waste and pollution crisis when they clearly knew this wasn’t possible. ExxonMobil lied to further its record-breaking profits at the expense of our planet and possibly jeopardizing our health. Today’s lawsuit shows the fullest picture to date of ExxonMobil’s decades-long deception, and we are asking the court to hold ExxonMobil fully accountable for its role in actively creating and exacerbating the plastics pollution crisis through its campaign of deception.”

    ExxonMobil’s Deceptive Marketing

    ExxonMobil is the world’s largest producer of polymers used to make single-use plastics. These materials are produced by ExxonMobil from fossil fuels and are then molded (by other companies) into single-use plastic. For decades, ExxonMobil, one of the most powerful companies in the world, falsely promoted all plastic as recyclable, when in fact the vast majority of plastic products are not and likely cannot be recycled, either technically or economically. This caused consumers to purchase and use more single-use plastic than they otherwise would have due to the company’s misleading public statements and advertising. For instance, through a trade group launched to promote recycling as an alternative to reducing plastics consumption, ExxonMobil placed a 12-page editorial-style advertisement in a July 1989 edition of Time magazine titled “The URGENT NEED TO RECYCLE.” This “advertorial” highlighted recycling as a smart solution for plastic waste and efforts to further recycling and recycling technology. Since 1970, ExxonMobil, through this trade association, also adapted and promoted the chasing arrows symbol for plastics. This symbol is now strongly associated with recycling and consumers are led to believe that items with the symbol can and will be recycled when placed in the recycling stream. In reality, only about 5 percent of U.S. plastic waste is recycled, and the recycling rate has never exceeded 9 percent. 

    More recently, ExxonMobil continues to deceive the public by touting “advanced recycling”  as the solution to the plastic waste and pollution crisis. “Advanced recycling” (also known as “chemical recycling”) is an umbrella term used by the plastics industry to describe a variety of heat or solvent-based technologies that can theoretically convert certain types of plastic waste into petrochemical feedstock, which can be used to make new plastic. Under its “advanced recycling” program, ExxonMobil uses heat to break down plastic waste. ExxonMobil promotes its “advanced recycling” program as a breakthrough in technology that will make plastics sustainable but hides important truths about its technical limitations, including that: 

    • The vast majority—92 percent—of plastic waste processed through ExxonMobil’s “advanced recycling” technology does not become recycled plastic, but rather primarily fuels,
    • The plastics that are produced through ExxonMobil’s “advanced recycling” process contain so little plastic waste that they are effectively virgin plastics deceptively marketed as “circular” (co-opting a term typically understood as a full circle of sustainable reuse, where waste becomes raw material) and sold at a premium,
    • ExxonMobil’s “advanced recycling” process cannot handle large amounts of post-consumer plastic waste such as potato chip bags without risking the safety and performance of its equipment,
    • Plastics produced through ExxonMobil’s “advanced recycling” program, in ExxonMobil’s best case scenario, will only account for less than one percent of ExxonMobil’s total virgin plastic production capacity, which continues to grow.

    ExxonMobil’s “advanced recycling” program is nothing more than a public relations stunt meant to encourage the public to keep purchasing single-use plastics that are fueling the plastics pollution crisis.

    ExxonMobil produces the largest amount of single-use plastic that becomes plastic waste. Since 1985, more than 26 million pounds of trash has been collected from California beaches and waterways, approximately 81 percent of which is plastic. Most of the plastic items collected on the annual California Coastal Cleanup Day can be traced to ExxonMobil’s polymer resins.

    Threats Posed by Plastic to the Environment and California Communities

    The global plastics waste and pollution crisis has been driven by the fossil fuel and petrochemical industries. Around the world each year, an estimated 12.1 million tons of plastic waste become aquatic pollution, and 19.8 million tons are polluted to land. Together, that is the equivalent of 4 garbage trucks of plastic waste polluted in the water or land every minute.

    Single-use plastics—plastic packaging, bags, straws, disposable plasticware and utensils, and other products that are typically used once, then disposed—comprise most of the plastic waste that escapes into the environment. Plastic does not biodegrade, instead breaking down into smaller pieces called microplastics. Microplastics have been found in drinking water, food, and even the air people breathe. More recently, microplastics have been found inside the human body: in our lungs, blood, and in breast milk. Through its deception, ExxonMobil has caused or substantially contributed to plastic pollution that has harmed and continues to harm California’s environment, wildlife, and natural resources. 

