Each player was accused of sexually assaulting a woman in a hotel room. Today, Justice Maria Carroccia stated that the Crown did not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
The trial has captured the world’s attention and sparked polarized public debates about consent, hockey culture and the role of sport in socializing young men.
Elite athletes often operate within environments where their talent grants them special status and access to resources — monetary and otherwise — that bolster a sense of entitlement. In some instances, sport organizations exacerbate this sentiment by protecting their star performers instead of addressing misconduct, which was reflected in this case.
For example, an abusive national vaulting coach for New Zealand Athletics was finally banned for 10 years, but only after years of unchecked abuse of his female athletes, including “inappropriate sexual references.” This highlights how misconduct can go on unrestrained for so long.
As researchers with expertise in sport culture and sexual and gender-based violence, we’re reflecting on what the Hockey Canada trial reveals about the institutional and cultural practices within sport.
The formal and informal rules of men’s sport validate misogyny and reinforce systemic patterns of sexual entitlement and inadequate accountability. We offer some perspectives on how these troubling patterns of violence in sport can be reformed.
The Hockey Canada sexual assault trial has become a focal point for questioning how elite sporting environments shield athletes from accountability. This may be especially true in hockey.
In their book about toxic hockey culture, authors Evan Moore and Jashmina Shaw argue that hockey operates within “a bubble composed mostly of boys and men who are white, cis-het, straight and upper-class. And those who play often become coaches and teach the same values to the next generation.”
Male-dominated sporting cultures also emphasize a particular type of masculinity that focuses on dominance, physical intimidation and winning at all costs. This can blur the boundaries between acceptable competitive behaviour and problematic aggression.
Vulnerability in sports
Within the realm of professional sport, athletes also become commodified and objectified through media coverage, sponsorship deals and public scrutiny. This commodification can contribute to a culture where athletes may internalize the idea that their bodies are public property, further eroding their sense of autonomy and understanding of consent, especially in relation to others beyond the sport context.
But what often gets forgotten is how the hyper-masculine culture of sports creates significant barriers to seeking help. Young male athletes are socialized to comply with peer cultures that equate vulnerability with weakness. Yet they face intense pressures around family expectations, sponsorship deals and team success that demands they maintain appearances of strength and control.
This cycle of suppressed vulnerability and untreated distress enables toxic sporting masculinity to flourish, forcing organizations like Hockey Canada to confront their role in perpetuating these harmful dynamics.
The need for structural, cultural reform
Sports organizations have significant financial and reputational investment in athletes. This can create an inherent conflict when misconducts arise, problematically prompting sports organizations to use their power and resources to prioritize damage control over justice.
We saw this in the Hockey Canada sexual assault trial, where each hockey player had his own legal counsel, a stark illustration of institutional power and the extent to which sports organizations will go to shield their members from accountability. The deeply entrenched networks within sport prioritize self-preservation over addressing misconduct
Effectively responding to these issues requires addressing the systemic factors that perpetuate sexual and gender-based violence in sport. The sport ecosystem in Canada needs radical change, including who trains and mentors young men in hockey and how organizations investigate complaints.
It requires going beyond individual accountability, participating in consent workshops or issuing policy documents. These actions alone are insufficient to shift the cultural needle.
In 2022, Hockey Canada released a comprehensive action plan to address systemic issues in hockey that features discussions of accountability, governance, education and training and independent sport safety structures.
Work with athletes and sports organizations to address sexual violence in sports culture;
Support the development and growth of male allies programs within community-based sexual assault support centres; and
Support those who have been harmed.
In addition to these excellent suggestions, Hockey Canada and other allied hockey organizations must be willing to restructure the current hierarchical structure of power that governs not just hockey, but also the players and all the other agencies involved, including coaches, sponsors, trainers, legal teams, media and PR representatives.
These organizational changes are possible, as evidenced by the efforts of Bayne Pettinger, an agent who has led efforts to create space for queer hockey players in Hockey Canada and the National Hockey League.
Scott Smith, who stepped down from his role as Hockey Canada’s President and CEO, left, and Hockey Canada Chief Financial Officer Brian Cairo appear at a standing committee in July 2022 looking into how Hockey Canada handled allegations of sexual assault and a subsequent lawsuit. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick
Sport’s moral reckoning
However, the cultural norms of power in sport extend beyond the playing field to shape attitudes toward consent and sexual conduct.
Until sport organizations address the foundational cultural elements that enable misconduct — toxic masculinity, institutional protection and erosion of consent culture — meaningful change will remain elusive.
Within hockey environments, in particular, the objectification of women and the institutional silence surrounding sexual violence have become normalized aspects of the sport’s culture, creating conditions where misconduct can flourish unchecked.
The events examined in this most recent trial are not isolated incidents but symptoms of deeper systemic failures within elite sport.
Only through comprehensive cultural transformation can we ensure that sport environments are spaces of genuine safety, respect and accountability for all participants.
Laura Misener receives funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Treena Orchard receives funding from Western University for a Teaching Innovation Grant, however, those funds were not used in the creation of this article.
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4
A spokesman for the Working Family and Student Financial Assistance Agency (WFSFAA) said today (July 24) that the WFSFAA and the Police had recently conducted a joint operation to combat fraudulent acts by those seeking to obtain the Working Family Allowance (WFA) illegally. The Police have arrested a total of six people for allegedly defrauding or intending to defraud the WFSFAA, involving an amount of about $30,000.
The Working Family Allowance Office of the WFSFAA, when processing WFA applications in April this year, detected suspicious documentary proof relating to employment and income submitted by some applicants. The WFSFAA swiftly reported the incident to the Police and referred the cases suspected of using false documents to the Police for investigation. After a thorough investigation, the Police carried out an operation recently and have arrested a total of six people so far for allegedly defrauding or intending to defraud the WFSFAA. The WFSFAA will continue to render full assistance to the Police in the investigation and recover the overpaid allowances from the relevant persons as appropriate in a timely manner.
The spokesman said that the WFSFAA scrutinises every WFA application in a stringent manner and has established a mechanism to identify and guard against fraud cases. When detecting unlawful acts such as false information, fraudulence or other criminal elements in WFA applications, the WFSFAA will take appropriate follow-up actions, including referring any such suspected cases to the law enforcement agencies. The cases were discovered by the WFSFAA after identifying suspicious applications in the process of vetting applications. The WFSFAA will continue to examine WFA applications in a stringent manner to ensure the proper use of public funds. Members of the public are urged not to defraud the WFSFAA.
The WFA Scheme aims to support low-income working households, which are not receiving Comprehensive Social Security Assistance, by promoting full-time employment and self-reliance, as well as rewarding hard work. Applicants are required to submit documentary proof of working hours, income and assets to the WFSFAA for assessing their eligibility for the WFA. Every applicant for the WFA is required to sign a declaration in the application form to declare that the information provided, and the documentary proof submitted, are true, complete and accurate. The WFSFAA has also clearly stated in the application form that obtaining the WFA by deception is a criminal offence. In addition to being disqualified for the WFA, the applicant may also be prosecuted and liable on conviction to imprisonment for a maximum of 14 years under the Theft Ordinance (Cap 210).
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4
The Secretary for Labour and Welfare, Mr Chris Sun, officiated at Child Protection – Launching Ceremony of the Guide for Mandated Reporters today (July 24) to announce the official launch of the Guide for mandated reporters’ reference.
The Mandatory Reporting of Child Abuse Ordinance, which mandates 25 categories of specified professionals from the social welfare sector, education sector and healthcare sector to report serious child abuse cases, will commence on January 20, 2026, to create a wide and effective protection web for children. As such, the Government formed three professional consultative panels in each of the aforementioned sectors in early 2024 for formulating the Guide, which aims to assist mandated reporters in mastering child protection principles and identifying cases to be reported under the mandatory reporting regime.
Addressing the ceremony, Mr Sun said that the three professional consultative panels comprise cross-disciplinary professionals. Their professional exchanges on different cases not only have assisted in establishing a list of key factors that mandated reporters should take into consideration before deciding whether a report is necessary under different scenarios, but also laid an important foundation for the decision trees in the Guide, which further helps mandated reporters make reporting decisions and serves as a practical reference for mandated reporters.
He said that an electronic system of the decision trees has also been specially developed by the Social Welfare Department to assist mandated reporters in making an analysis of the case scenarios in a swift and convenient manner only by answering simple questions. The electronic system will also direct those cases that need mandatory reporting to the reporting page to ensure mandated reporters can make a report as soon as practicable.
At the ceremony, Mr Sun, accompanied by the Permanent Secretary for Labour and Welfare, Ms Alice Lau, and the Director of Social Welfare, Mr Edward To, officiated the launch of the Guide with the Chairman of the Legislative Council Panel on Welfare Services, Reverend Canon Peter Douglas Koon; Deputy Secretary for Health Ms Elaine Mak; the Assistant Commissioner of Police (Crime), Ms Chung Wing-man; and the Acting Principal Assistant Secretary (Special Education) of the Education Bureau, Ms Candy Chan.
The features of the Guide were introduced at the ceremony. A demonstration of the workflow of the electronic version of the decision trees to be rolled out was also featured. Three representatives from the professional consultative panels of the social welfare sector, education sector and healthcare sector shared their feelings about their participation in formulating the Guide. They commended the Guide as a successful example of cross-disciplinary efforts in promoting child protection. While formulating the Guide, the professional consultative panels discussed 650 case scenarios and questions collected from their sectors in 33 focus group meetings. The valuable advice gathered from the 540 frontline professionals participating in these focus group meetings became a helpful and important reference for the professional consultative panels to finalise the details of the Guide.
Mr To said that cross-disciplinary collaboration has long been indispensable to child protection. The Guide, which is a combination of local experience, practical wisdom and professional knowledge, not only symbolises a new milestone in child protection efforts, but also further promotes synergy across different disciplines.
The Government will roll out Module 2 of the online learning course for specified professionals in phases starting from next week, covering basic knowledge on the legal and reporting matters related to the Ordinance, including the key content of the Ordinance, a brief introduction to the Guide, analysis of common scenarios, reporting procedures, and post-reporting follow-up.
A federal jury convicted a Louisiana nurse practitioner today for her role in an over $12.1 million health care fraud scheme to defraud Medicare by ordering medically unnecessary cancer genetic tests for hundreds of patients she never met or examined.
According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, Scharmaine Lawson Baker, 58, of Richmond, Texas, served as a nurse practitioner and was an enrolled Medicare provider. She held herself out as an expert in Medicare regulations – authoring publications on medical necessity and patient-provider relationships – while actively violating those very standards.
“Scharmaine Lawson Baker shamelessly exploited her medical license and the trust of vulnerable patients to enrich herself through a multimillion-dollar genetic testing fraud,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Matthew R. Galeotti of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “The defendant peddled false promises of free cancer screenings while pocketing kickbacks for medically unnecessary tests. The Criminal Division remains relentless in uncovering and prosecuting fraud against government programs and those who prey on victims for personal gain.”
“This conviction signals the end of a challenging and labor-intensive prosecution,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Michael M. Simpson for the Eastern District of Louisiana. “Medicare fraud schemes such as these, profoundly impact our society, not only because of the monetary loss sustained by our Medicare program, and the damages suffered by those who were victimized by the fraud, but also by the erosion of public trust in our institutions. The successful prosecution of this case exemplifies our commitment to seek justice for all victims of fraud as well as to preserve taxpayer confidence in our nation’s medical institutions as a whole.”
“This defendant brazenly exploited the federal health care system for personal profit. Her scheme to peddle millions of dollars of medically unnecessary genetic tests was not a mistake — it was a calculated crime. She preyed on vulnerable patients, siphoned taxpayer dollars, and turned health care into a tool for fraud. Her actions represent a deliberate betrayal of public trust and a flagrant abuse of those she was entrusted to serve,” said Deputy Inspector General for Investigations Christian J. Schrank of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG). “HHS-OIG, in coordination with our federal and state partners, will continue to apply every available resource to detect and disrupt fraud schemes that seek to abuse the Medicare program and enrollees.”
From 2018 to 2019, Lawson Baker worked as an independent contractor for a company that claimed to provide telehealth services. In her role, the defendant signed hundreds of orders for medically unnecessary cancer genetic testing after brief phone calls – typically lasting less than 60 seconds – and without conducting any physical exams of patients. Lawson Baker falsely diagnosed patients to justify the unnecessary tests, such as diagnosing male patients with cervical cancer that they did not have. Lawson Baker never reviewed any of the test results, including when the results showed that patients actually had variants predisposing them to certain cancers.
In furtherance of the scheme, Lawson Baker participated in phone calls misleading patients into believing they were being screened for cancer at no cost, despite the tests ordered not actually diagnosing patients with existing cancer. In doing so, she exploited the trust placed in licensed health care professionals and manipulated vulnerable patients.
In total, Lawson Baker caused over $12.1 million in fraudulent Medicare claims and the labs involved in the scheme received over $1.5 million in reimbursements for unnecessary testing. In exchange for signing these orders, Lawson Baker accepted kickbacks and bribes from the telehealth company – payments she later failed to disclose in her bankruptcy petition.
Lawson Baker was convicted of six counts of health care fraud. She is scheduled to be sentenced on Nov. 19 and faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison on each count. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
HHS-OIG and FBI investigated the case.
Trial Attorneys Samantha Usher and Gary A. Crosby II of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Nicholas D. Moses for the Eastern District of Louisiana are prosecuting the case. Trial Attorney Kelly Z. Walters of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section assisted in the prosecution.
The Fraud Section leads the Criminal Division’s efforts to combat health care fraud through the Health Care Fraud Strike Force Program. Since March 2007, this program, currently comprised of 9 strike forces operating in 27 federal districts, has charged more than 5,800 defendants who collectively have billed federal health care programs and private insurers more than $30 billion. In addition, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with HHS-OIG, are taking steps to hold providers accountable for their involvement in health care fraud schemes. More information can be found at www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud/health-care-fraud-unit.
A federal grand jury in San Francisco returned a superseding indictment yesterday charging a California man with filing false tax returns, mail fraud, and money laundering. Gilbert was previously charged with filing false tax returns earlier this year.
The following is according to the superseding indictment: Michael M. Gilbert, of San Rafael, filed false tax returns for himself and two business entities he controlled. Gilbert, a certified public accountant since 1985, allegedly underreported the total income his accounting and tax return preparation business, M.M. Gilbert & Company Inc., received during the years 2017 through 2020.
The superseding indictment further alleges that Gilbert solicited payments from clients of M.M. Gilbert for “tax strategies” and “donations,” among other things, which the clients paid to White Mountain Properties Inc., another entity Gilbert controlled. Gilbert allegedly did not report these payments as income on the company’s 2017 through 2021 business tax returns. These payments to White Mountain were allegedly proceeds from Gilbert’s scheme to defraud his clients through the promise of some tax benefit. In fact, the White Mountain funds did not create a tax benefit for Gilbert’s clients, and Gilbert allegedly instead diverted the payments for his own personal enrichment. In 2020-2021, Gilbert is alleged to have transferred more than $5 million from White Mountain to himself and then failed to report that income on his individual tax returns.
If convicted, Gilbert faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison for each count of mail fraud, a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison for each count money laundering, and a maximum penalty of three years in prison for each count of filing a false tax return. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Karen Kelly of the Justice Department’s Tax Division and U.S. Attorney Craig H. Missakian for the Northern District of California made the announcement.
IRS Criminal Investigation is investigating the case.
Trial Attorneys Julia M. Rugg and Patrick Burns of the Tax Division and Assistant U.S. Attorney Sara E. Henderson for the Northern District of California are prosecuting the case.
An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
ALBUQUERQUE – A Shiprock man has been sentenced to 10 years in federal prison for causing a deadly drunk driving crash on the Navajo Nation reservation that resulted in two deaths and serious injuries.
According to court documents, on December 1, 2023, Brian Gonnie, 45, an enrolled member of the Navajo Nation, was operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol on Highway 64 in Shiprock, New Mexico. He was traveling at approximately 86 mph in a 35-mph zone when he crossed into the oncoming lane and struck another vehicle head-on. The crash claimed the lives of Gonnie’s passenger and the driver of the other vehicle. A passenger in the struck vehicle sustained life-altering injuries, including multiple fractures and required extensive surgery.
Gonnie’s blood alcohol concentration was measured at .267%, with numerous empty alcohol containers found in his vehicle. During an interview with FBI agents, Gonnie admitted to drinking and driving the night of the crash.
Gonnie subsequently pled to two counts of involuntary manslaughter and one count of assault. Upon his release, Gonnie will be subject to up to three years of supervised release.
U.S. Attorney Ryan Ellison Philip Russell, Acting Special Agent in Charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Albuquerque Field Office, made the announcement today.
This case was investigated by the Farmington Resident Agency of the FBI Albuquerque Field Office with assistance from the Navajo Police Department and Navajo Department of Criminal Investigations and the New Mexico State Police. Assistant United States Attorney Jesse Pecoraro is prosecuting the case.
ALBUQUERQUE – A Little Water man has been charged with assault resulting in serious bodily injury following an incident in 2024.
