NewzIntel.com

Category: Law

  • MIL-OSI USA: LEADER JEFFRIES STATEMENT ON DONALD TRUMP’S UNPRECEDENTED ATTACK ON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Hakeem Jeffries (8th District of New York)

    Know Your Immigration Rights

    If you or a loved one encounter immigration enforcement officials, it is essential that you know your rights and have prepared your household for all possible outcomes.

    Ask for a warrant: The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution protects you from unreasonable search and seizure. You do not have to open your door until you see a valid warrant to enter your home or search your belongings.

    Your right to remain silent: The Fifth Amendment protects your right to remain silent and not incriminate yourself. You are not required to share any personal information such as your place of birth, immigration status or criminal history.

    Always consult an attorney: You have a right to speak with an attorney. You do not have to sign anything or hand officials any documents without speaking to an attorney. Try to identify and consult one in advance.

    The New York City Office of Civil Justice and the Mayor’s Office of Immigrant Affairs (MOIA) support a variety of free immigration legal services through local nonprofit legal organizations. To access these resources, dial 311 and say “Action NYC,” call the MOIA Immigration Legal Support Hotline at 800-354-0365 Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. or visit MOIA’s website.

    Learn more here: KNOW YOUR IMMIGRATION RIGHTS  – Congressman Hakeem Jeffries

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Speech to the Law Association 2025

    Source: New Zealand Government

    Thank you all for the invitation to speak with you this morning. I have been looking forward to this opportunity. May is a busy month for the Government, and it is always a relief to have the Budget delivered. 

    Today, I would like to speak about what I see as my privilege and responsibility to uphold the rule of law, and the role that all lawyers play in this, alongside the judiciary and the executive.

    This is also an opportunity for me to hear from you. It is always wonderful to hear from Law Association members who are out there in communities, listening to what clients want from their legal system, and from those making laws that affect them. You have a front row seat to lawmakers in action and can help us understand the impacts of what we do. 

    A legal system we can be proud of

    We can be proud of our legal system. 

    As you know, the rule of law is a foundational doctrine underpinning the law and order of any civilised society. New Zealand’s adherence to the rule of law ensures that standards of justice are upheld and provides safeguards against the arbitrary exercise of power. That adherence is recognised internationally, with the World Justice Project ranking us 6th overall in the 2024 Rule of Law index. 

    This commitment to the rule of law helps maintain our international rankings as a country with low corruption rates. This reputation is important for New Zealand’s economic growth and prosperity as a nation. Those living, working, and investing here know that we have a sound and accessible justice system and that success doesn’t require bribes behind the scenes.

    We are known as a country where access to independent courts, and the outcomes from these courts, cannot be bought or sold. That is invaluable and it means we are a good place to do business. 

    And it’s not just me saying this: we are currently fourth internationally in the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index behind Denmark, Finland and Singapore and well ahead of Australia, which is tied for 10th place.   

    This is a great place to sit in the rankings, but we still have room for improvement. While our position is steady in the top five, our Corruption Perceptions score has fallen from a high of 91 in 2013-15 to 83 last year.

    In 2024, the OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions found that only 42% of New Zealanders believed that public employees would refuse bribes to speed up service access. Even in the Rule of Law Index, there are factors such as order and security where we drop outside the top 10. 

    The Government is committed to being better. Earlier this month, my colleague Minister Mark Mitchell joined the Serious Fraud Office for the launch of their national campaign targeting foreign bribery. The campaign will raise awareness and involves the introduction of a new online platform to support safe, anonymous reporting of suspected foreign bribery.

    The campaign asks people to be on the lookout for ‘red flags’. You may come across some of these in your roles, particularly if you are advising clients engaged in international trade – things like business partners or agents refusing to provide details on transactions, or someone requesting an unusually high level of discretion around a particular contract. I think this is a great initiative, and I encourage you all to engage with the SFO’s content to learn more about the campaign.

    Moving away from traditional institutions

    Society is changing at a rapid pace. We are in a time, globally and domestically, where traditional institutions are losing the trust and respect they were once afforded. Data from the 2023 General Social Survey released last September found that New Zealanders’ trust in institutions such as Parliament, media and the courts has declined since 2021. 