    California Department of Justice Legal Claims

    On April 28, 2022, the Attorney General launched his investigation into fossil fuel and petrochemical industries for their role in causing the global plastics waste and pollution crisis. As part of its investigation, the DOJ issued investigative subpoenas to ExxonMobil and related plastics industry groups to seek details about the nature and extent of the company’s deception efforts. The DOJ has actively been conducting the investigation into the petrochemical industry for the past two years, including subpoenas that uncovered never-before-seen documents, culminating in today’s lawsuit.

    The lawsuit alleges that ExxonMobil has misled consumers and continues to do so by engaging in an aggressive campaign to deceive the public and perpetuate the myth that recycling will solve the crisis of plastic pollution. For decades, ExxonMobil has dumped the cleanup and environmental costs of its deception and plastic production onto the public, and Californians are paying the price.

    The lawsuit alleges that ExxonMobil’s decades-long campaign of deception violated state nuisance, natural resources, water pollution, false advertisement, and unfair competition laws. The Attorney General is seeking nuisance abatement, disgorgement (which would require the defendants to give up the profits gained through their illegal conduct), and civil penalties; and injunctive relief to both protect California’s natural resources from further pollution, impairment, and destruction, as well as to prevent ExxonMobil from making any further false or misleading statements about plastics recycling and its plastics operations. 

    Joining today’s virtual press conference are Sierra Club, Surfrider Foundation, Heal the Bay, and Baykeeper, who have separately filed their own lawsuit raising similar issues regarding ExxonMobil’s role in causing the global plastics pollution crisis.  

    A copy of the Attorney General’s complaint can be found here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Federal Hate Crime Charges Brought for Assault on Stranger Wearing a Yarmulke in Foggy Bottom

    Source: United States Department of Justice (Hate Crime)

                WASHINGTON — A federal grand jury today returned an indictment charging Walter James, 38, with one count of causing bodily harm to an individual due to his actual or perceived religion.

                U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves for the District of Columbia and Assistant Director in Charge David Sundberg for the FBI Washington Field Office made the announcement.

                The indictment alleges that on the morning of July 10, 2024, James assaulted a man, who was walking through Foggy Bottom and wearing a yarmulke, without any provocation or warning. James repeatedly punched the individual in his face and head. While he was assaulting the individual and immediately afterward, James yelled antisemitic slurs, such as: (1) “You are murdering innocent men, women, and children in Gaza.” (2) “They’re the cause of all our wars – killing the children of Palestine.” (3) “You control us with money.” (4) “You are not the real Jewish [sic].” And (5) “You guys kill people in Gaza.” As a result of the assault, the individual suffered cuts and abrasions to his face and right elbow and cephalic swelling.

                James faces a statutory maximum sentence of 10 years in prison if convicted. James was previously charged in D.C. Superior Court with assault with significant injury with a hate crimes enhancement.

                This case was investigated by the FBI Washington Field Office and is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney John Crabb Jr.

                For more information and resources about the Justice Department’s work to combat hate crimes, visit www.justice.gov/hatecrimes.

                An indictment is merely an allegation, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

                Prosecuting bias-related crimes is critical to keeping our community safe. When one member of a group in the community is the victim of a bias-related crime, all members carry with them a fear that they, too, may be targeted because of who they are. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia (USAO-DC) is committed to enforcing both federal and local hate and bias-related crime laws. For more information: https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/hatebias-related-crimes.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Melrose  — Man and woman die following two-vehicle collision

    Source: Royal Canadian Mounted Police

    Two individuals, a 43-year-old man from Charlottetown, P.E.I., and a 37-year-old woman from Charlottetown, P.E.I., have died following a two-vehicle collision in Melrose, N.B.

    On September 22, 2024, at approximately 3:47 p.m., members of the Sackville RCMP responded to a report of a head-on collision between a minivan and a pick-up truck hauling a trailer on Route 16 in Melrose. The driver, a 43-year-old man, and the passenger, a 37-year-old woman of the minivan both died at the scene as a result of their injuries. The driver and sole occupant of the pick-up truck was transported to hospital with what is believed to be serious but non-life-threatening injuries.