According to court documents, on July 29, 2024, Anthony Sandoval, 40, an enrolled member of the Navajo nation, assaulted the victim with a rifle and the assault resulted in serious bodily injury.
Sandoval is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, assault resulting in serious bodily injury and using and carrying a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence. Sandoval will remain in third party custody pending trial, which has not yet been scheduled. If convicted of the current charges, Sandoval faces up to 10 years in prison.
U.S. Attorney Ryan Ellison and Philip Russell, Acting Special Agent in Charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Albuquerque Field Office, made the announcement today.
The Gallup Resident Agency of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Albuquerque Field Office investigated this case with assistance from the Navajo Nation Police Department and Navajo Department of Criminal Investigations. Assistant U.S. Attorney Nicholas J. Marshall is prosecuting the case.
An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
A federal jury convicted a Louisiana nurse practitioner today for her role in an over $12.1 million health care fraud scheme to defraud Medicare by ordering medically unnecessary cancer genetic tests for hundreds of patients she never met or examined.
According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, Scharmaine Lawson Baker, 58, of Richmond, Texas, served as a nurse practitioner and was an enrolled Medicare provider. She held herself out as an expert in Medicare regulations – authoring publications on medical necessity and patient-provider relationships – while actively violating those very standards.
“Scharmaine Lawson Baker shamelessly exploited her medical license and the trust of vulnerable patients to enrich herself through a multimillion-dollar genetic testing fraud,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Matthew R. Galeotti of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “The defendant peddled false promises of free cancer screenings while pocketing kickbacks for medically unnecessary tests. The Criminal Division remains relentless in uncovering and prosecuting fraud against government programs and those who prey on victims for personal gain.”
“This conviction signals the end of a challenging and labor-intensive prosecution,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Michael M. Simpson for the Eastern District of Louisiana. “Medicare fraud schemes such as these, profoundly impact our society, not only because of the monetary loss sustained by our Medicare program, and the damages suffered by those who were victimized by the fraud, but also by the erosion of public trust in our institutions. The successful prosecution of this case exemplifies our commitment to seek justice for all victims of fraud as well as to preserve taxpayer confidence in our nation’s medical institutions as a whole.”
“This defendant brazenly exploited the federal health care system for personal profit. Her scheme to peddle millions of dollars of medically unnecessary genetic tests was not a mistake — it was a calculated crime. She preyed on vulnerable patients, siphoned taxpayer dollars, and turned health care into a tool for fraud. Her actions represent a deliberate betrayal of public trust and a flagrant abuse of those she was entrusted to serve,” said Deputy Inspector General for Investigations Christian J. Schrank of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG). “HHS-OIG, in coordination with our federal and state partners, will continue to apply every available resource to detect and disrupt fraud schemes that seek to abuse the Medicare program and enrollees.”
From 2018 to 2019, Lawson Baker worked as an independent contractor for a company that claimed to provide telehealth services. In her role, the defendant signed hundreds of orders for medically unnecessary cancer genetic testing after brief phone calls – typically lasting less than 60 seconds – and without conducting any physical exams of patients. Lawson Baker falsely diagnosed patients to justify the unnecessary tests, such as diagnosing male patients with cervical cancer that they did not have. Lawson Baker never reviewed any of the test results, including when the results showed that patients actually had variants predisposing them to certain cancers.
In furtherance of the scheme, Lawson Baker participated in phone calls misleading patients into believing they were being screened for cancer at no cost, despite the tests ordered not actually diagnosing patients with existing cancer. In doing so, she exploited the trust placed in licensed health care professionals and manipulated vulnerable patients.
In total, Lawson Baker caused over $12.1 million in fraudulent Medicare claims and the labs involved in the scheme received over $1.5 million in reimbursements for unnecessary testing. In exchange for signing these orders, Lawson Baker accepted kickbacks and bribes from the telehealth company – payments she later failed to disclose in her bankruptcy petition.
Lawson Baker was convicted of six counts of health care fraud. She is scheduled to be sentenced on Nov. 19 and faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison on each count. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
HHS-OIG and FBI investigated the case.
Trial Attorneys Samantha Usher and Gary A. Crosby II of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Nicholas D. Moses for the Eastern District of Louisiana are prosecuting the case. Trial Attorney Kelly Z. Walters of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section assisted in the prosecution.
The Fraud Section leads the Criminal Division’s efforts to combat health care fraud through the Health Care Fraud Strike Force Program. Since March 2007, this program, currently comprised of 9 strike forces operating in 27 federal districts, has charged more than 5,800 defendants who collectively have billed federal health care programs and private insurers more than $30 billion. In addition, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with HHS-OIG, are taking steps to hold providers accountable for their involvement in health care fraud schemes. More information can be found at www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud/health-care-fraud-unit.
A federal grand jury in San Francisco returned a superseding indictment yesterday charging a California man with filing false tax returns, mail fraud, and money laundering. Gilbert was previously charged with filing false tax returns earlier this year.
The following is according to the superseding indictment: Michael M. Gilbert, of San Rafael, filed false tax returns for himself and two business entities he controlled. Gilbert, a certified public accountant since 1985, allegedly underreported the total income his accounting and tax return preparation business, M.M. Gilbert & Company Inc., received during the years 2017 through 2020.
The superseding indictment further alleges that Gilbert solicited payments from clients of M.M. Gilbert for “tax strategies” and “donations,” among other things, which the clients paid to White Mountain Properties Inc., another entity Gilbert controlled. Gilbert allegedly did not report these payments as income on the company’s 2017 through 2021 business tax returns. These payments to White Mountain were allegedly proceeds from Gilbert’s scheme to defraud his clients through the promise of some tax benefit. In fact, the White Mountain funds did not create a tax benefit for Gilbert’s clients, and Gilbert allegedly instead diverted the payments for his own personal enrichment. In 2020-2021, Gilbert is alleged to have transferred more than $5 million from White Mountain to himself and then failed to report that income on his individual tax returns.
If convicted, Gilbert faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison for each count of mail fraud, a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison for each count money laundering, and a maximum penalty of three years in prison for each count of filing a false tax return. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Karen Kelly of the Justice Department’s Tax Division and U.S. Attorney Craig H. Missakian for the Northern District of California made the announcement.
IRS Criminal Investigation is investigating the case.
Trial Attorneys Julia M. Rugg and Patrick Burns of the Tax Division and Assistant U.S. Attorney Sara E. Henderson for the Northern District of California are prosecuting the case.
An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
Columbia University agreed on July 23, 2025, to pay a US$200 million fine to the federal government and to settle allegations that it did not create a safe environment for Jewish students during Palestinian rights protests in 2024.
The deal will restore the vast majority of the $400 million in federal grants and contracts that Columbia was previously awarded, before the administration withdrew the funding in March 2025.
It marks the first financial and political agreement a university has reached with the Trump administration in its push for more control over higher education – and stands to have significant ripple effects for how other universities and colleges carry out their basic operations.
Amy Lieberman, the education editor at The Conversation U.S., spoke with Brendan Cantwell, a scholar of higher education at Michigan State University, to understand what’s exactly in this agreement – and the lasting precedent it may set on government intervention in higher education.
Palestinian rights demonstrators march through Columbia University on Oct. 7, 2024, marking one year of the war between Hamas and Israel. Kena Betancur/AFP via Getty Images
What’s in the deal Columbia made with the Trump administration?
The agreement requires Columbia to make a $200 million payment to the federal government. Columbia will also pay $21 million to settle investigations brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Columbia will need to keep detailed statistics about student applicants – including their race and ethnicity, grades and SAT scores – as well as information about faculty and staff hiring decisions. Columbia will then have to share this data with the federal government.
In exchange, the federal government will release most of the $400 million in frozen grant money previously awarded to Columbia and allow faculty at the university to compete for future federal grants.
How does this deal address antisemitism?
The Trump administration has cited antisemitism against students and faculty on campuses to justify its broad incursion into the business of universities around the country.
But the federal complaint the administration made against Columbia was not actually about antisemitism. The administration made a formal accusation of antisemitism at Columbia in May of this year but suspended grants to the university in March. The federal government had initially acknowledged that cutting federal research grants did nothing to address the climate for Jewish students on campus, for example.
When the federal government investigates civil rights violations, it usually conducts site visits and does very thorough investigations. We never saw such a government report about antisemitism at Columbia or other universities.
The settlement that Columbia has entered into with the administration also doesn’t do much about antisemitism.
The agreement includes Columbia redefining antisemitism with a broader definition that is also used by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. The definition now includes “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews” – a description that is also used by the U.S. State Department and several European governments but some critics say conflates antisemitism with anti-Zionism.
Instead, the agreement primarily has to do with faculty hiring and admissions decisions. The federal government alleges that Columbia is discriminating against white and Asian applicants, and that this will allow the government to ensure that everybody who is admitted is considered only on the basis of merit.
The administration could argue that changing hiring practices to get faculty who are less hostile to Jewish students could change the campus climate, but the agreement doesn’t really identify ways in which the university contributed to or ignored antisemitic conduct.
Is this a new issue?
There has been a long-running issue that conservatives and members of the Trump administration – dating back to his first term – have with higher education. The Trump administration and other conservatives have said for years that higher education is too liberal.
The administration’s complaints aren’t limited to Columbia. Harvard is in a protracted conflict with the administration, and the administration has launched investigations into dozens of other schools around the country. These universities are butting heads with the administration over the same grievance that higher education is too liberal. There are also specific claims about antisemitism on university campuses and the privileges given to nonwhite students in admissions or campus life.
While the administration has a common set of complaints about a range of universities, there is a mix of schools that the administration is taking issue with. Some of them, such as Harvard, are very high profile. The Department of Justice forced out the president at the University of Virginia in January 2025 on the grounds that he had not done enough to root out diversity, equity and inclusion programs at the public university. The University of Virginia may have been a target for the administration because a Republican governor appointed most members of its governance board and agreed with Trump’s complaints.
How could this change the makeup of Columbia’s student population?
Now, with the Columbia deal, the government could say that it would expect to see a proportion of students who are white increase and students who are Black and Latino to decrease at Columbia. That’s a legal approach that America First Legal, a conservative legal advocacy group founded by Stephen Miller, a Trump administration official, has already tried.
Back in February 2025, America First Legal alleged in a federal lawsuit that the University of California, Los Angeles, was using illegal admissions criteria, because of the number of Black and Latino students that were admitted by the school. That lawsuit is ongoing.
Claire Shipman, Columbia University’s acting president, speaks during the school’s May 2025 commencement ceremony. Jeenah Moon/Pool/AFP via Getty Images
What does this agreement mean for US higher education as a whole?
It is an enormous, unprecedented shift in how the federal government works with higher education. Since the McCarthy era in the 1940s and ’50s, when professors were blacklisted and fired because of their alleged communism, Americans have not seen the federal government interrogate education.
The federal government does have a role in securing people’s civil rights, including in the context of higher education, but this is very, very different from how the federal government has done civil rights investigations and entered into agreements with universities in the past.
This agreement is very broad and gives the federal government oversight of things that have long been under universities’ control, such as whom they hire to teach and which students they admit.
The federal government is now saying it has the right to look over universities’ shoulders and guide them in this work that has long been considered independent. And the government is willing to be extremely coercive to get universities to comply.
What signal does this agreement send to other universities?
This agreement sets a precedent for the government to direct colleges and universities to comply with its political agenda. This violates the long tradition of academic independence that had helped to make the U.S. higher education system the envy of the world.
Columbia can afford paying $200 million to the federal government. Most universities can’t afford to pay $200 million.
And most campuses cannot survive without federal resources, whether that comes in the form of student financial aid or research grants. This agreement sets a standard for other universities that, if they don’t immediately do what the federal government wants them to do, the government could impose penalties that are so high it could end their ability to operate.
Brendan Cantwell is a Professor in the Department of Educational Administration at Michigan State University.
Source: United States Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) delivered remarks on the Senate floor slamming Democrats for obstructing the voting process on President Trump’s nominees, his efforts to enforce our immigration laws and secure the border, and his America First policies in the courts:
Click hereto download Senator Blackburn’s remarks on the Senate floor.
REMARKS AS PREPARED
While Republicans Work to Deliver Wins for the American People, Democrats Are Obstructing President Trump’s Agenda
In November, President Trump and Republicans received a powerful mandate from the American people to secure our border, strengthen our economy, rein in wasteful spending, and Make America Great Again.
By passing the One Big Beautiful Bill, we delivered on this mandate by securing…
The largest tax cut in U.S. history—including reduced taxes on tips and overtime, a $6,000 bonus deduction for seniors, and the permanent extension of President Trump’s 2017 tax cuts;
It also reduces the burden of the death tax for millions, providing critical relief for family-owned businesses and farmers;
It bolsters our Armed Forces with a $150 billion increase in military spending;
It provides the largest-ever investment in border security so that we can complete the border wall and hire thousands of new Border Patrol Agents;
It strengthens Medicaid by rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse in the program;
It restores fiscal sanity by eliminating hundreds of billions of dollars in far-left spending;
And it accomplishes so much more.
These are huge wins for the American people. But our work is far from finished.
Democrats Are Hurting Americans by Obstructing President Trump’s Nominees
At the top of the list: confirming President Trump’s nominees.
The President deserves to have his team in place to enact his America First agenda.
But instead of working with us to carry out the will of the American people, our colleagues across the aisle have chosen to obstruct at any cost.
Right now, we have 135 pending nominations in the Senate.
There is absolutely zero reason we should have this backlog—especially with such important nominations:
U.S. ambassadorships to the Vatican, the Netherlands, Chile, Greece, and the European Union;
Seven federal judgeships;
U.S. Attorneys;
Under Secretaries for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and the Navy;
The Commissioner of the Securities and Exchange Commission;
And much more.
Democrats, however, are trying to slow down the voting process on these qualified nominees as much as possible.
They’re losing at the ballot box, in the halls of Congress, and in the courts—so stalling is all they have left to spite the President.
They might think that they are hurting Republicans. In reality, they are hurting the American people.
Every single day that goes by with stalled nomination votes is another day that these qualified nominees are unable to get to work on behalf of our country.
Democrats’ Obstruction Is Nothing New – Recent Disclosures Show Obama Manufactured Russia Collusion Hoax to Derail President Trump
Unfortunately, this obstruction is nothing new.
With the recent disclosures from Director of National Intelligence Gabbard, we are learning even more about how President Obama and Democrats manufactured the Russia Hoax to try to derail President Trump’s first term.
Activist Judges Have Blocked Lawful Orders from President Trump in Attempts to Obstruct His Agenda
For months, far-left activist judges undermined our Constitution by blocking lawful orders from the Trump administration in a brazen effort to decide nationwide policy.
Their abuse of power only came to an end when the Supreme Court reined in the use of nationwide injunctions.
Democrats Have Obstructed ICE Agents from Enforcing Immigration Law
And more recently, we’ve seen Democrats try their best to obstruct a core part of the America First agenda: Securing our border.
Americans want our border to be secure. And they want criminal illegal aliens removed from their communities.
Across the country, ICE and Border Patrol agents have been hard at work carrying out this mandate and arresting criminals who have no right to be in our country.
Yet Democrats are working to vilify and undermine our brave federal law enforcement.
We’ve seen congressional Democrats try to storm ICE facilities—including a House member who faces federal charges for assaulting an ICE officer.
They’ve smeared ICE agents who are risking their lives to protect our country, comparing them to “secret police” and the Nazis.
They’ve pushed legislation that would prohibit officers from wearing masks, exposing them and their families to targeted harassment.
This is all happening as ICE officers face an 830 percent surge in assaults.
Source: United States Senator for Hawaii Brian Schatz
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i) spoke on the Senate floor today about the national housing shortage in the United States and the urgent need to cut onerous regulations that stand in the way of building more housing. Schatz introduced three bipartisan housing bills this week, including the Build More Housing Near Transit Act and the YIMBY Act. The Build More Housing Near Transit Act incentivizes local governments to build housing near federally-funded transit projects. The YIMBY Act encourages localities to cut regulations and adopt pro-housing policies.
“When it comes to one of the most basic necessities in life for people – housing – both political parties have failed,” said Senator Schatz. “This crisis was not inevitable. It is a problem that the government has created. There is not enough housing in this country because we have made it virtually impossible to build housing. But the good news is this if the government got us into this mess in the first place, it can help to get us out. And mainly that means getting out of our own way and not preventing the very things that we say that we like.
Senator Schatz added, “We can and we do disagree about almost everything. But on this we should all be able to agree: in the richest country in the history of the world, people should not have to worry about having a roof over their heads. We can fix this, and we must.”
A transcript of Senator Schatz’s remarks is below. Video is available here.
When it comes to one of the most basic necessities in life for people – housing – both political parties have failed. Housing costs more than ever today, with the median home costing five times as much as the median income for your average American. First time home buyers are fewer and older than ever. 1 in 4 renters are being forced to spend more than half of their income on rent, and homelessness is plaguing more people than ever before.