    We cannot be so naïve as to think that this loss of trust has occurred entirely by accident. There will always be those that see opportunities in destabilising norms. However, it is not just “bad“ actors who undermine our institutions. Misunderstandings of the constitutional settings can also impact how our respective institutions are seen and perceived. 

    We can all think of times where emphasis is put on the Judiciary and Executive appearing to disagree. When the public see judges and politicians criticising each other, confidence in both groups can be lost, and this can affect the strength of our institutional domains.

    When your clients see the judiciary and executive seemingly at odds, how can they feel confident about the experience they will have with our legal system? 

    Comity and the separation of powers

    Those of you who attended last year will have heard me talk about our constitutional arrangements and comity. I have spoken about its importance at length, most recently to senior members of the judiciary. 

    Comity requires each branch to act with mutual restraint and respect towards the others. This principle allows them to respond in a way that reinforces, rather than undermines, the other branches’ legitimacy. It helps us ensure that we remain on the right side of our respective constitutional lines. 

    If the delicate balance that keeps the executive, Parliament and the judiciary operating well together is disturbed, it is extremely difficult to restore.  This balance helps us be strong, both individually and collectively as the institutions of government, so it is crucial we do our best to preserve it. 

    The separation of powers is something that I as Senior Law Officer pay particular attention to: what is the nature of that separation? How has it changed and how might it change in the future? How do we ensure that separate does not mean siloed, disconnected or in conflict, and that independence does not mean isolated? 

    Maintaining trust and confidence

    Those of us involved in creating the policy underpinning the laws of New Zealand need to ensure the resulting law is precise, clear, and not open to significant debate about its meaning.

    Earlier this year, I took on the portfolio of Minister for the Public Service. I’ve made it clear to Public Service leaders that the more complex and challenging it gets, the more simple we need to keep it. 

    Together with Public Service Commissioner Sir Brian Roche, I am committed to ensuring that the purpose and functions of the Public Service are clearly understood, including the importance of free and frank advice and the efficient use of taxpayers’ money. I want New Zealanders to feel confident that all those serving them can be trusted to deliver results. 

    It is my expectation that when the Public Service delivers those core functions well, the legislation and practice that emerge will be less ambiguous. This will allow you to focus on your role and reducing the number of instances where the executive and legislature may be seen to have handed off their responsibilities.

    “The Courts will sort that out” should not be a default position for a parliamentary lawmaker. We will play our part.

    Independent, fair and efficient courts are an important cornerstone of our democracy and the rule of law, and courts are a key underpinning of social stability. They give confidence that our rights as citizens can be upheld; differences and conflicts can be resolved through law; our society can be protected from law breakers; and that the State can be required always to act in accordance with the law.

    The courts do justice according to law, on the basis of clear, certain and determinate frameworks of legal principle. That sort of stability is not only essential to the rule of law and maintaining confidence in our legal system, but also facilitates government under law and economic growth.

    New Zealand Judges are independent in their decision making and cannot be influenced by Parliament or the executive. They should hold us to account. New Zealand is not best served by courts that rubber stamp decisions.

    However, the judiciary also cannot usurp the functions of the executive and the legislature. That undermines the system for everyone. While our common law method, of course, enables judicial development of the law that is to be done carefully, incrementally and being alert to the need to preserve certainty, stability and coherence of the law. 

    We all need to respect the roles each branch of government plays even when – in fact, especially when – it is inconvenient to do so.

    King’s Counsel appointments

    While we are all here together, I would like to remind you that applications for King’s Counsel are open until 9 June. 

    Appointments of King’s Counsel are made by the Governor-General on the recommendation of the Attorney-General and with the concurrence of the Chief Justice. The Governor-General may also appoint King’s Counsel in recognition of their extraordinary contributions to the law in fields other than advocacy. I take my role in this process very seriously.

    I am proud to be the Senior Law Officer of New Zealand and to represent and advocate for lawyers. 