    The collision is believed to have occurred when the minivan, travelling eastbound, crossed the center line and collided head-on with the pick-up truck.

    Members of the Port Elgin Fire Department, Ambulance New Brunswick, and the Department of Justice and Public Safety also attended the scene. RCMP Collision Reconstructionist, and a member of the New Brunswick Coroner’s office, attended the scene. Autopsies will be conducted to determine the exact cause of death for the two individuals.

    The investigation is ongoing.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: FBI Releases 2023 Crime in the Nation Statistics | Federal Bureau of Investigation

    Source: United States Department of Justice (Hate Crime)

    The FBI released detailed data on over 14 million criminal offenses for 2023 reported to the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program by participating law enforcement agencies. More than 16,000 state, county, city, university and college, and tribal agencies, covering a combined population of 94.3% inhabitants, submitted data to the UCR Program through the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) and the Summary Reporting System.

    The FBI’s crime statistics estimates, based on reported data for 2023, show that national violent crime decreased an estimated 3.0% in 2023 compared to 2022 estimates:  

    • Murder and non-negligent manslaughter recorded a 2023 estimated nationwide decrease of 11.6% compared to the previous year.  
    • In 2023, the estimated number of offenses in the revised rape category saw an estimated 9.4% decrease.  
    • Aggravated assault figures decreased an estimated 2.8% in 2023. 
    • Robbery showed an estimated decrease of 0.3% nationally.  

    In 2023, 16,009 agencies participated in the hate crime collection, with a population coverage of 95.2%. Law enforcement agencies submitted incident reports involving 11,862 criminal incidents and 13,829 related offenses as being motivated by bias toward race, ethnicity, ancestry, religion, sexual orientation, disability, gender, and gender identity.  

    To publish a national trend, the FBI’s UCR Program used a dataset of reported hate crime incidents and zero reports submitted by agencies reporting six or more common months or two or more common quarters (six months) of hate crime data to the FBI’s UCR Program for both 2022 and 2023. According to this dataset, reported hate crime incidents decreased 0.6% from 10,687 in 2022 to 10,627 in 2023.  

    The complete analysis is located on the FBI’s Crime Data Explorer.   

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Texas Man Arrested and Charged with Making Threats to Kill Nashville District Attorney Glenn Funk

    Source: United States Department of Justice (Hate Crime)

    NASHVILLE –A federal criminal complaint filed today charges David Aaron Bloyed, 59, of Frost, Texas, with threatening to lynch and kill Glenn Funk, the elected District Attorney General (“DA”) for Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee, announced United States Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee Henry C. Leventis.

    According to the complaint, on July 14, 2024, members of the Goyim Defense League (“GDL”) – an antisemitic Neo-Nazi group – were protesting in downtown Nashville when they encountered an employee of a local bar. A fight broke out and a GDL member was arrested and charged with aggravated assault for hitting the bar employee repeatedly using a metal flagpole with a swastika flag affixed to the top.

    While in Nashville, GDL members routinely posted about their activities on various social media platforms, including Telegram. Following the arrest of the GDL member, a Telegram user associated with GDL posted threats against DA Funk that included a photograph of DA Funk with the caption, “Getting the rope,” and an emoji finger pointed towards Funk’s image. The posts also included a photograph of a person hanging by the neck from a gallows, with the phrases, “The ‘Rope List’ grew by a few more Nashville jews today,” and “Will you survive the day of the rope?” Law enforcement subsequently identified another social media account with an almost identical username, belonging to Bloyed and containing threats nearly identical to those posted on the Telegram account.

    “In a functioning democracy, we simply cannot tolerate threats of violence against elected officials,” said United States Attorney Henry C. Leventis. “The charges announced today are just the latest illustration of the Department’s commitment to protecting public servants and upholding the rule of law.”  

    If convicted, Bloyed faces up to five years in federal prison. This case is being investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Nashville Resident Agency, Memphis Field Office and the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department.