This crisis was not inevitable. It is a problem that the government has created. There is not enough housing in this country because we have made it virtually impossible to build housing. Ask anyone who has tried to build anything a shed, a patio, or an accessory dwelling unit for their in-laws. They will tell you that the moment you try to do something, there are endless procedural hurdles and regulatory barriers that immediately get in the way. Exclusionary zoning. Minimum lot sizes. Height restrictions. Requirements for multiple staircases, environmental reviews, dozens of public meetings where the grouchiest people in your neighborhood can stop the most virtuous project in your neighborhood. Extensive permitting paperwork. Yearslong battles with community organizations and boards. And if you want to expedite your permit. You can pay a permit expediter. If you’ve got ten grand, they’ll put your thing on the top of the pile.
Nobody should like this system. I cannot think of something so essential to American life: housing. Whether you rent or you want to own, so essential to American life, where the government has created the shortage on purpose. And then it strokes its chin, confused as to why there is a shortage there is a shortage. There is a shortage because of the government itself, making it hard to construct the thing that we all say we want.
But the good news is this if the government got us into this mess in the first place, it can help to get us out. And mainly that means getting out of our own way and not preventing the very things that we say that we like. A lot of progressives in my own party like to say we’re for housing, we’re for clean energy, we’re for transit and infrastructure. But you can’t be for something if you don’t want it near you. If you’re for housing, you’ve got to see the housing. If you’re for clean energy, you’re going to see a windmill or a wind farm or a nuclear power plant somewhere. As we envision a just and sustainable and wealthy country, we have to actually make the things that make us more sustainable and wealthy.
There is nothing progressive about preventing a nurse, or a firefighter, or a teacher, or a small business owner from actually living in the community in which they work. There is nothing progressive about making people drive an hour to work or in Hawaii, forcing people to leave the state. Lawn sizes and building heights don’t make neighborhoods – people do.
And yet, you’ll often hear people who oppose new housing say things like, ‘Well, we want to preserve the unique character of the neighborhood.’ And this is something that I’m embarrassed to say I didn’t know until I came to the United States Senate. Understand what those words mean and where they came from. They are echoing a dark time in American history: the Jim Crow era. It was a time when communities specifically codified into law language that prohibited Black people and other racial minorities from moving into certain neighborhoods. The racial covenants would literally say, “No lot covered by this indenture, or any part thereof, shall ever be sold, resold, conveyed, granted, devised, leased or rented to or occupied by, or in any way used by, any person or persons not of the Caucasian Race.” That’s from a covenant in St. Louis from 1949. And there were contracts just like that one in neighborhoods all across the country.
And then racial covenants were outlawed. But their legacy continues today, because what happened was the racists, after this was outlawed, figured out a proxy for race. Figured out a way to keep people separated and figured out a way to keep people out of their neighborhoods. Figured out a way to make housing more constrained. And that’s exclusionary zoning. That’s minimum lot sizes. That means you need interior staircases. All of these things that sound virtuous: safety, sanitation, environmental review, historic preservation – all of those things actually matter. But understand that they are being weaponized against the working class.
And I’m not sure if this is permissible under the rules, but I’m looking at a bunch of Senate pages, all 16 years old, trying to figure out: ‘Where am I going to live when I get a job? Do I have to live with my folks? And for how long? Am I going to be able to move to a suburb, or a city, or stay in my hometown? Where am I going to live?’
So how do we fix it? First of all, government has a role that is not just getting out of the way. On the financing side, on the public housing stock side, on vouchers, on Section 8, on HUD-VASH – there are lots of programs that work. A lot of government – things that we do – that have helped and can help more.
But the truth is that the throughput capacity of the system is being constrained by the government itself. We could allocate $3 trillion to affordable housing. And if it’s still hard to build a house in an individual neighborhood, all that money would get stuck. Actually, the state of California tried that. They allocated an enormous amount of money to housing, and they didn’t get very much built. The County of Maui many years ago said no new housing unless it’s affordable. Which kind of lands on the ears in a wonderful way, right? No new housing unless it’s affordable. You know what happened? There was no new housing at all for a full decade.
The reason I care about this is because I think it is the single most impactful economic policy that we can implement to make it easier to build housing for working people, for students, for the disabled, for the elderly, for the entrepreneurs, for cities, for towns, for rural neighborhoods. This is important because I care about that. Now, if you are a conservative, the basic principle is almost even more simple, which is it’s your damn property. You should be permitted to do what you want with your property, within certain safety boundaries and all the rest of it. But if it’s your property and if you’ve got a quarter of an acre and you want to build an accessory dwelling unit for your kids because they’re adults and they just had a baby, you should be allowed to do pretty much whatever you want with your property.
But we have inverted the presumption so that it’s your neighbors that get to decide what you get to do with your property. So if you’re a private property rights person, you should love the idea of deregulating the housing market. And if you are a progressive and you see how much people are struggling right now, you should love the idea of deregulating the housing market. We need to reform land use laws for upzoning to allow higher density, reduce minimum lot sizes, deploy manufactured homes, enable single room occupancy development wherever multifamily housing is allowed. And we know all of this works because it’s working in certain places.
It’s hard to keep any issue out of the partisan crossfire, where everyone retreats to their own corner and starts talking past each other and trying to light the algorithm on fire. Our ability to come together, use common sense, and find a way forward will affect how people live and succeed for generations to come. Just this week, Senator Banks and I introduced legislation to incentivize local governments to build more housing near federally funded transit projects. Senator Young and I introduced the YIMBY Act – the Yes in My Backyard Act – which encourages localities to cut onerous regulations and adopt pro-housing policies.
We can and we do disagree about almost everything. But on this we should all be able to agree: in the richest country in the history of the world, people should not have to worry about having a roof over their heads. We can fix this, and we must.
During Coldplay’s “jumbotron song” — the concert segment where cameras pan over the crowd — the big screen landed on Andy Byron, then-CEO of data firm Astronomer, intimately embracing Kristin Cabot, the company’s chief people officer. Both are married to other people.
The moment, captured on video and widely circulated on social media, shows the pair abruptly recoiling as Coldplay’s lead singer Chris Martin says: “Either they’re having an affair or they’re just very shy.”
Martin’s comment — seemingly light-hearted at the time — quickly took on a different tone as online sleuths identified the pair and uncovered their corporate roles and marital statuses. Within days, Byron resigned from his position as CEO while Cabot is on leave.
This spectacle raises a deeper question: why does infidelity, especially among the powerful, provoke such public outcry. Literary tradition offers some insight: intimate betrayal is never truly private. It shatters an implicit social contract, demanding communal scrutiny to restore trust.
When trust crumbles publicly
French philosopher Paul Ricoeur’s notion of “narrative identity” suggests we make sense of our lives as unfolding stories. The promises we make (and break) become chapters of identity and the basis of others’ trust. Betrayal ruptures the framework that stitches private vows to public roles; without that stitch, trust frays.
Byron’s stadium exposure turned a marital vow into a proxy for professional integrity. Public betrayal magnifies public outcry because leaders symbolize stability; their personal failings inevitably reflect on their institutions.
When Astronomer’s board stated the expected standard “was not met,” they were lamenting the collapse of Byron’s narrative integrity — and, by extension, their company’s.
This idea — that private morality underpins public order — is hardly new. In Laws, ancient Greek philosopher Plato described adultery as a disorder undermining family and state. Roman philosopher Seneca called it a betrayal of nature, while statesman Cicero warned that breaking fides (trust) corrodes civic bonds.
The social cost of infidelity in literature
Literature rarely confines infidelity to the bedroom; its shockwaves fracture communities.
French sociologist Émile Durkheim’s idea of the “conscience collective” holds that shared moral norms create “social solidarity.” As literature demonstrates, violations of these norms inevitably undermines communal trust.
‘Anna Karenina’ by Leo Tolstoy. (Penguin Random House)
Leo Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina (1875-77) dramatizes the social fracture of betrayal. Anna’s affair with Count Vronsky not only defies moral convention but destabilizes the aristocratic norms that once upheld her status.
As the scandal leads to her ostracization, Anna mourns the social world she has lost, realizing too late that “the position she enjoyed in society… was precious to her… [and] she could not be stronger than she was.”
In Gustave Flaubert’s Madame Bovary (1857), Emma Bovary’s extramarital affairs unravel the networks of her provincial town, turning private yearning for luxury and romance into public contagion.
Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter (1850) makes this explicit: Hester Prynne’s scarlet “A” turns her sin into civic theatre. Public shaming on the scaffold, the novel suggests, delineates moral boundaries and seeks to restore social order — a process that prefigures today’s “digital pillories,” where viral moments subject individuals to mass online judgment and public condemnation.
Domestic crumbs and digital scaffolds
Contemporary narratives shift the setting but uphold the same principle: betrayal devastates the mundane rituals that build trust.
‘Heartburn’ by Nora Ephron. (Penguin Random House)
Nora Ephron’s autobiographical novel Heartburn (1983), based on her own marriage’s collapse to investigative journalist Carl Bernstein, weaponizes domesticity.
Heartburn’s protagonist Rachel Samstat delivers her emotions through recipes — “Vinaigrette” as a marker of intimacy and betrayal, “Lillian Hellman’s Pot Roast” as a bid for domestic stability and “Key Lime Pie,” hurled at her cheating husband — become symbols of a life undone by public infidelity.
Ephron’s satire, later adapted into a film, anticipates our digital age of exposure, where private pain fuels public consumption and judgment.
‘Dept. of Speculation’ by Jenny Offill. (Penguin Random House)
Jenny Offill’s Dept. of Speculation (2014), which draws from her own life, shows another perspective: betrayal as quiet erosion.
Offill never depicts the affair directly; instead, the husband’s absences, silences and an off-hand reference to “someone else” create a suffocating dread. This indirection shows betrayal’s power lies in its latent potential, slowly dismantling a life built on trust before any overt act.
Both works underscore betrayal’s impact on the collective conscience: a lie fractures a family as fundamentally as a CEO’s indiscretion erodes institutional trust. Power magnifies the fallout by turning private failings into public symbols of fragility. Even hidden betrayal poisons the shared rituals binding any group, making the notion of “private” unsustainable long before any public revelation.
The limits of power
Literature acknowledges power’s protective veneer from consequence — and its limits.
Theodore Dreiser’s Trilogy of Desire (1912–47), modelled on the Gilded Age robber baron Charles Yerkes, follows the rise of financier Frank Cowperwood, whose power shields him — until it doesn’t. Even his vast empire proves vulnerable once his adultery becomes public. The very networks that protected him grow wary.
Though many critics of the elite are themselves morally compromised in the trilogy, Cowperwood’s transgression becomes a weapon to discredit him. His brief exile shows that power may defer, but cannot erase, the costs of betrayal. Once trust fractures, even the powerful become liabilities. They do not fall less often — only more conspicuously.
Gender also plays a role in shaping these narratives. Male protagonists like Cowperwood rebound as tragic anti-heroes, their moral failings recast as flaws of character. By contrast, women — think Flaubert’s Emma Bovary or Hawthorne’s Hester Prynne — are branded cautionary figures, their transgressions stigmatized rather than mythologized.
This imbalance in assigning consequences reveals a deeper societal judgment: while broken trust demands repair, the path to restoration often depends on the transgressor’s gender.
The unblinking eye
From Tolstoy’s salons to TikTok’s scroll, literature offers no refuge from betrayal’s ripple effects. When private trust visibly fractures, communal reflexes kick in.
Scarlet letters, exile or a CEO’s resignation all aim to heal the collective trust. The jumbotron, like Hester’s scaffold, is the latest instrument in this age-old theatre of exposure.
Jumbotrons. Scaffolds. Same operating system. Same shame.
Jason Wang does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
overnor Kathy Hochul today announced six designations to the New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, in the First and Second Departments. Under New York’s Constitution, the Governor designates Justices of the Appellate Divisions from among the elected Justices of the State Supreme Court. This class is composed of highly skilled jurists who come from diverse personal and professional backgrounds, underscoring Governor Hochul’s commitment to ensuring New York State’s judiciary reflects the wide array of people who call New York home. The slate consists of four designations to the Appellate Division, First Department and two designations to the Appellate Division, Second Department.
“These designations to the Appellate Division are part of my continued commitment to building a judiciary that embodies the highest standards of legal excellence and reflects the rich diversity of New York,” Governor Hochul said. “Each of these jurists brings a wealth of experience and perspective that will strengthen our courts and help ensure that justice is served fairly and equitably across our state.”
As Justices of the Appellate Division, First Department:
Honorable Troy Webber, Associate Justice
Justice Troy K. Webber was elected to the Civil Court, New York County, in 1993 and assigned to the county of her birth, Bronx County. In 2002, she was elected to the Supreme Court. In 2009, Justice Webber was appointed Acting Surrogate in New York County, where she served for almost 2 years and then returned to Supreme Court, Bronx County. In 2016, Justice Webber was appointed to the Appellate Division, First Department.
Justice Webber began her legal career as an Assistant District Attorney in New York County. She then served as a Law Assistant to a State Supreme Court Justice, Assistant New York State Attorney General and Deputy Bureau Chief at the New York City Law Department. Justice Webber was also a litigation associate at a law firm. Justice Webber is a graduate of New York University School of Law, where she serves on the Alumni Board of Directors.
Justice Webber serves as Co-Chair of the Franklin H. Williams Judicial Commission and is a member of the Metropolitan Black Bar Association, the Association of Women Judges, the Judicial Friends, and the New York County Lawyers Association. She serves on the New York State Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics, the Advisory Committee on Criminal Law and Procedure and is a member of the board of directors of JALBCA (Judges and Lawyers Breast Cancer Alert).
Justice Webber participates in the Scales of Justice Academy, a summer legal educational program for underserved female high school students, as well as the Legal Outreach Program. She mentors students who attend NYU Law School, the City University of New York, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, and Fordham University School of Law and participates in moot court programs sponsored by NYU Law School and New York Law School. Justice Webber is also an adjunct professor in criminal justice at Monroe University.
Honorable Saliann Scarpulla, Associate Justice
Justice Saliann Scarpulla is a graduate of Boston University and Brooklyn Law School, cum laude. After law school, Justice Scarpulla clerked for the Hon. Alvin F. Klein in Supreme Court, New York County. When her clerkship concluded, Justice Scarpulla joined Proskauer Rose Goetz & Mendelsohn as a litigation associate. Justice Scarpulla later moved to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as Senior Counsel in the New York Legal Services Office. From the FDIC Justice Scarpulla became Senior Vice President and Bank Counsel to Hudson United Bank.
Justice Scarpulla returned to the New York State court system in 1999, as Principal Court Attorney to the Hon. Eileen Bransten. She was then elected to the New York City Civil Court in 2001, appointed to the New York State Supreme Court in 2009, and elected to the Supreme Court in 2012. From 2014 to 2020, Justice Scarpulla sat in the New York County Commercial Division, and she was responsible for all international commercial arbitration matters pending in the State Supreme Court. In 2020, Justice Scarpulla was appointed to the Appellate Division, First Department.
Justice Scarpulla is a contributing author to the Commercial Litigation in New York State Courts treatise and has authored numerous articles on technology and commercial litigation. She is a frequent lecturer for, among others, the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, the New York County Lawyers Association, the New York State Bar Association, the American Bar Association, the Practicing Law Institute, and the New York State Judicial Institute. Justice Scarpulla has received the Louis J. Capozzoli Gavel award and the Thurgood Marshall award from the New York County Lawyers Association, the Rapallo/Scalia award from the Columbian Lawyers Association, and service awards from the National Association of Italian American Women and the New York Women’s Bar Association.
Justice Scarpulla is active in several New York City and statewide bar associations and is a Business Court Representative to the American Bar Association and Co-Chair of the Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain, and Intellectual Property subcommittee. She is a member of New York’s Commercial Division Advisory Council, and the Co-Chair of the Council’s Subcommittee on Use of Technology in Commercial Division Cases. Justice Scarpulla also sits on the Chief Judge’s Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory Committee, and, in October 2019, she was appointed for a term to the New York State Continuing Legal Education Board. Justice Scarpulla is a past Co-President and current Board member of Judges and Lawyers Breast Cancer Alert (JALBCA).
Honorable Shlomo Hagler, Additional Justice
Hon. Shlomo S. Hagler is the current Presiding Justice of the Appellate Term, First Department. He was appointed to the court in 2021. Justice Hagler began his judicial career in 1999, when he was appointed to New York City Housing Court. In 2003, he was elected to the New York City Civil Court, and in 2008, Justice Hagler was designated an Acting Justice of the Supreme Court, Civil Branch, New York County. As an Acting Justice, he established and presided over an “Innovative Guardianship Part” that combined the authority of the Supreme Court under the Mental Hygiene Law with that of the Housing Court. This initiative aimed to protect and empower vulnerable individuals within the community. In 2012, he was elected to the Supreme Court.
Justice Hagler earned his undergraduate degree from Yeshiva University in 1988, and a Juris Doctor from the City University of New York Law School in 1991. He started his legal career as an associate at Bartlett, Bartlett & Ziegler, P.C., before serving as Court Attorney to Hon. Martin Shulman, currently an Associate Justice of the Appellate Division, First Department.