    However, whether it is judicial appointment or KC appointment, I will not reward poor interpersonal conduct with appointment to these important and influential roles. 

    If you experience rudeness or intolerance, overbearing or bullying behaviour, whether from judges or lawyers, please raise it through the processes available to you. Contact your law society representative if you need to know more about these options. 

    I will never apologise for having high standards. If there is one thing you take away from my remarks today, I hope it is a reinforced sense of how important it is for each of us to do our duty. 

    Do not underestimate the contribution of ensuring we speak the truth to each other and valuing what we each do. Together we all have our part to play in maintaining the trust and confidence of people, here and overseas – and long may it continue. 

    Thank you for your time today. 

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Appeal for witnesses: Whitford serious crash

    Source: New Zealand Police

    Counties-Manukau Police are appealing for information from anyone who witnessed a crash involving a car and a truck yesterday morning on Whitford-Maraetai Road.

    The crash occurred around 6.45am near the intersection of Whitford-Maraetai and Waikopua Roads.

    The female driver of a small maroon hatchback vehicle remains in hospital in a serious condition.

    The truck driver sustained minor injuries.

    “A scene examination has been completed and Police are now appealing for witnesses to come forward,” Detective Senior Sergeant Dean Batey, of Counties Manukau East Police, says. 

    “We are keen hear from anyone who saw the accident or has dash cam footage that might assist our enquiries.”

    Anyone with information is asked to update Police online or call 105.

    Please use the reference number 250609/0912.

    ENDS

    Nicole Bremner/NZ Police 

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI: MediPharm Labs’ Founder-CEO Pat McCutcheon Throws his Support behind Apollo Capital as Dissident

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    McCutcheon Agrees with Apollo that Urgent Change is Needed, including Complete Turnover at the Board Level after Years of Value-Destruction

    Apollo Capital Announces Filing of Circular Addendum to
    Reflect McCutcheon’s Endorsement

    SHAREHOLDERS ARE URGED TO VOTE THE GOLD CARD “FOR” APOLLO CAPITAL’S SIX DIRECTOR NOMINEES AND NOT VOTE MEDIPHARM’s GREEN CARD

    TORONTO, June 09, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Apollo Technology Capital Corporation (“Apollo Capital”), one of MediPharm Lab Corp’s (TSX: LABS) (OTCQB: MEDIF) (FSE: MLZ) (“MediPharm”, or the “Company”) largest investors, is very pleased to announce that Pat McCutcheon, a founder, former CEO, director and Chairman of MediPharm, has joined Apollo Capital as a co-dissident in its battle to bring integrity, transparency and prosperity back to MediPharm’s long-suffering shareholders.

    Pat McCutcheon stated: “I have been observing Apollo’s activist campaign from the sidelines, and I can no longer just sit by and watch. I still feel a deep responsibility to the Company, its employees and the shareholders who have invested millions into the vision of MediPharm being the global leader in medical cannabis and cannabis derived pharmaceutical products. Over the past three years, the share price has collapsed while the senior management team has been paid over $10,000,000, a compensation program that should never have been approved by the independent Directors. Management has failed to capitalize on the medical cannabis opportunity and taken the Company away from its founding vision by entering the recreational market, taking on dilutive M&A transactions and recently announcing a return to cultivating cannabis. This is not the MediPharm investors have supported.

    I have gotten to know Regan McGee & his team of proposed directors. The directors have a broad range of relevant experience including medical cannabis experience, turn-around experience, and extensive capital markets experience. Regan has demonstrated himself to be a skilled investor who has been successful in both start-ups and turn-around projects. He’s also overcome great personal adversity, showing that he never backs down from a fight. In terms of the negative statements from MediPharm about Regan, the ones that I have been able to independently verify have turned out to be simply fabrications that appear to be part of MediPharm’s campaign to discredit and defame Regan. I believe the attacks on Regan & his business record are not factual and more importantly hide the real issues that shareholders should be considering such as compensation, dilution & the share price. On each of these fronts, I believe the Apollo directors are a better choice than the directors put forward by the current Board.