    A federal complaint is merely an allegation. The defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

    # # # # #

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Valley National Bank Resolves Civil Liability Relating To Self-Disclosure Of Its Role In The Impermissible Use Of PPP Loan Proceeds By Bank Customer

    Source: United States Department of Justice (National Center for Disaster Fraud)

    Tampa, FL – Valley National Bank (VNB), a national bank and member of the Federal Reserve System, has agreed to pay $216,784.50 to resolve its civil liability under the False Claims Act for its self-disclosed role in the administration of two loans to a bank customer made under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (CARES), the Payroll Protection Program (PPP) and Economic Aid to Hard-Hit Small Businesses, Nonprofits and Venues Act (Economic Aid Act).

    Congress created the PPP in March 2020 as part of the CARES Act to provide emergency loans to small businesses suffering economic hardship due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The CARES Act authorized these businesses to seek forgiveness of the loans if they spent the loan funds on eligible expenses. The PPP was administered by the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA).

    This settlement resolves VNB’s civil liability related to a bank customer who had applied for two PPP loans with VNB. VNB, through a bank relationship manager, assisted the customer in the impermissible use of a portion of the PPP loan proceeds from its first PPP loan to repay an outstanding loan to a third party. After learning of this conduct, VNB conducted an independent investigation and review of those issues and provided the United States with a detailed and thorough written self-disclosure. VNB cooperated fully with the government’s investigation of the conduct, disclosing relevant documents, facts, and information gathered during its investigation. Although PPP lending has ended, VNB took steps to remediate and improve the issues with its PPP lending policies and practices, including requiring PPP borrowers to open a deposit account to undergo depositor screening, retaining an accounting firm to serve as a PPP loan help desk, and utilizing a company to interface with the SBA E-Tran platform.

    “The United States Attorney’s Office is committed to investigating and holding responsible those who failed to follow the rules of the PPP program,” said U.S. Attorney Roger B. Handberg for the Middle District of Florida. “We will continue to seek civil redress and, where appropriate, federally prosecute those individuals and entities that engage in improper uses of PPP loan proceeds.”

    SBA’s General Counsel Therese Meers stated, “The favorable settlement in this case is the product of enhanced efforts by federal agencies such as the Small Business Administration working with the U.S. Attorney’s Office, other federal law enforcement agencies, as well as financial institutions or private individuals who uncover borrower misconduct to recover the lending program’s damages.”

    The resolution obtained in this case was the result of a coordinated effort by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Florida and the Small Business Administration. The matter was handled by Assistant U.S. Attorney Kelley Howard-Allen, with assistance from the Small Business Administration – Office of General Counsel. 

    The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only and there has been no determination or admission of liability by VNB.

    On May 17, 2021, the Attorney General established the COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force to marshal the resources of the Department of Justice in partnership with agencies across government to enhance efforts to combat and prevent pandemic-related fraud. The task force bolsters efforts to investigate and prosecute the most culpable domestic and international criminal actors and assists agencies tasked with administering relief programs to prevent fraud by, among other methods, augmenting and incorporating existing coordination mechanisms, identifying resources and techniques to uncover fraudulent actors and their schemes, and sharing and harnessing information and insights gained from prior enforcement efforts. For more information on the department’s response to the pandemic, please visit https://www.justice.gov/coronavirus.

    Tips and complaints from all sources about potential fraud affecting COVID-19 government relief programs can be reported by visiting the webpage of the Civil Division’s Fraud Section, which can be found here. Anyone with information about allegations of attempted fraud involving COVID-19 can also report it by calling the Department of Justice’s National Center for Disaster Fraud (NCDF) Hotline at 866-720-5721 or via the NCDF Web Complaint Form at: https://www.justice.gov/disaster-fraud/ncdf-disaster-complaint-form.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: FACT SHEET: PRESIDENT BIDEN AND VICE PRESIDENT HARRIS ISSUE REPORT ON PROGRESS MADE TO REDUCE GUN VIOLENCE ONE YEAR AFTER CREATING WHITE HOUSE OFFICE OF GUN VIOLENCE  PREVENTION

    Source: The White House

    Statement from the President: “I’ve spent countless hours meeting with families impacted by gun violence as they mourn their loved ones. They’ve all had the same simple message for their elected officials: ‘do something.’ Vice President Harris and I responded to their call: I signed the most significant gun safety legislation in nearly 30 years, and we announced dozens of executive actions to reduce gun violence. But we knew more was needed. That’s why I established the first-ever White Office of Gun Violence Prevention, overseen by the Vice President. In just one year, it has accelerated my Administration’s efforts to reduce gun violence and save lives.”