Justice Hagler recently received an award celebrating his 25 years on the bench from the New York County Lawyers Association and in April 2025, received the Benjamin N. Cardozo award from the Jewish Lawyers Guild for excellence in the legal profession. He is also a member of the Board of Governors of the Jewish Lawyers Guild and the Gender Fairness Committee of the Supreme Court, New York County. Justice Hagler has given numerous lectures as a judicial panelist on various legal topics, including protecting tenants with disabilities in housing.
Honorable Margaret Anne Pui Yee Chan, Additional Justice
Justice Chan, elected in 2021 to the New York State Supreme Court, serves in the New York County Commercial Division resolving complex business disputes. Before her election, she was an Acting Justice from 2012, handling a wide range of cases from mass torts to constitutional litigation.
Born in Hong Kong, she immigrated to Canada at age seven and then, at fourteen, to Brooklyn. When she was elected to the New York City Civil Court in 2006, she became the first Asian immigrant woman to become a New York judge. Before ascending to the bench, Justice Chan had an immigration and appellate practice in Manhattan’s Chinatown. Her partner was Benjamin Gim, who co-founded the Asian American Legal Defense & Education Fund.
Justice Chan attended Brooklyn College full time, where she majored in economics while also working full-time. She later attended Touro Law Center on a scholarship and was the managing editor of the Law Review. She then completed five years as a senior court attorney at the Appellate Division, Second Department.
Justice Chan serves on various court committees, including the Committee on AI and the Courts and Committee on Pattern Jury Instructions (PJI) – Civil. She also served as a Fordham University School of Law adjunct professor from 2018-2024, teaching legal research and writing and the judicial-externship seminar.
As Justices of the Appellate Division, Second Department:
Honorable Elena Goldberg Velazquez, Additional Justice
Justice Elena Goldberg Velazquez was appointed to the Appellate Term, 9th and 10th Judicial Districts, in 2024, where she hears appeals from landlord-tenant court, small claims court, civil court and criminal court. Recently, Justice Goldberg Velazquez was elected as the President of the Latino Judges Association.
In 2022, Justice Goldberg Velazquez was elected to the New York State Supreme Court, 9th Judicial District. Presently, she is assigned to Westchester County where she has presided over a variety of civil hearings and trials. Since her ascension to Supreme Court, she has also been published in the New York Law Journal. Prior to becoming a Supreme Court Justice, Justice Goldberg Velazquez was a Yonkers City Court Judge, where she handled criminal matters from arraignment to disposition, landlord-tenant matters (both residential and commercial), small claims and civil matters. She also presided over trials and felony hearings. In addition, while in City Court she was appointed as an Acting Family Court Judge presiding over the Integrated Domestic Violence Court.
Prior to being elected to the bench, Justice Goldberg Velazquez worked at the Supreme Court, Appellate Division First Department for nearly a decade. Prior to working at the Appellate Division, Justice Goldberg Velazquez worked at private law firms handling primarily civil matters.
Justice Goldberg Velazquez is an active member of her community, having founded and served as president of her local neighborhood association. She has served as the President of the Puerto Rican Bar Association, Chair of the Women’s Committee and Chair of the Young Lawyers Committee. She is presently a member of the New York State Bar Association, Hudson Valley Hispanic Bar Association, Puerto Rican Bar Association, New York Women’s Judges Association, Westchester County Bar Association, Westchester Women’s Bar Association and the Yonkers Lawyers Association.
Justice Goldberg Velazquez is a graduate of CUNY School of Law, where she was the managing editor of the New York City Law Review and now serves on the Board of Visitors. She earned her Bachelors of Arts in Political Science and International Relations from Syracuse University where she graduated Pi Sigma Alpha. While at Syracuse, Justice Goldberg Velazquez was on the Dean’s List and a member of the nationally ranked Mock Trial Team.
Justice Goldberg Velazquez resides in Westchester with her husband and two young daughters.
Honorable Susan Quirk, Additional Justice
Hon. Susan Quirk was elected to the Civil Court Bench in Brooklyn in 2016, where she served until 2018. She was then assigned to Brooklyn Family Court in 2018 to augment the bench in response to the enactment and implementation of the Raise the Age legislation, where she presided until 2022 when she was elected to the Supreme Court in Brooklyn where she currently presides over all types of criminal matters.
Prior to becoming a judge, strongly attracted to both public service and the study of law, Judge Quirk began working as a paralegal in 1998 in the Kings County District Attorney’s Office while attending Brooklyn Law School in the evening. She graduated in 2004, receiving the distinction of being awarded the “Cali Excellence for the Future” Award for achieving the highest grade in Trial Advocacy. Upon being admitted to practice in 2005, Judge Quirk continued her career in public service by becoming an Assistant District Attorney in Brooklyn, where she served with distinction until 2013, when she was designated a Court Attorney Referee in Supreme Court, where she continued to serve the public as a Hearing Officer until her election to the bench.
Active in the legal community, Judge Quirk is a member of the Supreme Court Justices Association of the City of New York; the Puerto Rican Bar Association; the Brooklyn Bar Association; the Brooklyn Women’s Bar Association; the Columbian Lawyers Association; the Catholic Lawyers Guild, Kings County Chapter; the Richmond County Bar Association; the Staten Island Women’s Bar Association, where she previously served on the Administrative Board; and the New York City Civil Court Judges Association, where she previously served as the Vice President for Richmond County.
Judge Quirk is the proud mom of two young daughters, both of whom currently attend her alma mater, St. Joseph Hill Academy.
PENSACOLA, FLORIDA –Crescencio Diaz-Diaz, 36, and Marcelo Perez-Santiz, 33, both of the country of Mexico, have been charged in federal court with illegal reentry of a removed alien. Diaz-Diaz has additionally been charged with possession and use of fraudulent employment authorization documents. The charges were announced by John P. Heekin, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Florida.
Court documents allege that Crescencio Diaz-Diaz reentered the United States illegally after being previously deported in 2020. He was encountered by federal agents during the execution of federal criminal search warrants at a Navarre business, Emerald Coast Lawns, and an adjacent residence yesterday. During the search, agents seized a fraudulent permanent resident card (sometimes referred to as a “green card”) and social security card bearing Diaz-Diaz’s name and/or photograph but another person’s identifying information, which Diaz-Diaz allegedly admitted he presented to Emerald Coast Lawns in order to gain employment.
Separate court documents allege that Marcelo Perez-Santiz reentered the United States illegally after being previously deported on three separate occasions in 2012 and had been found at the business address for Emerald Coast Lawns back in February. Perez-Santiz was arrested yesterday on a criminal complaint and had an initial appearance before United States Magistrate Judge Zachary C. Bolitho.
The penalty for illegally reentering the United States after deportation is a maximum of two years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
The cases are being investigated by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations and Enforcement and Removal Operations with assistance from the Federal Bureau of Investigations, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Florida Highway Patrol, United States Marshals Service and the Santa Rosa County Sheriff’s Office. The cases are being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Alicia H. Forbes.
This case is part of Operation Take Back America (https://www.justice.gov/dag/media/1393746/dl?inline ) a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN).
A criminal complaint is merely an allegation by a sworn affiant that a defendant has committed a violation of federal criminal law and is not evidence of guilt. All defendants are presumed innocent and entitled to due process, to include a fair trial, during which it is the government’s burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.
The United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Florida is one of 94 offices that serve as the nation’s principal litigators under the direction of the Attorney General. To access public court documents online, please visit the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida website. For more information about the United States Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Florida, visit http://www.justice.gov/usao/fln/index.html.
KANSAS CITY, Mo. – On July 17, 2025, the United States Attorney’s Office obtained a temporary restraining order against the unidentified foreign operators of a fraudulent online cryptocurrency investment platform called “Triangular.” The order resulted in the suspension of online access to two websites used to access the platform.
The United States also filed a civil forfeiture complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri against more than $325,000 in cryptocurrency seized from two addresses linked to the scam. According to the complaint, the FBI used blockchain analysis and other investigative techniques to determine that the cryptocurrency is connected to the theft and laundering of funds from victims of the Triangular investment fraud scheme.
The complaint alleges that between July and October 2024, the two cryptocurrency addresses were used to launder millions of dollars in suspected scam proceeds. The complaint further alleges that a victim located in the Western District of Missouri lost more than $16 million to the fake Triangular investment platform.
The scammers involved in this scheme lured victims through unsolicited messages on social media sites like LinkedIn. Once a relationship formed, the scammers introduced the victims to the fraudulent Triangular platform and made promises of immense investment gain with little to no risk of loss. After the victims made an initial investment through the sophisticated-looking platform, the scammers manipulated the victims’ account to appear to show exponential investment returns and encouraged victims to transfer more cryptocurrency. But when victims tried to withdraw their profit, they were told they needed to pay more in false withdrawal fees or “taxes.” The victims never recovered their money.
Commonly referred to as a cryptocurrency confidence scam, fake investment schemes like Triangular cost Americans billions of dollars every year, according to the FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center’s 2024 Internet Crime Report.
If you believe you are a victim of a cryptocurrency investment fraud or other cyber-enabled crime, report the fraud to the FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center at https://www.ic3.gov, your local law enforcement agency, and the Federal Trade Commission at https://reportfraud.ftc.gov.
The claims in the United States’ civil complaints are only allegations. The preliminary injunction hearing is scheduled for August 6, 2025, before U.S. District Judge Brian C. Wimes. The case is United States v. John Doe, No. 4:25-cv-00529-BCW.
This investigation is being handled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation Kansas City Field Office. The civil cases are being handled by Assistant U.S. Attorney John Constance. The Department of Justice would like to acknowledge Tether for its assistance in effectuating the transfer of these assets
SPRINGFIELD, Mo. – A Springfield, Mo., man was sentenced in federal court today for illegally possessing a firearm.
Joseph Archer III, 43, was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Beth Phillips to 96 months in federal prison without parole.
On Oct. 29, 2024, Archer pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm.
On June 29, 2023, officers with the Springfield Police Department attempted to stop a Toyota Camry that was being driven by Archer. Archer fled from officers, leading them on a vehicle pursuit. During the pursuit Archer crashed into an officer’s vehicle, disabling the police vehicle, and causing the officer to suffer minor injuries. As a result of that crash, Archer briefly lost control of his car before continuing to flee. The pursuit ended when Archer crashed the Camry into an outbuilding. Archer fled the scene of the crash on foot before the officers arrived. When officers searched the Camry, they located a stolen Taurus PT handgun. They also located a box of ammunition, fentanyl, methamphetamine, mail addressed to Archer, and his Missouri Department of Corrections ID in the glove box.
Under federal law, it is illegal for anyone who is convicted of a felony to be in possession of any firearm or ammunition. Archer has prior felony convictions for conspiracy to distribute cocaine and possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking crime.
This case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephanie L. Wan. It was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the Springfield, Mo., Police Department.
Project Safe Neighborhoods
This case is part of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce violent crime and gun violence, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. On May 26, 2021, the Department launched a violent crime reduction strategy strengthening PSN based on these core principles: fostering trust and legitimacy in our communities, supporting community-based organizations that help prevent violence from occurring in the first place, setting focused and strategic enforcement priorities, and measuring the results.
ST. LOUIS – A jury on Wednesday found a man guilty of a crime for temporarily blinding Metro Air Support pilots with a laser pointer.
Jurors in U.S. District Court in St. Louis took roughly 20 minutes to convict Joshua J. Johnson, 44, of one felony count of knowingly aiming a laser pointer at an aircraft. The trial started Tuesday afternoon with jury selection.
Evidence and testimony at the trial showed that shortly before 9:45 p.m. on August 9, 2024, Johnson used a blue laser to target a marked Metro Air Support helicopter that was flying over the Benton Park neighborhood in St. Louis in support of other officers. A St. Louis County Police Department pilot and a St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department pilot were temporarily blinded when blue light flooded the cockpit. As the blue light started to wane, the officers were able to track the beam to the driver’s side of a vehicle below them. The officers then tracked the vehicle as it drove down the street. The driver aimed the laser at the helicopter again. The officers continued to track the vehicle and provided updates to officers on the ground, who stopped the vehicle and arrested the sole occupant – Johnson. After initially denying that he pointed the laser, he later admitted that he was responsible. He also admitted that fact in calls from jail.
Laser pointers are widely available and range in power. The strongest models can permanently blind air crews. Those who point lasers at aircraft can also be subject to civil penalties of up to $11,000 imposed by the Federal Aviation Administration. Pilots reported 12,840 laser strikes to the FAA in 2024.
Johnson is scheduled to be sentenced on October 30. The crime carries a potential punishment of up to five years in prison.
The case was investigated by the FBI, the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department and the Metro Air Support Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Mohsen Pasha and Derek Wiseman are prosecuting the case.
ST. LOUIS – Three men from Florida have admitted stealing jewelry and other valuables worth hundreds of thousands of dollars from homes in St. Louis County, including Ladue and Chesterfield.
Benjamin Andres Ovalle-Taibo, 33, and Jonathan Vejar-Caro, 33, pleaded guilty Wednesday in U.S. District Court in St. Louis. Ovalle-Taibo pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit the transportation of stolen goods and Vejar-Caro to one count of transportation of stolen goods.
Henry Jose Ferreira-Perez, now 21, pleaded guilty to one count of transportation of stolen goods in December and has been sentenced to 14 months in prison.
All three admitted travelling on June 9, 2023, to St. Louis County, where they scouted possible burglary targets and purchased items to use in home break-ins. That evening Ovalle-Taibo and Vejar-Caro stole luxury items worth more than $330,000 from a home in Ladue, including jewelry, handbags and watches. They drove to Illinois and stayed in an Airbnb before returning to Florida to sell the stolen goods.
On June 16, 2023, Ovalle-Taibo and Vejar-Caro burglarized a home in unincorporated St. Louis County which was investigated by the Frontenac Police Department. They stole about $128,000 worth of items, primarily jewelry. They next day, they burglarized two homes in Chesterfield, stealing about $188,500 worth of items from one home and $44,000 from the other.
Ovalle-Taibo and Vejar-Caro are scheduled to be sentenced in October. All three are in the United States illegally and will likely be deported upon their release from prison.
The case was investigated by the FBI, the Ladue Police Department, the Frontenac Police Department and the Chesterfield Police Department. Assistant U.S. Attorney Gwendolyn Carroll is prosecuting the case.
Operation Grayskull Eradicated Four Dark Web Child Abuse Sites and Led to the Convictions of 18 Offenders to Date, Who Have Collectively Received More than 300 Years in Prison
Today, the Justice Department announced the results of Operation Grayskull, a highly successful joint effort between the Department of Justice and the FBI that resulted in the dismantling of four dark web sites dedicated to images and videos containing child sexual abuse material (CSAM). To date, the operation has led to the convictions of 18 offenders, including a Minnesota man who was sentenced yesterday to 250 months in prison and lifetime supervised release for his involvement with one of these dark web sites. He was also ordered to pay $23,000 in restitution.
“Today’s announcement sends a clear warning to those who exploit and abuse children: you will not find safe haven, even on the dark web,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Matthew R. Galeotti of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “These offenders thought that they could act without consequences, but they were wrong. Thanks to the relentless determination of our prosecutors and law enforcement partners we have exposed these perpetrators for who they are, eliminated their websites and brought justice to countless victims.”
“This operation represents one of the most significant strikes ever made against online child exploitation networks,” said FBI Director Kash Patel. “We’ve not only dismantled dangerous platforms on the dark web, but we’ve also brought key perpetrators to justice and delivered a powerful message: you cannot hide behind anonymity to harm children.”
“Yesterday’s sentencing reaffirms our steadfast commitment to protecting our children, the most vulnerable among us, from those who exploit and harm them through the despicable trade in child sexual abuse material,” said U.S. Attorney Hayden P. O’Byrne for the Southern District of Florida. “Thomas Peter Katsampes and his co-conspirators ran some of the darkweb’s most heinous networks, enabling horrific crimes against innocent victims, but Operation Grayskull has shut these sites down and delivered justice. We applaud the FBI and our international partners for their tireless work, and let this be a clear warning: we will relentlessly pursue and prosecute anyone engaged in such atrocities, no matter how they attempt to cover their tracks.”
Thomas Peter Katsampes, 52, of Eagan, Minnesota, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise and conspiracy to distribute child pornography on Feb. 27. According to court documents, Katsampes joined a dark web site dedicated to CSAM in 2022, advertised and distributed CSAM over the website, including CSAM depicting prepubescent children, and eventually worked his way up to a staff position on the web site, which, among other things, involved moderating the site, enforcing the site’s rules for posting CSAM, and advising the site’s users about how to post CSAM.
In addition to Katsampes, eight individuals have been convicted and sentenced in the Southern District of Florida for their involvement in running the primary site targeted by Operation Grayskull.
Defendant
Residence
Case Status
Selwyn David Rosenstein
Boynton Beach, Florida
Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography, five counts of advertisement of child pornography, and possession of child pornography.