    We need to focus on the real issues – who is going to drive the stock price higher. Apollo only makes money when the stock price goes up, as all the shareholders do together. This is why I support the Apollo team. I’m asking shareholders to vote GOLD at this year’s AGM. We do not have time to wait.”

    Apollo notes that its business model with MediPharm is highly aligned with shareholders. As an activist investor, it looks to make investments in poorly managed companies where new governance and management can work to improve the share price for Apollo and all other investors. Apollo’s business model is to buy stock in target companies and work with frustrated shareholders to secure the majority of votes needed to replace board members and executives with ones focused on share value growth. Apollo does not “take over” or otherwise control its target companies, rather it appoints directors who recognize their legal fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of all common shareholders.

    Regan McGee of Apollo Capital commented: “We are immensely proud to welcome Pat McCutcheon as a co-dissident. Pat is responsible for helping to build MediPharm into an absolute powerhouse in the cannabis industry, and I can only imagine how difficult it has been for him to watch the Company he loves so much be mismanaged virtually to the point of insolvency.

    Pat and I want exactly the same thing – to restore value to MediPharm shareholders and to usher in a new era of profitability, good governance and most importantly, accountability. We both believe that if we all come together and take urgent action, the future for the MediPharm will be bright.”

    In connection with the addition of Mr. McCutcheon as a “dissident” within the meaning of applicable corporate laws, an addendum dated June 4, 2025 (the “Addendum”) to the dissident information circular dated May 15, 2025 (the “Circular”) has been filed on www.SEDARPLUS.ca under MediPharm’s profile. Shareholders are encouraged to read the Circular, as supplemented and amended by the Addendum.

    Apollo Capital’s strategic five-pillar plan for MediPharm has been made available in detail at www.curemedipharm.com. With shareholder support, we can turn MediPharm around and transform it into the world’s leading medical cannabis company.

    Apollo Capital urges shareholders to vote for change by voting the GOLD CARD by June 12, 2025. Shareholders are urged NOT to sign or return the green proxy cards sent by the Company.

    Contacts

    For Shareholders:
    Carson Proxy
    North American Toll-Free Phone: 1-800-530-5189
    Local or Text Message: 416-751-2066 (collect calls accepted)
    E: info@carsonproxy.com

    For Media:
    media@curemedipharm.com

    This solicitation is being made by and on behalf of the Concerned Shareholder, who, as of the date of this Circular, beneficially owns or controls, directly and indirectly through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Nobul Technologies Inc., 12,491,500 common shares of the Company (“Common Shares”), representing approximately 3% of the total Common Shares issued and outstanding, and not by the management of the Company (“Management”).

    Legal Disclosures

    Information in Support of Public Broadcast Exemption under Canadian Law

    In connection with the annual general and special meeting (the “Annual Meeting”) of shareholders of MediPharm, Apollo Capital has filed an amended and restated dissident information circular dated May 15, 2025 (the “Circular”), as amended and supplemented by an addendum to the Circular subsequently filed by Apollo Capital and Patrick McCutcheon (together, the “Concerned Stakeholder”) dated June 4, 2025 (the “Addendum” and together with the Circular, the “Amended Circular”), each in compliance with applicable corporate and securities laws. The Concerned Stakeholder has provided in, or incorporated by reference into, this press release the disclosure required under section 9.2(4) of NI 51-102 – Continuous Disclosure Obligations (“NI 51-102”) and the corresponding exemption under the Business Corporations Act (Ontario), and has filed the Amended Circular, available under MediPharm’s profile on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca. The Amended Circular contains disclosure prescribed by applicable corporate law and disclosure required under section 9.2(6) of NI 51-102 in respect of the Concerned Stakeholder’s director nominees, in accordance with corporate and securities laws applicable to public broadcast solicitations. The Amended Circular is hereby incorporated by reference into this press release and is available under MediPharm’s profile on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca. The registered office of the Company is 151 John Street, Barrie, Ontario, Canada L4N 2L1.