    Statement from the Vice President: “President Biden and I have worked to address the epidemic of gun violence with the urgency it demands by enacting the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act – the most significant gun safety law in nearly 30 years – and launching the first-ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention. In the year since President Biden asked me to oversee this Office, our administration has improved and expanded background checks, announced the single largest investment in youth mental health in history, and been an unprecedented resource to states, cities, and local communities. We have also supported, convened, and worked alongside gun violence survivors, the families of those who have lost loved ones to shootings, and other impacted individuals to tackle the trauma caused by gun violence. I am committed to continuing this urgent work to ensure that every person in our nation has the freedom to live safe from gun violence.”

    After the prior Administration oversaw the largest one-year increase in murders ever recorded, President Biden and Vice President Harris took historic action from the start of their Administration to reduce violent crime. Because firearms are used in approximately 80% of murders in the United States, addressing gun crime is essential to addressing violent crime. The President and Vice President secured funding through the American Rescue Plan—which every Republican in Congress voted against—for law enforcement and community violence interventions. President Biden and Vice President Harris announced executive actions to keep guns out of dangerous hands and, by the middle of 2022, the Biden-Harris Administration had already taken more executive action to reduce gun violence than any other administration. On June 25, 2022, President Biden signed into law the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act—the most significant new gun violence prevention law in nearly 30 years. Year-over-year comparisons show that 2023 had the single largest homicide rate drop in recent history.

    After two and a half years of significant progress, President Biden and Vice President Harris’s next step was to establish a White House office dedicated to coordinating across the federal government and partnering with gun violence survivors, law enforcement, state and local officials, and community leaders on our shared goal of reducing gun violence.  After championing this issue for decades, President Biden asked Vice President Harris to oversee the White House Office of Gun Violence because he knows that she has a proven record as a leader for gun violence prevention.

    The past year, the reduction in homicide has only accelerated, with the Department of Justice reporting that, from January to June, homicides dropped 17% compared to the same time last year. In addition, data from the Gun Violence Archive indicates that the number of mass shootings to date in 2024 has decreased by 20 percent compared to the same period last year.

    Today, the White House is releasing a report on progress made by the Biden-Harris Administration to reduce gun violence in the one year since President Biden created the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention. The report provides a summary, but not an exhaustive list, of how the Biden-Harris Administration has taken action to fulfill the four objectives President Biden gave the office:

    1. Expedite implementation of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and already-announced executive actions;
    2. Coordinate more support for survivors of gun violence;
    3. Identify new executive actions; and
    4. Expand our coalition of partners in states and cities across the country.

    For President Biden, this work is the culmination of well over 30 years of national leadership to reduce gun violence and save lives. He played a critical role in securing passage of the Brady Bill in 1993 and the assault weapons ban in 1994. In the early 2000s, when the National Rifle Association was experiencing growing power in Washington and claiming to “work out of [the President’s] office,” then-Senator Biden was a key voice taking votes opposing their dangerous agenda. From 2012 to 2013, then-Vice President Biden led the Obama-Biden Administration’s efforts to develop and implement over two dozen executive actions after the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School. He has continued this work throughout his own presidency by actually establishing an Office of Gun Violence Prevention and forcefully calling on Congress to pass an assault weapons ban and repeal PLCAA.

    As President Biden emphasized during his State of the Union address earlier this year, Vice President Harris continues to lead the Administration’s work to address the epidemic of gun violence and keep communities safe while overseeing the first-ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention. Since taking office, there have been more than 80 instances where the Vice President has put a focus on gun violence prevention. This includes mourning with families and consoling communities that have been directly impacted by gun violence across the nation – from Buffalo and Highland Park to Nashville, Monterey Park, Atlanta, Pittsburgh, and Parkland.