Sentenced on Dec. 12, 2022, to 28 years in prison and ordered to pay $80,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
Matthew Branden Garrell
Raleigh, North Carolina
Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.
Sentenced on Aug. 1, 2023, to 20 years and 10 months in prison and ordered to pay $158,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
Robert Preston Boyles
Clarksville, Tennessee
Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.
Sentenced on Aug. 15, 2023, to 23 years and four months in prison and ordered to pay $7,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
Gregory Malcolm Good
Silver Springs, Nevada
Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.
Sentenced on Aug. 22, 2023, to 25 years and 10 months in prison and ordered to pay $93,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
William Michael Spearman
Madison, Alabama
Pleaded guilty to engaging in a child exploitation enterprise.
Sentenced on Jan. 23, 2024, to life in prison and ordered to pay $123,400 in restitution to victims of his offense.
Joseph Addison Martin
Tahuya, Washington
Pleaded guilty to engaging in a child exploitation enterprise.
Sentenced on April 18, 2024, to 42 years in prison and ordered to pay $174,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
Joseph Robert Stewart
Milton, Washington
Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.
Sentenced on April 18, 2024, to 23 years and 9 months in prison and ordered to pay $19,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
Keith David McIntosh
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography, both as a person with a prior conviction for possession of child pornography.
Sentenced on Dec. 19, 2024, to 55 years in prison.
The website’s leaders advertised and distributed CSAM, promulgated rules for the website, enforced the rules by banning or scolding users who violated them, held staff meetings, recruited members to serve as staff members, recommended users for promotion, edited and deleted user posts, praised individuals for participating in and contributing to the website, kept records of CSAM posts made by individual members, and paid for and maintained the website servers, among other things.
Operation Grayskull resulted in the dismantling of a total of four sites dedicated to images and videos depicting child sexual abuse. These websites were some of the most egregious on the dark web, and they included sections specifically dedicated to infants and toddlers, as well as depictions of violence, sadism, and torture. The websites also contained detailed advice on how to avoid detection by law enforcement – for example, by using sophisticated technologies.
In other judicial districts around the country, nine additional individuals have been convicted for their involvement with these websites, including the following:
Charles Hand, of Aberdeen, Maryland, was prosecuted in the District of Maryland and was sentenced to 14 years in federal prison;
Michael Ibarra, of Wenatchee, Washington, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Washington and was sentenced to 12 years in prison;
Clay Trimble, of Fordyce, Arkansas, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Arkansas and was sentenced to 18 years in prison;
David Craig, of Houston, Texas, was prosecuted in the Southern District of Texas and was sentenced to nine years in prison;
Robert Rella of Chesapeake, Virginia, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Virginia and was sentenced to five years and eight months in prison;
Samuel Hicks, of Fort Wayne, Indiana, was prosecuted in the Northern District of Indiana and was sentenced to 16 years in prison;
Richard Smith of Dallas, Texas, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Texas and was sentenced to 14 years in prison;
Patrick Harrison, of Grand Rapids, Michigan, was prosecuted in the Western District of Michigan and was sentenced to five years and ten months in prison.
Thomas Gailus, of Webbers Falls, Oklahoma, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Oklahoma, and his sentencing is pending.
Two other individuals in the United States died before being charged for their involvement with the websites. The operation also resulted in arrests in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany, Estonia, Belgium, and South Africa.
The FBI’s Child Exploitation Operational Unit and Miami Field Office, West Palm Beach Resident Agency investigated the cases.
Acting Deputy Chief Kyle P. Reynolds and Trial Attorney William G. Clayman of the Justice Department’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS) and former Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory Schiller of the Southern District of Florida coordinated the operation and prosecuted the defendants in the Southern District of Florida.
Substantial assistance for the cases prosected in the Southern District of Florida was provided by FBI Field Offices and Resident Agencies in Huntsville, Alabama; Reno, Nevada; Clarksville, Tennessee; Raleigh, North Carolina; Madison, Wisconsin; Tacoma, Washington; Grand Rapids, Michigan; and Minneapolis, Minnesota; CEOS’s High Technology Investigative Unit; and the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Northern District of Alabama, District of Nevada, Middle District of Tennessee, Eastern District of North Carolina, Western District of Wisconsin, Western District of Washington, Western District of Michigan, and District of Minnesota.
This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and CEOS, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.justice.gov/psc.
Operation Grayskull Eradicated Four Dark Web Child Abuse Sites and Led to the Convictions of 18 Offenders to Date, Who Have Collectively Received More than 300 Years in Prison
Today, the Justice Department announced the results of Operation Grayskull, a highly successful joint effort between the Department of Justice and the FBI that resulted in the dismantling of four dark web sites dedicated to images and videos containing child sexual abuse material (CSAM). To date, the operation has led to the convictions of 18 offenders, including a Minnesota man who was sentenced yesterday to 250 months in prison and lifetime supervised release for his involvement with one of these dark web sites. He was also ordered to pay $23,000 in restitution.
“Today’s announcement sends a clear warning to those who exploit and abuse children: you will not find safe haven, even on the dark web,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Matthew R. Galeotti of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “These offenders thought that they could act without consequences, but they were wrong. Thanks to the relentless determination of our prosecutors and law enforcement partners we have exposed these perpetrators for who they are, eliminated their websites and brought justice to countless victims.”
“This operation represents one of the most significant strikes ever made against online child exploitation networks,” said FBI Director Kash Patel. “We’ve not only dismantled dangerous platforms on the dark web, but we’ve also brought key perpetrators to justice and delivered a powerful message: you cannot hide behind anonymity to harm children.”
“Yesterday’s sentencing reaffirms our steadfast commitment to protecting our children, the most vulnerable among us, from those who exploit and harm them through the despicable trade in child sexual abuse material,” said U.S. Attorney Hayden P. O’Byrne for the Southern District of Florida. “Thomas Peter Katsampes and his co-conspirators ran some of the darkweb’s most heinous networks, enabling horrific crimes against innocent victims, but Operation Grayskull has shut these sites down and delivered justice. We applaud the FBI and our international partners for their tireless work, and let this be a clear warning: we will relentlessly pursue and prosecute anyone engaged in such atrocities, no matter how they attempt to cover their tracks.”
Thomas Peter Katsampes, 52, of Eagan, Minnesota, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise and conspiracy to distribute child pornography on Feb. 27. According to court documents, Katsampes joined a dark web site dedicated to CSAM in 2022, advertised and distributed CSAM over the website, including CSAM depicting prepubescent children, and eventually worked his way up to a staff position on the web site, which, among other things, involved moderating the site, enforcing the site’s rules for posting CSAM, and advising the site’s users about how to post CSAM.
In addition to Katsampes, eight individuals have been convicted and sentenced in the Southern District of Florida for their involvement in running the primary site targeted by Operation Grayskull.
Defendant
Residence
Case Status
Selwyn David Rosenstein
Boynton Beach, Florida
Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography, five counts of advertisement of child pornography, and possession of child pornography.
Sentenced on Dec. 12, 2022, to 28 years in prison and ordered to pay $80,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
Matthew Branden Garrell
Raleigh, North Carolina
Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.
Sentenced on Aug. 1, 2023, to 20 years and 10 months in prison and ordered to pay $158,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
Robert Preston Boyles
Clarksville, Tennessee
Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.
Sentenced on Aug. 15, 2023, to 23 years and four months in prison and ordered to pay $7,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
Gregory Malcolm Good
Silver Springs, Nevada
Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.
Sentenced on Aug. 22, 2023, to 25 years and 10 months in prison and ordered to pay $93,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
William Michael Spearman
Madison, Alabama
Pleaded guilty to engaging in a child exploitation enterprise.
Sentenced on Jan. 23, 2024, to life in prison and ordered to pay $123,400 in restitution to victims of his offense.
Joseph Addison Martin
Tahuya, Washington
Pleaded guilty to engaging in a child exploitation enterprise.
Sentenced on April 18, 2024, to 42 years in prison and ordered to pay $174,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
Joseph Robert Stewart
Milton, Washington
Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography.
Sentenced on April 18, 2024, to 23 years and 9 months in prison and ordered to pay $19,500 in restitution to victims of his offense.
Keith David McIntosh
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Pleaded guilty to conspiracy to advertise child pornography and conspiracy to distribute child pornography, both as a person with a prior conviction for possession of child pornography.
Sentenced on Dec. 19, 2024, to 55 years in prison.
The website’s leaders advertised and distributed CSAM, promulgated rules for the website, enforced the rules by banning or scolding users who violated them, held staff meetings, recruited members to serve as staff members, recommended users for promotion, edited and deleted user posts, praised individuals for participating in and contributing to the website, kept records of CSAM posts made by individual members, and paid for and maintained the website servers, among other things.
Operation Grayskull resulted in the dismantling of a total of four sites dedicated to images and videos depicting child sexual abuse. These websites were some of the most egregious on the dark web, and they included sections specifically dedicated to infants and toddlers, as well as depictions of violence, sadism, and torture. The websites also contained detailed advice on how to avoid detection by law enforcement – for example, by using sophisticated technologies.
In other judicial districts around the country, nine additional individuals have been convicted for their involvement with these websites, including the following:
Charles Hand, of Aberdeen, Maryland, was prosecuted in the District of Maryland and was sentenced to 14 years in federal prison;
Michael Ibarra, of Wenatchee, Washington, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Washington and was sentenced to 12 years in prison;
Clay Trimble, of Fordyce, Arkansas, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Arkansas and was sentenced to 18 years in prison;
David Craig, of Houston, Texas, was prosecuted in the Southern District of Texas and was sentenced to nine years in prison;
Robert Rella of Chesapeake, Virginia, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Virginia and was sentenced to five years and eight months in prison;
Samuel Hicks, of Fort Wayne, Indiana, was prosecuted in the Northern District of Indiana and was sentenced to 16 years in prison;
Richard Smith of Dallas, Texas, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Texas and was sentenced to 14 years in prison;
Patrick Harrison, of Grand Rapids, Michigan, was prosecuted in the Western District of Michigan and was sentenced to five years and ten months in prison.
Thomas Gailus, of Webbers Falls, Oklahoma, was prosecuted in the Eastern District of Oklahoma, and his sentencing is pending.
Two other individuals in the United States died before being charged for their involvement with the websites. The operation also resulted in arrests in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany, Estonia, Belgium, and South Africa.
The FBI’s Child Exploitation Operational Unit and Miami Field Office, West Palm Beach Resident Agency investigated the cases.
Acting Deputy Chief Kyle P. Reynolds and Trial Attorney William G. Clayman of the Justice Department’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS) and former Assistant U.S. Attorney Gregory Schiller of the Southern District of Florida coordinated the operation and prosecuted the defendants in the Southern District of Florida.
Substantial assistance for the cases prosected in the Southern District of Florida was provided by FBI Field Offices and Resident Agencies in Huntsville, Alabama; Reno, Nevada; Clarksville, Tennessee; Raleigh, North Carolina; Madison, Wisconsin; Tacoma, Washington; Grand Rapids, Michigan; and Minneapolis, Minnesota; CEOS’s High Technology Investigative Unit; and the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Northern District of Alabama, District of Nevada, Middle District of Tennessee, Eastern District of North Carolina, Western District of Wisconsin, Western District of Washington, Western District of Michigan, and District of Minnesota.
This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and CEOS, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.justice.gov/psc.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07)
Six Months into Trump Admin, Pressley Reintroduces Bill to Codify Equity, Improve Government Services for Underserved Communities
Bill Text | Press Conference Video
WASHINGTON – As the nation marks six months of the Trump Administration, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07),Congressman Jonathan Jackson (IL-01), Chair of the Congressional Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Caucus, and their colleagues are affirming their unwavering commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives amid Donald Trump’s attacks and continuing to advance an affirmative, equitable vision for communities of color, the LGBTQIA+ community, people with disabilities, and other marginalized groups.
Congresswoman Pressley was joined by Maya Wiley, President and CEO, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, Marc Morial, President and CEO, National Urban League, Juan Proaño, CEO, League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), and Rob Weissman, Co-President, Public Citizen, at a Capitol Hill press conference yesterday to discuss their broader fight to defend diversity amidst the Trump Administration’s harmful and unprecedented onslaught on DEI. The full video from their press conference is available here.
“Donald Trump’s first six months in office have been a precise, intentional assault on people of color, as well as our LGBTQIA+ siblings, folks with disabilities, and other marginalized people. Despite this, we’re more resolved than ever in our commitment to a more just, equitable, and diverse America,” said Congresswoman Pressley. “I’m proud to join my colleagues and movement partners in making plain that we will not be silenced and we will not stand by as Donald Trump and extremist Republicans resegregate America and continue rolling back our hard-earned civil rights. We must work to ensure diversity, equity, and inclusion is the law of the land. That is why the Equity in Government Act is deeply necessary and will aide our efforts by helping to ensure the federal government works for all people.”
“Diversity, equity, and inclusion are not just policies—they are essential commitments to fairness and opportunity for all,” said Congressman Jackson, Co-Chair of the Congressional Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Caucus. “The escalating rollback of DEI protections is a direct attack on the rights and futures of Black, brown, Veterans, and disabled Americans. We will not accept the reckless undoing of progress won through generations of struggle. I stand with my colleagues and communities across this country to defend DEI, because every person in America deserves the dignity to thrive. This fight is about justice, about truth, and about building a nation where no one is left behind.”
“In a time when others seek to divide and exclude, this bill is a beacon of hope for Latino communities who have long been left behind. Ensuring equity in government isn’t just a box to check — it’s a lifeline for the more than 60 million Latinos in our country,” said Juan Proaño, CEO of LULAC. “By making diversity, equity, and inclusion the law of the land, this policy will uplift our families and ensure our voices are heard in every federal agency. LULAC is proud to stand with Congresswoman Pressley, Congressman Jackson, and their colleagues on this bold, affirmative vision for America, because an inclusive America is a stronger America for us all.”
“The Leadership Conference supports the Equity in Government Act because federal agencies are required by civil rights laws and principles to make sure they are serving all communities fairly,” said Maya Wiley, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. “Regardless of your race, ZIP code, or bank account, we need the government to make sure we are getting the health care, education, and other services we all need. We are witnessing cuts that harm a Latino child who attends Head Start or a student with disabilities who relies on educational supports in schools, in addition to the elimination of grants that address health disparities of people of color — all because they are part of advancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility. This bill ensures agencies have to collect data, listen to communities, and have dedicated teams focused on serving everyone equitably. Democracy is more than just a promise — it’s an obligation to enact and enforce civil rights. We will not go back to a time when this country didn’t care about all of us. We continue to fight for a diverse, equitable, inclusive, and accessible future for all our people.”
“The National Urban League’s 2025 State of Black America report, ‘A State of Emergency: Civil Rights, Democracy, and Progress Under Attack’ lays bare a deliberate, coordinated campaign to reverse decades of progress,” National Urban League President and CEO Marc H. Morial said. “In the last six months, federal departments protecting civil rights have been defunded, voting protections rolled back, and diversity programs criminalized. Far-right actors have weaponized the term ‘woke’ to attack equity, inclusion, and even historical truth. The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice has been twisted into a tool of political retaliation. The National Urban League is proud to stand with Congresswoman Pressley and all our allies to meet this moment of crisis.”
“Every American should be appalled by the racist, sexist and ableist policies of this administration, which aim to exacerbate social and economic inequality. Every American should also understand that these policies are not only unjust, they make America weaker. Rollbacks in consumer protection, environmental protection, civil liberties and more – carried out under the cloak of “anti-DEI” policies – leave every American more vulnerable to abuses and the country itself far weaker. That’s why America needs Rep. Ayanna Pressley’s leadership and passage of the Equity in Governance Act.” – Rob Weissman, Public Citizen Co-President
“Inclusive America is a non-profit and bipartisan organization that works to ensure the government is as diverse as the American people. With this reasoning, our team worked with Rep. Pressley to push the Equity in Government Act which is a critical step towards a broader reform of civil rights and equal opportunity.” — Inclusive America Advocacy Team
As part of her fight to defend diversity, Congresswoman Pressley is introducing the Equity in Government Act, legislation to advance equity and support for underserved communities through the federal government. The bill would codify key ideas from the Biden-Harris Administration’s Executive Orders 13985 and 14091 —which Donald Trump revoked on his first day in office —to ensure that federal agencies continue their work to promote equal opportunity for all, including people of color, women, rural communities, individuals with disabilities, and others that have been systemically excluded from participating fully in economic, social, and civic life.
Full text of the Equity in Government Act is available here.
On his first day in office, President Biden signed Executive Order (EO) 13985, launching a historic, whole-of-government effort to advance equity by requiring federal agencies to identify and address barriers to serving underserved communities. In 2023, he followed with EO 14091, which expanded this work by establishing agency equity teams, a White House steering committee, and annual equity action plans to embed equity in federal planning.
This progress was long overdue. In 2021, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) found that most federal agencies lacked the demographic data necessary to identify barriers to equity in their programs and services – let alone develop serious plans to eliminate them. Yet, on his very first day in office, Trump dismantled these equity-focused efforts, underscoring the need for statutory protections.