    SHAREHOLDERS OF MEDIPHARM ARE URGED TO READ THE AMENDED CIRCULAR CAREFULLY BECAUSE IT CONTAINS IMPORTANT INFORMATION. Investors and shareholders are able to obtain free copies of the Amended Circular and any amendments or supplements thereto and further proxy circulars at no charge under MediPharm’s profile on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca. In addition, shareholders are also able to obtain free copies of the Amended Circular and other relevant documents by contacting the Concerned Stakeholder’s proxy solicitor, Carson Proxy Advisors Ltd. (“Carson Proxy”) at 1-800-530-5189, local (collect outside North America): 416-751-2066 or by email at info@carsonproxy.com.

    Proxies may be revoked in accordance with subsection 110(4) of the Business Corporations Act (Ontario) by a registered shareholder of Company shares: (a) by completing and signing a valid proxy bearing a later date and returning it in accordance with the instructions contained in the accompanying form of proxy; (b) by depositing an instrument in writing executed by the shareholder or by the shareholder’s attorney authorized in writing; (c) by transmitting by telephonic or electronic means a revocation that is signed by electronic signature in accordance with applicable law, as the case may be: (i) at the registered office of the Company at any time up to and including the last business day preceding the day the Annual Meeting or any adjournment or postponement of the Annual Meeting is to be held, or (ii) with the chair of the Annual Meeting on the day of the Annual Meeting or any adjournment or postponement of the Annual Meeting; or (d) in any other manner permitted by law. In addition, proxies may be revoked by a non-registered holder of Company shares at any time by written notice to the intermediary in accordance with the instructions given to the non-registered holder by its intermediary. It should be noted that revocation of proxies or voting instructions by a non-registered holder can take several days or even longer to complete and, accordingly, any such revocation should be completed well in advance of the deadline prescribed in the form of proxy or voting instruction form to ensure it is given effect in respect of the Annual Meeting.

    The costs incurred in the preparation and mailing of any circular or proxy solicitation by the Concerned Stakeholder and any other participants named herein will be borne directly and indirectly by Apollo Capital. However, to the extent permitted under applicable law, Apollo Capital intends to seek reimbursement from the Company of all expenses incurred in connection with the solicitation of proxies for the election of its director nominees at the Annual Meeting.

    This press release and any solicitation made by the Concerned Stakeholder is, or will be, as applicable, made by such parties, and not by or on behalf of the management of the Company. Proxies may be solicited by proxy circular, mail, telephone, email or other electronic means, as well as by newspaper or other media advertising and in person by managers, directors, officers and employees of the Concerned Stakeholder who will not be specifically remunerated therefor. In addition, the Concerned Stakeholder may solicit proxies by way of public broadcast, including press release, speech or publication and any other manner permitted under applicable Canadian laws, and may engage the services of one or more agents and authorize other persons to assist it in soliciting proxies on their behalf.

    Apollo Capital has entered into an agreement with Carson Proxy for solicitation and advisory services in connection with the solicitation of proxies by the Concerned Stakeholder for the Annual Meeting, for which Carson Proxy will receive a fee from Apollo Capital not to exceed $250,000, together with reimbursement for reasonable and out-of-pocket expenses. Apollo Capital has also engaged Gasthalter & Co. LP (“G&Co”) to act as communications consultant to provide the Concerned Stakeholder with certain communications, public relations and related services, for which G&Co will receive, from Apollo Capital, a minimum fee of US$75,000 in addition to a performance fee of US$250,000 in the event that the Concerned Stakeholder’s nominees make up a majority of the board of directors of MediPharm (the “Board”) following the Annual Meeting, plus excess fees, related costs and expenses.

    No member of the Concerned Stakeholder nor any of their respective associates or affiliates has or has had any material interest, direct or indirect, in any transaction since the beginning of the Company’s last completed financial year or in any proposed transaction that has materially affected or will or would materially affect the Company or any of the Company’s affiliates. No member of the Concerned Stakeholder nor any of their respective associates or affiliates has any material interest, direct or indirect, by way of beneficial ownership of securities or otherwise, in any matter to be acted upon at the Annual Meeting, other than setting the number of directors and the election of directors to the Board.

    Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains forward‐looking statements. All statements contained in this filing that are not clearly historical in nature or that necessarily depend on future events are forward‐looking, and the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “expect,” “estimate,” “plan,” and similar expressions are generally intended to identify forward‐looking statements. These statements are based on current expectations of the Concerned Stakeholder and currently available information. They are not guarantees of future performance, involve certain risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict, and are based upon assumptions as to future events that may not prove to be accurate. All forward-looking statements contained herein are made only as of the date hereof and the Concerned Stakeholder disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any such forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that subsequently occur, or of which the Concerned Stakeholder hereafter becomes aware, except as required by applicable law.

    Hashtags: #ShareholderActivism #CorporateGovernance #InvestorProtection #Investor Alert #Investor Fraud #FinancialRegulation #CorporateCrime #FinancialCrime #HomelandSecurity #DHS #OpioidCrisis #OpioidEpidemic #OpioidLitigation #OpioidVictims #BMO #DEA #ONDCP

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Man charged with murder following Horeke homicide

    Source: New Zealand Police

    A 73-year-old man has been charged with murder following the death of a man in Horeke last month.

    Daniel Hepehi, also known as Danny Whiston, was found with critical injuries at a property in Waikerikeri Road in the early hours of May 22.

    Sadly, the 77-year-old died at the scene.

    Detective Inspector Rhys Johnston, of Northland CIB, says Police have now charged a man with murder following an ongoing investigation.

    “The accused will appear in Kaikohe District Court today via video link and we are not seeking anyone else in connection with this homicide.

    “Police have made a number of appeals for information during this investigation and we would like to thank those members of the public for their support,” Detective Inspector Johnston says.

    “We are continuing with our enquiries and we are pleased with the progress so far.”

    As the matter is before the court Police are limited in providing further comment.

    ENDS.

    Nicole Bremner/NZ Police 

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Marshall Calls for Full Funding of State and Local Law Enforcement Drug Interdiction Program

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Kansas Roger Marshall

    Washington – U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas) is asking the Senate Appropriations Committee to fully fund the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) program, which works with state and local law enforcement offices across the U.S. to foster collaboration, share resources, and leverage expertise to keep communities safe.  
    This effort follows the release of President Trump’s FY26 Budget, which calls for a 35% reduction in HIDTA funding, as well as the transfer of the program from the Office of National Drug Control Policy to the Department of Justice. Should this transfer and funding reduction occur, the Midwest HIDTA branch would lose approximately $5 million in annual resources and its ability to tailor strategies to regional needs. Both consequences would undermine the program’s mission to effectively reduce the impact of drug trafficking.  
    “As the son of a police chief, the safety of all Americans will always be one of my top priorities,” said Senator Marshall. “Our local law enforcement officers are the front lines of our battle against drug and human trafficking. The HIDTA program effectively utilizes local, state and federal resources to help law enforcement agencies better understand and combat threats and criminal activity in their communities.” 
    “Continued funding for the HIDTA Program is critical to supporting state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies working to keep our communities safe and to ensuring a response tailored to the unique drug threats in each region,” said Daniel Neill, Executive Director of the Midwest HIDTA. “It is equally important that HIDTA remain under ONDCP to preserve the neutrality, balance, and ability of Executive Boards to address drug threats specific to their communities. We appreciate Senator Marshall’s leadership during this pivotal time.” 
    This effort follows the release of President Trump’s FY26 Budget, which calls for a 35% reduction in HIDTA funding, as well as the transfer of the program from the Office of National Drug Control Policy to the Department of Justice. Should this transfer and funding reduction occur, the Midwest HIDTA branch would lose approximately $5 million in annual resources and its ability to tailor strategies to regional needs – both consequences would undermine the program’s ability to effectively reduce the impact of drug trafficking. 
    “Cutting HIDTA funding will weaken the ability of state, federal and local enforcement operations to stop the influx of fentanyl, methamphetamine, and other illicit drugs that fuel addiction and violent crime,” said KBI Director Tony Mattivi. “Without continued support, our communities will face increased risks from the spread of these substances and the influence of drug cartels.” 
    “The Sheriffs of Kansas and the Kansas Sheriffs Association greatly appreciate Senator Marshall’s efforts to fully fund the HIDTA program,” said Scott Braun, Ellis County Sheriff and President of the Kansas Sheriffs’ Association. “HIDTA substantially supports financially numerous drug task forces across Kansas who target the large-scale drug dealers in our State.  This is a unique collaboration with local, state, and federal law enforcement in combating the illicit drug activity across Kansas.” 
    “Midwest HIDTA is a valuable partner in assisting local and state law enforcement in their battle against illicit narcotics, particularly deadly fentanyl,” said Chief Karl Oakman, Kansas City Police. “A budget cut will significantly set back the gains made to reduce fentanyl trafficking in middle America.” 
    “The Midwest HIDTA program is a critical asset in our fight against drug trafficking and substance abuse in Kansas and beyond,” said Courtney Leslie, President of the Kansas Association of Chiefs of Police. “It provides essential resources and fosters collaboration among law enforcement agencies to combat the growing threat of illicit drug networks. Senator Marshall’s commitment to fully funding this program highlights his dedication to the safety and well-being of our communities, and to protecting and reducing the flow of dangerous drugs across Kansas.” 
    Background: 