    This dedicated work is a continuation of the Vice President’s decades-long record of taking on gun violence and advancing gun safety policies. As District Attorney of San Francisco, she prosecuted homicide cases and saw first-hand the devastation of gun violence. She also invested in community violence intervention efforts by championing Community Response Networks. While overseeing the second largest Department of Justice in America as Attorney General of California, Vice President Harris worked to get illegal firearms off the street and to prosecute gun trafficking. And as Senator, she co-sponsored several pieces of gun safety legislation, including an assault weapons ban.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Ohio Man Sentenced to Prison on Felony and Misdemeanor Charges for Actions During January 6 Capitol Breach

    Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) State Crime Alerts (b)

                WASHINGTON – An Ohio man was sentenced to prison after he was previously found guilty of felony and misdemeanor charges related to his conduct during the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol. His actions and the actions of others disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress convened to ascertain and count the electoral votes related to the 2020 presidential election.

                William Dunfee, 59, of Frazeysburg, Ohio, was sentenced on Sept. 19, 2024, to 30 months in prison, 36 months of supervised release, and ordered to pay a $10,000 fine and $2,000 in restitution by U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton. Judge Walton sentenced Dunfee on one felony offense of civil disorder and a misdemeanor offense of entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds.

                Dunfee was convicted of two felony offenses of obstruction of an official proceeding or aiding and abetting and civil disorder and the misdemeanor offense of entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds following a bench trial before Judge Walton on Jan. 22, 2024.

                According to court documents, Dunfee, a pastor of the New Beginnings Ministry Warsaw, in Warsaw, Ohio, posted a video to social media on Dec. 27, 2020, via the Ministry’s Facebook page, telling his congregation that “The Government, the tyrants, the socialists, the Marxists, the progressives, the RINOs, they fear you. And they should. Our problem is we haven’t given them reason to fear us.” Later he stated, “As I said earlier in another previous sermon is this, they used to tell us, you know what, you settle your differences at the ballot. How did that work out for us? It’s not over.” He added, “January 4th through 6th … Are you ready?”

                On Jan. 6, 2021, Dunfee illegally entered the Capitol grounds and, using a bull horn, he repeatedly exhorted the crowd. In a video filmed at the Capitol, Dunfee tells the mob: “This election has been stolen right out from underneath of our noses and it is time for the American people to rise up. Rise up. Rise up. Today is the day in which it is that these elected officials realize that we are no longer playing games. That we are not sheeple that are just going to be corralled according to their whims and their wills.” Later in the video, Dunfee stated, “We will stand up for our country. We are standing up for our freedoms. We are standing up for our president. And today is the day these elected officials, these senators and these congressmen, understand that we are not going to allow this to continue any longer.”

                At 1:35 p.m., Dunfee announced: “Mister police officers, we want you to understand something. We want you to understand something. We want Donald Trump and if Donald Trump is not coming, we are taking our house. We are taking our house.”

                Minutes later, at 1:44 p.m., Dunfee pushed a metal barricade against officers with the U.S. Capitol Police, who were attempting to hold the line. He pushed against the barricade a second time at approximately 1:58 p.m. He moved to the front of a crowd of rioters at the East Front entrance to the Capitol. Dunfee walked away from the East Front doors as others moved into the building, but he remained in the area. As rioters exited the building, one stated, “We did it. We shut ‘em all down. We did our job.” Dunfee responded, “Hallelujah,” and told the crowd, “Mission accomplished.”

                Surveillance cameras captured Dunfee’s actions that day. Videos and images show Dunfee physically resisting U.S. Capitol Police by pushing against a metal barricade and subsequently entering the restricted areas of the U.S. Capitol grounds. This case was prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and the Department of Justice National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section. Valuable assistance was provided by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Ohio.

                This case was investigated by the FBI’s Cincinnati Field Office. Valuable assistance was provided by the FBI’s Washington Field Office, the U.S. Capitol Police, and the Metropolitan Police Department.

                In the 44 months since Jan. 6, 2021, more than 1,504 individuals have been charged in nearly all 50 states for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol, including more than 560 individuals charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement, a felony. The investigation remains ongoing.

                Anyone with tips can call 1-800-CALL-FBI (800-225-5324) or visit tips.fbi.gov.

    MIL Security OSI –