The Equity in Government Act codifies several key ideas from the Biden EOs and ensures that agencies continue this work for years to come – regardless of who occupies the White House. Specifically, it would:
Require agencies include at least one goal relating to improving the equitable provision of services when they submit Agency Strategic Plans and Agency Performance Plans;
Require agencies to consult with community organizations and other stakeholders as they develop and revise their strategic plans and work towards their performance goals;
Permanently authorize the Federal Chief Data Officer Council, which works to improve the quality, use, and management of data for evidence-based government operations, and ensuring that the Council’s work facilitates fair and equitable outcomes;
Establish an Equity Subcommittee of the existing Performance Improvement Council, which would serve as an interagency working group to facilitate the development and sharing of guidance, data, and best practices for providing government services fairly, and would be required to solicit input directly from those receiving such services; and
Establish statutory requirements for an Agency Equity Advisory Team within each federal agency, led by the agency’s Performance Improvement Officer and with representation from key internal agency offices.
Co-sponsors of the Equity in Government Act include Representatives Alma Adams, Joyce Beatty, Sanford D. Bishop, Jr., Shontel M. Brown, André Carson, Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, Yvette D. Clarke, James Clyburn, Danny K. Davis, Cleo Fields, Valerie Foushee, Maxwell Frost, Robert Garcia, Sylvia R. Garcia, Steven Horsford, Jonathan L. Jackson, Pramila Jayapal, Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr., Robin L. Kelly, Timothy M. Kennedy, Summer L. Lee, Stephen Lynch, LaMonica McIver, Kweisi Mfume, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Delia Ramirez, Jamie Raskin, Lateefah Simon, Darren Soto, Melanie Stansbury, Shri Thanedar, Rashida Tlaib, Nydia Velazquez, Bonnie Watson Coleman, and Nikema Williams.
The bill is endorsed by the following organizations: AAPI Victory Alliance, ACLU, African American Policy Forum, American Oversight, Common Cause, Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, Inclusive America, Interfaith Alliance, League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), National Action Network, National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, National Council of Asian Pacific Americans, National Urban League, National Black Justice Collective, Popular Democracy, Public Citizen, and SEIU.
In April 2022, Rep. Pressley joined Administration officials at a White House event to announce the executive orders, which followed calls from Congresswoman Pressley and then-House Oversight Committee Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney for robust data collection, assessment tools, and stakeholder engagement to ensure the success of the initiative. Video of the event is available here.
Rep. Pressley has consistently advocated for race-conscious policies to help close the racial wealth gap in America, uplift Black, brown, and other marginalized communities, and transform the criminal legal system to center the dignity, humanity, and equality of everyone who calls America home —especially during the second Trump Administration.
On January 22, 2025, Rep. Pressley issued a statement slamming the Trump Administration’s harmful executive actions on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), including the placement of DEI employees on leave ahead of their eventual layoffs.
In February, during Black History Month, Rep. Pressley and Senator Cory Booker reintroduced H.R. 40, legislation to establish a federal commission to examine the lasting legacy of slavery and develop reparations proposals for African American descendants of enslaved people.
In May, she and Senator Paul Tonko led 69 of their colleagues on a letter to the Inspector General of the Smithsonian Institution demanding an investigation of the impact of Donald Trump’s harmful Executive Order attacking Smithsonian museums – namely, the American Art Museum, the American Women’s History Museum, and the National Museum of African American History and Culture – attempting to erase histories of marginalized communities.
Earlier this year, Rep. Pressley delivered a floor speech slamming Trump’s attack on Smithsonian museums and affirming that Black history is American history.
Congresswoman Pressley and Senator Booker are the lead co-sponsors of the American Opportunity Accounts Act—also known as Baby Bonds—legislation that would create a federally-funded savings account for every American child in order to make economic opportunity a birthright for every child and help close the racial wealth gap.
Congresswoman Pressley is the lead sponsor of the People’s Justice Guarantee (PJG) – her comprehensive, decarceration-focused resolution that outlines a framework for a fair, equitable and just legal system.
Memphis, TN – Today, the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) captured Derrion Taylor, 18, who is charged in a shooting that resulted in the death of a 93-year-old victim and injuries to two other people. Taylor is charged with First-Degree Murder, Two Counts of Attempted First-Degree Murder, and Two Counts of Aggravated Assault.
On January 17, 2024, the Memphis Police Department (MPD) responded to a shooting call on Kendale Avenue in Memphis. Upon arrival, they discovered three female victims had been struck by gunfire. One victim, Geraldine Harris, 93, succumbed to her injuries and died on the scene. Two other victims were transported to an area hospital with critical injuries.
After an in-depth investigation, MPD Homicide Detectives determined that Derrion Taylor, who was then 17 years old, was responsible for these crimes.
On July 22, 2025, a juvenile petition was issued for his arrest. The USMS Two Rivers Violent Fugitive Task Force (TRVFTF) in Memphis was requested to assist in finding an apprehending Taylor.
Around 8 a.m., July 24, 2025, the TRVFTF tracked Taylor to a residence in the 3000 block of Colony Drive in Memphis. Deputy U.S. marshals and task force officers surrounded the residence and took Taylor into custody without incident.
The U.S. Marshals Service Two Rivers Violent Fugitive Task Force is a multi-agency task force within Western Tennessee. The TRVFTF has offices in Memphis and Jackson, and its membership is primarily composed of Deputy U.S. Marshals, Shelby, Fayette, Tipton, and Gibson County Sheriff’s Deputies, Memphis and Jackson Police Officers, Tennessee Department of Correction Special Agents and the Tennessee Highway Patrol. Since 2021, the TRVFTF has captured over 3,000 violent offenders and sexual predators.
For the past few weeks the headlines about Gaza have focused on the hundreds of people who have been killed while queueing for food. The aid distribution system put in place in May, backed by the US and Israel and run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, has proved to be chaotic and allegedly resulted in violence, with both Israel Defense Forces personnel and armed Palestinian gangs blamed for killing about 1,000 people in the two months the new system has been operating.
Now the headlines are focusing on the growing number of people dying of starvation.
Harrowing reports from the Gaza Strip report almost daily on the children dying of malnutrition in hospitals and clinics that simply don’t have the food to keep them alive. Writing in the Guardian this week, a British volunteer surgeon working in one of Gaza’s hospitals, Nick Maynard, described patients who “deteriorate and die, not from their injuries, but because they are too malnourished to survive surgery”.
The UK and 27 other countries this week has condemned the “drip feeding of aid and the inhumane killing of civilians” who are trying to get food and water. And yet, writes Simon Mabon, still the world’s leaders look on: “Most are apparently content to condemn – but little action has been taken.”
Mabon, a professor of international relations at Lancaster University, quotes the latest report from the IPC, which monitors food security in conflict situations. It estimates that 500,000 people in Gaza are considered to be facing “catastrophe”, while a further 1.1 million fall into the “emergency” risk category. Both categories anticipate a steadily rising death rate among civilians in Gaza.
So how can Israel’s allies apply pressure on Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to bring an end to the violence and allow Palestinian civilians access to the food, water and medical supplies they so desperately need?
Mabon canvasses a range of options. First of all, countries that have yet to recognise the state of Palestine can do so. It’s nonsense, Madon believes, to talk of a two-state solution – as the UK government does – when you haven’t actually recognised the second state in the equation.
Then they could stop selling arms to Israel. Many countries already have. But the US still issues export licenses for some weapons that are sold to Israel.
There are a plethora of other things world leaders could do to pressure Israel. Mabon recommends having a look at what the world did to isolate South Africa during the apartheid years, measures which eventually helped bring about meaningful change there.
As for Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister is reported to be considering an early election. In previous months this looked like a move freighted with jeopardy. An election loss brought on by a disenchanted electorate, heartbroken at the hostage situation and exhausted by the conflict, would probably mean having to face the charges of corruption which have hung over him for more than five years.
But recent polls have suggested a bump in popularity following his 12-day campaign against Iran. Netanyahu is nothing if not a clever political manipulator. But Brian Brivati, a professor of contemporary history and human rights at Kingston University, believes that to have a chance of winning, the prime minister will need to fight a campaign on three narratives of his government’s success: securing the release of the hostages, defeating Hamas and delivering regional security. “It is a tall order,” Brivati concludes.
Anyone following the situation in Gaza over the past 18 months will have encountered Francesca Albanese, the UN’s special rapporteur for Palestine’s occupied territories. For three years she has monitored the human rights situation in Gaza and the West Bank, delivering trenchant criticism of Israel’s conduct and those who, by their inaction – and sometimes contrivance – have enabled it.
Earlier this months, the US government imposed sanctions on Albanese, because – as US secretary of state Marco Rubio insisted – she has engaged with the International Criminal Court (also subject to US sanctions) “in efforts to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute nationals of the United States or Israel”. Also she has written “threatening letters to dozens of entities worldwide, including major American companies”.
Alvina Hoffman, an expert in diplomatic affairs and human rights at SOAS, University of London, explains what a special rapporteur does and why their work is so valuable in the defence of human rights.
To Istanbul, where delegations from Russia and Ukraine met yesterday for their third round of face-to-face talks. All 40 minutes of them. There was another agreement of prisoner swaps and the two sides decided to set up some working groups to look into various political, military and humanitarian issues – but online rather in person.
The brevity of the talks came as no surprise to Stefan Wolff. Wolff, an expert in international security at the University of Birmingham who has provided commentary for The Conversation throughout the conflict in Ukraine, points out that both sides remain wedded to their maximalist war aims. For Russia, this is for Ukraine to accept Russia’s annexation of Crimea and four provinces of eastern Ukraine, a ban on Ukraine’s membership of Nato and a much reduced military capacity. For Ukraine, it is getting their territory back and Russian acceptance of their national sovereignty, meaning it gets to determine for itself what alliances it seeks.
Donald Trump has told Vladimir Putin that, if there’s no ceasefire in 50 days, he’ll apply harsh secondary sanctions on the countries buying Russian oil and that he plans to supply Ukraine with American weapons (via Nato’s European member states, that is). Wolff believes both sides will now play the waiting game. They will calculate their next move after September 2, when the 50 days run out, and when they know more about what the US president plans to do.
Volodymyr Zelensky, meanwhile, faces pressure from his own people. There have been days of protest at his decision to bring two formerly independent anti-corruption organisations under the direct control of the government. He argues that this was necessary to prevent Russian infiltration, while critics are saying that the Ukrainian president has launched a power grab designed to prevent independent investigation of alleged corruption against people close to him.
Jenny Mathers says these protests, which involve people from all political shades, including people who have fought in the defence of Ukraine since 2022, some with visible injuries, represents a fracture of the “informal agreement between the government and society to show a united front to the world while the war continues”.
Ukrainians protest after Zelensky signs law clamping down on anticorruption agencies.
It’s not as if Zelensky is in clear and present danger of losing his job. His party holds a majority of seats in the Ukrainian parliament, so he governs without having to depend on coalition partners. And the country’s constitution prohibits the holding of elections in wartime – whatever Putin, who regularly insists that Zelensky is an illegitimate leader because he is governing past his term limit, might think. Plus his approval rating sits at 65%.
Zelensky has been quick to soften his stance on this. Mathers says that political corruption is a very sore point in Ukraine, where there was decades of it until the Maidan protests of 2013-14 unseated the pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych. As she writes here, “the ‘Revolution of Dignity’ that rejected Yanukovych’s leadership and his policies was also a resounding demonstration of the strength of Ukraine’s civil society and its determination to hold its elected officials to account. Zelensky would be rash not to heed that.
He also knows it’s important for him to present a squeaky clean image to his supporters in the west. So while the protests may not present an immediate threat to his own position, he knows that unless he acts to root out corruption in Ukraine, it’ll be a threat to the future of the country itself.
But ethicist Marcel Vondermassen from the University of Tübingen believes another recent decision by the Ukrainian government is storing up trouble for the future. Ukraine has recently announced its decision to pull out of the Ottawa convention, the treaty that forbids the use of anti-personnel landmines.
In doing so, he’s following the example of Finland, Poland, Lithuania and Estonia which have all also quite the treaty in recent months for fear of Russian aggression.
But as Vondermassen points out, landmines don’t usually switch themselves off when a conflict ends and people are still being killed an maimed in former conflict zones around the world. Often it is farmers at work or children at play who are the victims. If other ways to protect countries from aggression aren’t pursued, as he puts it, in future decades we’ll still be “counting thousands of child casualties … from the landmines laid in the 2020s”.
Thailand-Cambodia: centuries-old dispute flares again
A dispute between the two south-east Asian countries that has been simmering since May flared into life yesterday when five Thai soldiers patrolling the border region were injured after stepping on a landmine – the second such incident in the past week. Both countries have sealed their border and there have been tit-for-tat ambassadorial expulsions.
Cambodia fired rockets and artillery into Thailand, killing 12 civilians. Thailand in turn has launched airstrikes against Cambodia. Both countries are blaming the other for starting it.
Petra Alderman, an expert in south-east Asian politics from London School of Economics and Political Science, traces the origins of this row, which go back to the colonial era in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Travis Van Isacker, Senior Research Associate, School of Sociology, Politics and International Studies, University of Bristol
On a cold, wet November evening, Issa Mohamed Omar and more than 30 other men, women and children set off from their informal camp near the northern French port city of Dunkirk. They walked through the darkness in near-silence for around two hours, until they reached the beach from where they hoped to start a new and better life.
As they arrived, five men were busy pumping up an inflatable dinghy and attaching an outboard engine. These people smugglers had charged each of their customers more than a thousand euros for a trip that costs someone with the right passport less than a hundred.
The travellers were given life-vests, arranged into rows and counted. “There are 33 of you,” one of the smugglers said. For many on board, this was not their first attempt at reaching England.
Most came from Iraqi Kurdistan, including Kazhal Ahmed Khidir Al-Jammoor from Erbil, who was travelling with her three children: Hadiya, Mubin and Hasti Rizghar Hussein, respectively aged 22, 16 and seven.
A father and son from Egypt were shown how the engine worked and provided a GPS device and directions to Dover, around 35 miles (60km) to the west across the Channel. Mohamed Omar would later recall:
The Egyptian man was put in charge of steering the boat by the smugglers. He was travelling with his son, who looked like he was in his late teens or maybe early 20s. I do not know how they came to be the driver and navigator.
There were also at least three Ethiopian nationals – one of whom, father-of-two Fikiru Shiferaw from Addis Ababa, sent his wife Emebet at home in Ethiopia a final WhatsApp voice message:
We have already boarded the boat. We are on the way. I will turn off my phone now. Goodnight, I will call you tomorrow morning.
These were the last words she would ever receive from her husband.
What happened to Fikiru Shiferaw and the other passengers on the night of November 23-24 2021 has been the subject of the UK’s Cranston Inquiry which, during March 2025, heard from 22 witnesses to the disaster, including officers involved in the UK’s search-and-rescue (SAR) response. Chaired by former High Court judge Sir Ross Cranston, the independent inquiry also heard from Mohamed Omar from Somalia – one of only two survivors – as well as family members of many of the dead and missing.
These hearings not only shed light on the actions of UK Border Force and His Majesty’s Coastguard officers during the failed rescue operation – designated Incident Charlie – in the early hours of November 24, but the agencies’ approach to “small boat crossings” in general dating back to 2017.
According to the testimonies, officers had been operating under extreme pressure in the months leading up to the disaster. Kevin Toy, master of the Border Force ship Valiant which was sent out to search for the missing dinghy that night, explained that in the run-up to the incident, “night after night” he could see his crew were “utterly exhausted” by the end of their shifts.
The evidence shows the British government was aware of the growing risk that Border Force and HM Coastguard could be overwhelmed by the rising number of small boat crossings – and that people might die as a result. In May 2020, a document produced by the Department for Transport acknowledged that “SAR resources can be overwhelmed if current incident numbers persist”. At least three senior HM Coastguard officers identified the same risk in August 2021.
Multiple communication failures have also been exposed by the inquiry – among British officers, with their opposite numbers in France, and between both countries’ emergency services and the increasingly desperate people aboard the sinking dinghy.
Despite numerous distress calls and GPS coordinates being shared via WhatsApp, a rescue boat failed to reach the travellers in time. Amid the confusion, when their calls stopped, the coastguard assumed Charlie’s passengers had been picked up and were safe. In fact, they were perishing in the cold waters of the Channel over more than ten hours.
The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.
As part of my research into the digital transformation of the UK-France border, I attended the inquiry and have studied the many statements, call transcripts, operational logs, emails and meeting minutes it has made public. Initially, I wanted to understand how the November 2021 disaster became a watershed moment in the UK government’s response to people trying to cross the Channel by small boat or dinghy, catalysing the transformation of the UK’s maritime border into the hyper-surveilled space it is today.
But, after speaking to representatives for Mohamed Omar and the bereaved families as well as migrant rights organisations, larger questions have emerged. In particular, given the inquiry’s singular focus on this one catastrophic event in November 2021, those I spoke to are concerned that its recommendations will be unable to prevent further deaths from occurring in the Channel, which have risen dramatically over the last 18 months.
How ‘small boat crossings’ began
Since the UK and France began operating “juxtaposed” border controls in the early 1990s (meaning border checks occur before departure), asylum seekers trying to reach England have had to make irregular journeys across the Channel. Until 2018, these were typically aboard trains and ferries – after sneaking on to a lorry or through a French port’s perimeter security.
At the time of the “Jungle” camp near Calais in 2015-16, media coverage of collective attempts by its residents to enter French ports spiked UK government investment in the border. Between 2014 and 2018, it gave its French counterpart at least £123 million to “strengthen the border and maintain juxtaposed controls”. These funds paid for French police to patrol the ports and border cities, regularly evict migrants’ living sites, and finance detention and relocation centres.
As admitted by then-home secretary Sajid Javid in 2019, this increased security led people to find other ways across the Channel. Beginning in the winter of 2018, smugglers organised journeys in small, seaworthy vessels they had stolen from marinas along the French coast. These “small boats” continue to lend their name to this migration phenomenon – yet the unseaworthy inflatable dinghies used today, with no keel or rigid hull, are not worthy of the name.
Even in the context of the usual sensationalism surrounding irregular migration to the UK, small boat journeys were met with an especially intense response, both politically and in the media.
When 101 people crossed between Christmas and New Year in 2018, Javid declared it a major incident. Ever since, “stopping the boats” has been one of the UK government’s highest priorities. Despite small boat arrivals making up only 29% of UK asylum claimants in 2018-24, billions of pounds have been spent to try and control the route.
Frosty relations and the ‘pushback’ plan
As Channel crossings rose sharply over 2020-21, worsening relations between France and the UK due to Brexit complicated how the two governments worked together to respond. In his testimony, former clandestine Channel threat commander Dan O’Mahoney – appointed by Javid’s successor, Priti Patel, to “make small boat crossings unviable” – described relations between the two countries as already “very frosty” when he began in August 2020.
After France’s then-interior minister, Gérald Darmanin, axed a plan for UK vessels to take rescued migrants back to Dunkirk, O’Mahoney was tasked by senior ministers to come up with an alternative. The resulting “pushback” plan, called Operation Sommen, involved Border Force officers on jet skis driving into migrant dinghies to turn them back as they crossed the border line into UK waters. When France learned of the plan, O’Mahoney recalled:
They thought it went counter to their and our obligations around safety of life at sea … They objected to it very strongly, and it affected our already quite strained relationship with them further.
Operation Sommen was abandoned in April 2022 before having ever been used in anger. However, preparations were said to have taken up “a very considerable amount of time and resource” at both the Home Office and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency – and had “a detrimental effect” on the UK’s overall SAR response to small boat crossings.
At a meeting of senior officials in June 2021 to discuss Operation Sommen, ministers had made clear that the “numbers of people crossing [was] a political problem” – and that improving SAR capabilities did not “fit with [the] narrative of taking back control of borders”.
Although senior HM Coastguard officers recognised “it is extremely difficult to locate small boats or communicate with those onboard”, the inquiry heard that officers did not recall receiving “any small boat training before November 2021”, other than in the procedure to allow Border Force to push them back to French waters.
The head of Border Force’s Maritime Command, Stephen Whitton, told the inquiry he was under “a huge amount of pressure” to prevent small boat crossings, while also “providing the bulk of the support to search and rescue”. Despite carrying out 90% of all small boat rescues in the Channel and “regularly being overwhelmed”, Border Force Maritime Command received “no additional assets to manage the search and rescue response” before November 2021.
‘The pressure we were under’
When the decision was taken for Border Force – a law enforcement rather than search-and-rescue organisation – to be the primary responders to small boat crossings in 2018, only around 100 people were crossing each month. Yet by the time of the disaster three years later, according to an internal Home Office document, the total for 2021 was “already more than 25,000”.
At the inquiry, O’Mahoney stated: “As 2021 went on, it became much clearer that … frankly, we just needed more [rescue] boats.” Whitton admitted that before the disaster, Border Force, HM Coastguard, the Royal National Lifeboat Institution and other support organisations were all “on our knees in terms of the pressure we were under, and it was getting hugely challenging”.
The evidence shows this pressure was acutely felt inside Dover’s Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre, which sits atop the port’s famous white cliffs offering a commanding view of the Channel. Inside, Coastguard officers coordinate SAR operations and control vessel traffic in the Dover Strait – one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes.
On the night of November 23-24, three coastguard officers were on search-and-rescue duty: team leader Neal Gibson, maritime operations officer Stuart Downs, and a trainee – unnamed by the inquiry – who was officially only present as an observer.
HM Coastguard’s Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre at Dover overlooking the Channel. Travis Van Isacker, CC BY-NC-SA
Staffing appears to have been a longstanding issue at the Dover coastguard station where, according to divisional commander Mike Bill, there was “poor retention of staff” and “experience and competence weren’t the best”. Only the day before the disaster, during a migrant red days meeting – convened when, due to good weather, the probability of Channel crossers is considered “highly likely” – chief coastguard Peter Mizen had warned that only having two qualified officers at Dover on nights “isn’t enough”.
Over recent months, as the station had become busier responding to small boat crossings and in the wake of an unsuccessful recruitment drive, staff were having to work flat-out throughout their shifts, and were being asked to come in on scheduled days off.
On the night of November 23-24, owing to staff shortages, team leader Gibson told the inquiry he had to cover traffic control duties for three hours from 10.30pm. This meant he was away from the SAR desk at 00.41am, when a message arrived from the national rescue coordination centre along the coast in Fareham, stating that the Coastguard’s scheduled surveillance aeroplanes would not be flying over the Channel that night due to fog.
The officers were told they would be “effectively blind” – and should not allow themselves “to be drawn into relaxing and expecting a normal migrant crossing night”. The message warned: “This has the potential to be very dangerous.”
‘Their boat – there’s nothing left’
According to Mohamed Omar, the sea was calm when he and the other passengers departed the French beach around 9pm UK time. Giving his evidence to the Cranston Inquiry from Paris – he still cannot travel to the UK – a ship approached them around an hour into their voyage:
They came up to us to see what we were doing, and shone a light on us. I remember seeing a French flag on the boat. It was a big boat and I am certain it was the French coastguard. I had heard from people I met in the camp in Dunkirk that this happened sometimes, and that the French boat would follow until you reached English waters.
In fact, Mohamed Omar said, the French ship left the travellers again after about an hour. Shortly after this, the problems began.
A French warship patrols the shore of Mardyck in northern France, close to where Charlie is thought to have departed. Travis Van Isacker, CC BY-NC-SA
Around 1am, seawater began entering the dinghy. By now, it was in the vicinity of the Sandettie lightvessel, around 20 miles north-east of Dover. At first, passengers managed to bail out the 13°C water – but soon the flooding became uncontrollable. The dinghy’s inflatable tube began losing pressure, and a couple of the Kurdish men used air pumps to try to keep it inflated. Others tried to prevent panic spreading among the passengers.
Many onboard began to make frantic calls for rescue. What were reported to be leaked transcripts of some of these calls were published by French newspaper Le Monde a year after the sinking. They showed the first distress call from the dinghy was received by the French coastguard at 12.48am. Speaking in English, the caller said there were 33 people on board a “broken” boat.
According to Le Monde, three minutes later, another call was transferred to the French maritime rescue coordination centre at Cap Gris-Nez by an emergency operator who reported: “Apparently their boat – there’s nothing left.” Following procedure, the French coastguard officer asked the caller to send a GPS position by WhatsApp so she could “send a rescue boat as soon as possible”. At 1.05am UK time, the GPS position arrived.
Rather than send a French boat, Le Monde reported that the officer phoned her counterparts in Dover to warn them a dinghy 0.6 nautical miles from the border line would soon be crossing into UK waters. On the other end of the line was the trainee officer, who was handling routine calls that night despite officially only being an observer.
After the call finished, according to Downs’s evidence to the inquiry, the trainee mistakenly told him the dinghy was thought to be “in good condition” – information he recorded in the log for Incident Charlie. This miscommunication may have affected the urgency of the UK’s SAR response, preventing HM Coastguard and Border Force from appreciating the severe distress the “broken” dinghy was in.
Just before 1am, the French coastguard had sent its migrant tracker spreadsheet, containing information on all small boat crossings that night, to HM Coastguard for the first time. It showed four migrant dinghies at sea – which Gris-Nez had been aware of “for many hours”, according to Gibson.
The issue of the French coastguard appearing to withhold information about active small boat crossings had been raised by HM Coastguard’s clandestine operations liaison officer during a July 2021 review. And earlier that very evening, Gibson told one of his colleagues:
Sometimes they just seem to keep it quiet. Like we’ll not get anything – then we’ll get a tracker at three in the morning with 15 incidents, and they go: ‘Mostly these are in your search-and-rescue region.’ Wonderful.
At 1.20am, Downs phoned Border Force Maritime Command in Portsmouth to request a Border Force vessel search for the dinghy Charlie. He provided the GPS position received from his French counterpart and the number of people onboard – but also the incorrect information that “they think it’s in good condition”.
Ten minutes later, the Valiant, Border Force’s 42-metre patrol ship stationed at Dover, was tasked to proceed towards the Sandettie lightvessel. At the same time, the first direct call to the Dover rescue coordination centre came in from Charlie. The distressed caller said they were “in the water” and that “everything [was] finished”.
Around 15 minutes later, at 1.48am, Gibson took a call from 16-year-old Mubin Rizghar Hussein, who spoke good English. Despite the noise and commotion, he managed to provide Gibson with a WhatsApp number – in order to share their GPS position. The transcript of this call records voices shouting in the background: “It’s finished. Finished. Brother, it’s finished.”
A ‘grave and imminent threat to life’
Gibson told the inquiry that after his call with Rizghar Hussein, he had a “gut feeling that this doesn’t feel quite as usual”. By “usual” he meant what was, according to maritime operations officer Downs, a commonly held belief at the Dover coastguard station that with “nine out of ten”“ callers from small boats: “It would generally be overstated that the boat … was sinking, people were drowning … Whatever was going on would be overstated.”
Acting on his gut feeling, at 2.27am Gibson took the unprecedented decision to broadcast a Mayday Relay – denoting a “grave and imminent threat to life”. By maritime law, this alert required other vessels to offer their assistance.
Gibson told the inquiry he did this to get the French warship Flamant to respond. He could see on his radar screen that Flamant was closest to Charlie’s position and was the best vessel to rescue the people if the dinghy really was sinking.
Why the Flamant did not respond is at the centre of an ongoing criminal investigation in France into two of the warship’s officers and five coastguards from Gris-Nez, for “non-assistance of persons in distress”. This investigation’s strict confidentiality obligation means the inquiry was unable to access any information from the French side about their operations that night.
At 2.01 and again at 2.14am, HM Coastguard had received new GPS positions via WhatsApp showing the dinghy to be more than a mile inside UK waters.
Valiant, having been tasked at 1.30am, only exited the port of Dover at 2.22am and would need at least another hour to reach the Sandettie. Despite this, no other vessel was sent to join the search. At 3.11am, when asked during a call by Border Force Maritime Command whether Charlie was “still a Mayday situation”, Gibson replied: “Well, they’ve told me it’s full of water.”
With a total of four small boats being shown in the Channel that night by the French tracker spreadsheet, Gibson suggested there could be as many as 110 people on board these dinghies – beyond Valiant’s capacity for taking on survivors. Nevertheless, Border Force and HM Coastguard opted to “wait and see what the numbers are, and whether Valiant can deal with that … We don’t want to call any other assets out just yet.”
In a call with Christopher Trubshaw, captain of the Coastguard rescue helicopter stationed at Lydd on the Kent coast, aviation tactical commander Dominic Golden explained that Border Force was “not prepared to bring in their crews who are pretty knackered” unless “we can convince them there are people in real danger”. He then asked Trubshaw to search the Channel for the small boats shown in the French tracker, as the surveillance aeroplanes had been unable to take off.
In her closing submission to the inquiry, Sonali Naik, a legal representative of the survivors and bereaved families, highlighted Golden’s “dismissive attitude” towards Charlie’s distress when he gave Trubshaw the reason for the request, which included the following:
As usual, the catalogue of phone calls is beginning to trickle in … You know, the classic ‘I am lost, I am sinking, my mother’s wheelchair is falling over the side’ etc. ‘Sharks with lasers surrounding boat’ and ‘we are all dying’ type of thing.
Nevertheless, Golden asked the helicopter crew to pack a liferaft. “I can’t imagine we’re going to need it but … potentially you get to play with one of your new toys.”
While Golden described his words as “unwise” or “flippant”, Naik said they were “more than that” – suggesting they revealed rescuers’ general perceptions of the occupants of small boats and the widely held scepticism towards their distress calls.
‘We are dying. Where is the boat?’
With the water inside rising fast and their dinghy collapsing, Charlie’s increasingly desperate passengers kept trying to get rescuers to appreciate how dire their situation was.
At 2.31am in the Dover rescue coordination centre, Gibson received a second call from Mubin Rizghar Hussein, who pleaded: “We are dying, where is the boat?”
Gibson replied: “The boat is on its way but it has to get …” only to be interrupted by Rizghar Hussein saying: “We all die. We all die.”
“I get that,” Gibson told the terrified teenager, “but unfortunately, you’re going to be patient and all stay together, because I can’t make the boat come any quicker.” He ended the call saying:
You need to stop making calls because every time you make a call, we think there’s another boat out there – and we don’t want to accidentally go chasing for another boat when it’s actually your boat we’re looking for.
Gibson broke down briefly when recounting this second call during his evidence to the inquiry, explaining:
If you don’t understand what’s fully going on and you’re getting ‘we’re all going to die’, it’s quite a distressing situation to find yourself in, sitting at the end of a phone – effectively helpless. You know where they are, you want to get a boat to them, and you can’t.
Call records also show that coastguards on both sides of the Channel passed responsibility for rescuing the sinking dinghy off to one another. According to Le Monde, during one call a passenger told the French coastguard officer he was “in the water” – to which she replied: “Yes, but you are in English waters.”
The transcript of the last call before Charlie capsized, made at 3.12am, reveals that Downs asked “where are you?” 17 times – despite the caller being unable to answer anything beyond “English waters”. The maritime operations officer finished by instructing the caller to hang up and dial 999: “If it won’t connect on 999, then you’re probably still in French waters.”
In her closing submission, Naik pointed to “discriminatory stereotypes and attitudes towards migrants on small boats which fatally affected the SAR response” for Charlie – as rescuers, in her words, “jumped to premature conclusions”. According to survivor Mohamed Omar:
Because we have been seen as refugees … that’s the reason why I believe the rescue, they did not come at all. We feel like we were … treated like animals.
Fatal assumptions
At 3.27am, Border Force’s ship Valiant arrived at Charlie’s last recorded GPS position (from 2.14am) – but found nothing. Its master, Kevin Toy, decided to head north-easterly towards the Sandettie lightvessel, the way the tide was flowing.
En route, Valiant spotted two other dinghies in the darkness using its night vision – one still making its way towards the English coast, the other stopped in the water. The stationary dinghy was in greater danger from the Channel’s shipping traffic, so Valiant went to it and began rescuing those onboard – radioing back that it had “engaged unlit migrant crafts stopped in the water” with approximately 40 people onboard.
In the Dover rescue coordination centre, Gibson assumed this dinghy could be Charlie and gave Mubin Rizghar Hussein’s name and telephone number so Valiant’s crew could verify whether he was on board. At 4.16am, Gibson himself tried calling the WhatsApp number that Rizghar Hussein had shared, but the call failed.
At 4.20am, Valiant completed its first rescue of the morning. Two more followed after the Coastguard helicopter spotted two other dinghies in the Sandettie area – but nobody in the water. A near-capacity Valiant then returned to Dover just after 8am with 98 survivors on board.
None of the three rescued dinghies matched the description of Charlie. All were in good condition, differently coloured, and with disparate numbers of people onboard – yet the misplaced assumption Charlie had been rescued persisted amid the night’s murky information environment. Gibson stated that, while he had soon received additional information matching Valiant’s first rescue to a different dinghy, he was still “fairly certain Charlie had been picked up”.
“Once Valiant had picked up these [three] boats,” he explained, “we no longer received calls from Charlie, and a call to a known phone number on Charlie failed.” As a result, neither Valiant nor the Coastguard helicopter were sent back out to continue searching for the stricken dinghy.
In fact, Gibson’s call to Rizghar Hussein’s WhatsApp number did not fail because Charlie’s passengers had been rescued – nor because they had thrown their phones into the sea when Border Force arrived. Rather, it was because the dinghy had capsized and everyone had fallen into the Channel’s freezing waters.
‘No one came to our rescue’
In harrowing evidence to the inquiry, Mohamed Omar explained how, as one side of the dinghy deflated, the passengers – “hysterical and crying” – panicked and moved to the opposite side. This shift in weight caused the dinghy to capsize:
The screaming when the boat tipped and people fell in the water was deafening. I have never heard anything as desperate as this. I was not thinking about whether we were going to be rescued any more; it was all about how to stay alive.
As the passengers were thrown into the water, the dinghy flipped on top of them. Mohamed Omar described having to swim out from underneath to catch a breath: “It was dark and I could not really see. It was extremely cold and the sea was rough.”
As he surfaced, he saw Halima Mohammed Shikh, a mother of three also from Somalia and travelling alone, struggling as she couldn’t swim. She screamed his name for help, and he tried to get her back to what was left of the dinghy – but couldn’t. “I think she was one of the first people to drown,” he told the inquiry.
Others managed to cling to the broken inflatable, hoping rescue was on its way – but “no one came to our rescue”. Pushed and pulled by the waves, some lost their grip and drifted away before dawn. Mohamed Omar recalled:
All night, I was holding on to what remained of the boat. In the morning, I could hear the people were screaming and everything. It’s something I cannot forget in my mind.
By the time the sun finally rose at 7.26am, he estimated that no more than 15 people were left clinging to the broken dinghy – adrift on the tide in a busy shipping lane:
I do not recall speaking with anyone in the water. Those who were alive were half-dead. There was nothing we could do any more. I could see bodies floating all around us in the water. I presume most people were either already dead or were unconscious.
Shortly afterwards, Mohamed Omar said he let go of the dinghy and began to swim, thinking to himself: “I am going to die [but] I don’t want to die here. At least if I die whilst swimming, I won’t feel it.”
He swam towards a boat he could see in the distance and, as he got closer, began to wave his life jacket for attention. A French woman, out fishing with her family, saw him and jumped in the water to save him.
As he finished telling his story, Mohamed Omar told the inquiry: “I’m a voice for those people who passed away.”
Bodies are found
Around 1pm on the afternoon of November 24, 12 hours after the first distress calls from Charlie, a French commercial fishing vessel began finding bodies in the sea nine miles north-west of Calais. But as the news came in, no one at HM Coastguard or Border Force appears to have made the connection with Incident Charlie.
Days later, when the accounts of Mohamed Omar’s fellow survivor, Mohammed Shekha Ahmad from Iraqi Kurdistan, and a relative of two of the deceased emerged, the Home Office refuted their claims that the dinghy had sunk in UK waters as “completely untrue”.
However, five days after the disaster, Gibson contacted the small boats tactical commander to share his concerns that the reported deaths could be from Charlie. He had read a news article in which “the survivor states a male called Mubin called the emergency services, which could possibly be the ‘Moomin’ [sic] I spoke to”.
On December 1, clandestine Channel threat commander O’Mahoney responded to a question from the UK’s Joint Committee on Human Rights, as to whether the migrants whose bodies had been found in French waters had made distress calls to the UK authorities. O’Mahoney told the committee:
We are looking into that. To manage your expectation, though, it may never be possible to say with absolute accuracy whether that boat was in UK waters [and] I cannot tell you with any certainty that the people on that particular boat called the UK authorities.
Thanks largely to their grieving families tireless pursuit of the truth, however, it is now possible to say definitively that Charlie had been in UK waters – and that a number of its passengers spoke to HM Coastguard officers.
It was only after these families raised concerns that the disaster had involved the UK authorities that the Department for Transport commissioned a safety investigation into the incident in January 2022. A lawyer for the bereaved families suggested to me that without the threat of legal action, the Department for Transport “would likely not have done anything” – despite this being Britain’s worst maritime disaster for decades. Meanwhile, according to inquiry evidence, the Home Office is understood not to have conducted an internal review or investigation into its role in the disaster.
After a frustrating two years of waiting for the survivors and bereaved families, the Marine Accidents Investigations Branch published its report – which both confirmed most of their accounts and substantiated their criticisms of the SAR response.
Soon afterwards, the Cranston Inquiry was announced. Despite no bodies having been recovered in UK waters, it has been run almost like an inquest. In his final report – to be published by the end of 2025 – Sir Ross Cranston has promised to “consider what lessons can be learned and, if appropriate, make recommendations to reduce the risk of a similar event occurring”.
A ‘crucial and unique opportunity’
HM Coastguard and Border Force officers have repeatedly told the inquiry how the UK’s approach to small boat search-and-rescue has changed since the November 2021 disaster. More officers have been hired, Border Force has contracted additional boats to conduct rescues, information sharing has improved, and cooperation with French colleagues is better. Today, there are significantly more rescue ships on both sides of the Channel which can intervene faster when dinghies come to be in distress, and have undoubtedly saved many lives.
There has also been massive investment in drones, aeroplanes and powerful shore-based cameras to reduce the risk that HM Coastguard loses “maritime domain awareness” again if some of its surveillance aircraft are unable to fly. New technology automatically translates coastguard officers’ messages into different languages and extracts live GPS locations and images from travellers’ mobile devices.
Such investments make it unlikely that another dinghy could be lost in the middle of the Channel after its passengers call for help, in the way Charlie so catastrophically was.
Nevertheless, people continue dying while attempting to cross the Channel – with 2024 having been by far the deadliest year yet. At least 69 people lost their lives, according to the Refugee Council. So far in 2025, 24 people are documented as dead or missing at the UK-France border by Calais Migrant Solidarity, amid a record number of attempted crossings for the first half of the year.
Some migrants’ rights NGOs have suggested the UK’s “stop the boats” policies, and European efforts to disrupt the supply chain of dinghies and other equipment used in crossings, has driven such deadly overcrowding.
But it is also unlikely that the circumstances surrounding more recent deaths in the Channel will ever be investigated as thoroughly as Incident Charlie, if at all. Lawyers for the bereaved families have therefore been keen to highlight the Cranston Inquiry’s “crucial and unique opportunity” not only to look back and offer answers about one of Britain’s worst maritime disasters in recent decades – but to look forwards and “prevent the further loss of life at sea”.
The survivors, families and migrants’ rights organisations who contributed their evidence thus hope the inquiry’s recommendations go beyond purely operational and administrative improvements to search-and-rescue, to address the fundamental role that UK, France and European border policies play in why more people are dying in the Channel, despite the improvements to search-and-rescue strategies and resources.
Above all, they ask why only some people are able to travel to the UK in comfort and safety while others must make the journey in precarious, overcrowded inflatable dinghies – and thus entrust their lives to the search-and-rescue services whose success can never be guaranteed. As Halima Mohammed Shikh’s cousin, Ali Areef, told the inquiry:
It makes me feel sick to think about crossing the Channel in a ferry where others including a member of my family lost their lives because there was no other way to cross. I will never take a ferry across the Channel again.
To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
Travis Van Isacker gratefully acknowledges the support of the Economic and Social Research Council
(UK) (Grant Ref: ES/W002639/1).
Headline: Patio Furniture Company Grosfillex Inc. to Pay $4.9 Million to Resolve Allegations it Evaded Duties on Extruded Aluminum from the PRC
The Justice Department announced today that Grosfillex Inc. (Grosfillex), a patio furniture company located in Pennsylvania, has agreed to pay $4.9 million to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act and other statutes by evading antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD) on items made of extruded aluminum originating from the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
Headline: Patio Furniture Company Grosfillex Inc. to Pay $4.9 Million to Resolve Allegations it Evaded Duties on Extruded Aluminum from the PRC
The Justice Department announced today that Grosfillex Inc. (Grosfillex), a patio furniture company located in Pennsylvania, has agreed to pay $4.9 million to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act and other statutes by evading antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD) on items made of extruded aluminum originating from the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
The Justice Department announced today that Grosfillex Inc. (Grosfillex), a patio furniture company located in Pennsylvania, has agreed to pay $4.9 million to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act and other statutes by evading antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD) on items made of extruded aluminum originating from the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
The Department of Commerce assesses, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) collects, antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD) to level the playing field for domestic producers. Antidumping duties protect against foreign companies “dumping” products on U.S. markets at prices below cost, while countervailing duties offset foreign government subsidies. The settlement announced today resolves allegations that Grosfillex knowingly submitted, and caused to be submitted, false customs forms to CBP claiming that certain furniture parts made of extruded aluminum were not subject to AD/CVD. For a subset of such parts, the United States alleged that Grosfillex attempted to camouflage the aluminum extrusions by packaging the parts as sham furniture “kits.” In addition, for a different subset of such parts, Grosfillex knowingly failed to correct customs forms it had submitted previously, even after learning that the forms falsely stated to CBP that certain extruded aluminum parts were not subject to AD/CVD.
“Antidumping and countervailing duties protect American companies from unfair subsidies and trade practices that harm domestic industries,” said Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “Today’s settlement demonstrates that the Justice Department will continue to actively pursue those who knowingly fail to pay customs duties.”
“This settlement should serve as a warning that the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania will use every tool available to combat fraud in international trade,” said U.S. Attorney David Metcalf for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. “We will pursue those who seek an unfair advantage in U.S. markets by attempting to evade paying the customs, duties, or tariffs on foreign imports meant to level the playing field for U.S. manufacturers.”
“The investigation into Grosfillex Inc. highlights our relentless dedication to enforcing our nation’s trade laws and protecting the integrity of our economy. By uncovering and dismantling intricate schemes to defraud the government, we ensure that all businesses operate on a fair and level playing field,” said Special Agent in Charge Edward V. Owens of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) at the Philadelphia office of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “The successful settlement of this case is a testament to the outstanding collaboration between HSI, CBP and the U.S. Department of Justice. We remain vigilant in our efforts to identify and hold accountable those who attempt to exploit our trade system for their benefit.”
The allegations resolved by this settlement arose from a whistleblower lawsuit filed under the False Claims Act by Edward Wisner, a former employee of Grosfillex. Under the False Claims Act, private citizens can sue on behalf of the government and share in any recovery. Wisner will receive a $962,662.74 share of today’s settlement.
The settlement was the result of a coordinated effort between the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, with assistance from CBP.
Trial Attorney Nelson Wagner in the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Mark Sherer for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania handled the matter.
The pursuit of this matter illustrates the government’s emphasis on combating fraud, waste, and abuse. One of the most powerful tools in this effort is the False Claims Act. Tips and complaints from all sources about potential customs fraud can be reported to CBP at www.help.cbp.gov/s/tip.
The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only and there has been no determination of liability.
Source: United States Senator for Wyoming Cynthia Lummis
Washington, D.C. – Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), along with Representative Scott Fitzgerald (R-WI), today introduced the STUDENT Act, legislation that would impose necessary limitations and conditions on the National Education Association’s (NEA) federal charter to bring it in line with other federally chartered organizations and redirect it toward its original purpose of supporting teachers in America.
The NEA, which received its federal charter through an act of Congress, has strayed far from its original educational mission. Despite claiming to be “non-partisan,” the nation’s largest union has repeatedly supported divisive political causes through endorsements and financial contributions that harm students’ education and undermine parental rights. Earlier this month, the NEA members voted to cut ties with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) over its support for Israel.
“The NEA has exploited its federal charter to advance a radical political agenda that puts ideology before education,” said Sen. Lummis. “Wyoming parents and teachers deserve better than a union that prioritizes woke politics over student achievement. The resolution passed at the NEA Representative Assembly to cut ties with the Anti-Defamation League because of its support for Israel is abhorrent and does nothing to stem the rising tide of antisemitic incidents we’ve witnessed nationwide. Federal charters should be reserved for organizations that serve patriotic, charitable, historical, or educational purposes – not for unions that push divisive and antisemitic ideologies.”
“The NEA long ago transformed from an educational association into a political machine, pushing a progressive agenda that puts activists ahead of students’ needs,” said Congressman Scott Fitzgerald. “The STUDENT Act reins in NEA’s federal charter, restores accountability, and demands a return to its original purpose: educating, not indoctrinating, American children.”
“The National Education Association has failed to respect its duties as a federally chartered organization or as a steward of children’s education,” said Sen. Ricketts. “Rather than promote educational outcomes, they promote a radical agenda that supports illegal immigration and teaches harmful gender ideology. It is time for Congress to restore oversight of the entity it created and make sure young Americans receive the education they deserve.”
“Rep. Fitzgerald and Sen. Lummis should be commended for their leadership in introducing the STUDENT Act, which would address some of the NEA’s most concerning conduct and make it more accountable to the public and even its own members,” said Freedom Foundation CEO Aaron Withe. “The Freedom Foundation is proud to stand with these courageous lawmakers in the fight to restore sanity to public education.”
“The Endowment for Middle East Truth, EMET, is proud to endorse the STUDENT Act,” said Sarah Stern, President of the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET). “We solidly stand behind the ADL’s fight against the rising tide of antisemitism, which has skyrocketed in our country since October 7, 2023, as well as their position on Israel. We are appalled by the National Education Association’s blatant refusal to entertain the ADL’s professional, fair and balanced point of view, and that they have chosen to take a position that effectively condones Hamas’ atrocities against the Jewish people. It’s unfortunate that the NEA no longer works to fulfil its core mission of advancing an American bias-free education and has instead dedicated itself to political indoctrination and prejudice.”
In addition to Senators Lummis and Ricketts, U.S. Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX), Jim Risch (R-ID), and Tim Sheehy (R-MT) are original cosponsors.
Background:
A 2023 Freedom Foundation report revealed that the NEA’s federal charter is unusually brief compared to other Title 36 federally-chartered organizations, allowing the union to operate with minimal oversight while enjoying taxpayer-funded benefits.
Key Provisions of the STUDENT Act:
Bans promotion of antisemitic beliefs, including harmful stereotypes about Jewish people, Holocaust denial or minimization, and hatred based on Jewish identity or connection to Israel
Prohibits the union from promoting or requiring adherence to critical race theory concepts.
Prohibits the NEA from engaging in electoral politics and lobbying, a restriction included in 60 percent of federal charters;
Eliminates the NEA’s exemption from Washington, D.C. property taxes
Requires explicit member consent for all dues and fees
Mandates comprehensive record-keeping and document accountability
Directs all assets to the Department of Treasury if the NEA dissolves
Prohibits discrimination and hiring quotas
Prevents the NEA and its affiliates from calling strikes or work stoppages
Requires all NEA officers to be U.S. citizens
Establishes transparent governance standards
So far, the STUDENT Act has been endorsed by the following state and national organizations:
The State of Qatar has reiterated its rejection of the use of food and the starvation of civilians as a weapon of war, calling on the international community to compel Israel to allow the safe, sustained, and unobstructed entry of humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip, to be distributed by international humanitarian organizations.
This came in a statement delivered by HE Permanent Representative of the State of Qatar to the United Nations Sheikha Alya Ahmed bin Saif Al-Thani during the UN Security Council quarterly open debate on The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question (MEPQ), held at UN Headquarters in New York.
Her Excellency emphasized that the humanitarian situation in Gaza is beyond description, amid widespread famine, the collapse of infrastructure and the healthcare system, the spread of disease, and a death toll surpassing 58,000, including nearly 18,000 children.
She affirmed the State of Qatar strong condemnation of Israel ongoing attacks on civilian infrastructure, including hospitals, schools, and residential areas, stressing that the forced displacement of Palestinians in any form constitutes a blatant violation of international humanitarian law.
Her Excellency also stated that Qatar has made sincere efforts, in coordination with Egypt and the United States, to reach a permanent ceasefire in Gaza. She noted that past diplomatic efforts had yielded tangible results through previously reached agreements, and that current mediation efforts are ongoing to bridge the gap between the parties and secure an urgent agreement.
She further condemned the statements made by Israel Minister of Justice regarding the annexation of the West Bank, describing them as a continuation of illegal settlement policies and a flagrant violation of international law and UN Security Council Resolution 2334. She also denounced the approval of new settlement construction and the attacks carried out by settlers as part of an ongoing series of crimes against the unarmed Palestinian population. She called for urgent international action to protect civilians and to ensure accountability for those responsible.
Her Excellency conveyed Qatar condemnation of attempts by the Israeli occupation to alter the religious and historical status of holy sites, including the storming of Al-Aqsa Mosque by Israeli officials and settlers, the closure of the Jerusalem Fund, and the transfer of authority over Al Ibrahimi Mosque to a Jewish religious council.
She said Qatar warned of the risks of regional spillover due to the conflict and condemned Israel attacks on Syria, reaffirming its support for the Syrian Arab Republic sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity, and the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people for stability and development.
She also reaffirmed the State of Qatar’s principled and unwavering support for Lebanon, its unity and territorial integrity, and called for the withdrawal of Israeli occupation forces from all Lebanese territory, urging all parties to uphold the ceasefire agreement.
Her Excellency expressed the State of Qatar welcome of the upcoming United Nations High-Level International Conference on the Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine and the Implementation of the Two-State Solution to be co-chaired next week by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the French Republic. Qatar hopes the conference will yield tangible results and clear international commitments, serving as a foundational step toward full UN membership for the State of Palestine.
Her Excellency concluded by reaffirming Qatar principled and consistent stance in support of a just and sustainable solution to the Palestinian issue, based on international legitimacy and ensuring the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, foremost among them, the establishment of an independent Palestinian state along the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital. She stressed that Qatar will spare no effort in facilitating and supporting efforts toward achieving this goal.