    There are 33 HIDTAs across the U.S. that incorporate counties from all 50 states.  
    The Midwest HIDTA represents over 200 law enforcement personnel in Missouri, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, and North Dakota.  
    The program operates under the Office of the National Drug Control Policy and helps deliver funding and expertise to local law enforcement agencies to combat domestic and international drug trafficking organizations.  
    The goal of the Midwest HIDTA is to facilitate coordination between regional drug-control efforts to reduce drug trafficking and its harmful consequences. 
    More than 90% of the Midwest HIDTA’s funding is allocated directly to state and local law enforcement agencies.  

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General Bonta Files Pre-Enforcement Lawsuit Amid U.S. DOJ Demands that California Schools Violate State Law and U.S. Constitution

    Source: US State of California

    Lawsuit responds to threats by U.S. DOJ if California school districts do not certify to banning transgender students from playing on sports teams consistent with their gender identity 

    OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed a pre-enforcement lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S. DOJ) in anticipation of imminent legal retaliation against California’s school systems. Last week, U.S. DOJ issued a letter requesting certification from California school districts that they will not comply with longstanding state anti-discrimination law that provides for the participation in sports for K-12 students consistent with gender identity. Today, the California Department of Education notified U.S. DOJ that the state will not certify to its demands, which would require school districts to violate not only existing state law, but also the U.S. Constitution. In the lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta asks the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to uphold California’s anti-discrimination law and prevent the Trump Administration from taking retaliatory action, such as withholding or conditioning federal funding, over the state’s refusal to comply with U.S. DOJ’s unlawful demands. 

    “The President and his Administration are demanding that California school districts break the law and violate the Constitution – or face legal retaliation. They’re demanding that our schools discriminate against the students in their care and deny their constitutionally protected rights,” said Attorney General Bonta. “As we’ve proven time and again in court, just because the President disagrees with a law, that doesn’t make it any less of one. As California’s chief legal officer, I’ll always fight to uphold and defend the laws of our state, especially those that protect and ensure the civil rights of the most vulnerable among us.”

    Since 2012, it has been the law and policy of California that all persons, regardless of their gender, gender identity, or gender expression, should enjoy equal rights and opportunities, and freedom from discrimination of any kind, in their education. In 2013, the Legislature made clear that these protections specifically encompass school athletics. Similarly, the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF), the statewide governing body for school sports, allows all students to participate in athletics in accordance with their gender identity pursuant to its Bylaw 300.D. 

    With its recent certification letter, U.S. DOJ seeks to unlawfully upend, through executive decree, California’s longstanding policy of inclusion and anti-discrimination. On June 2, 2025, local educational agencies in California received a letter from U.S. DOJ wrongly asserting that Bylaw 300.D “requires California public high schools to allow male participation in girls’ interscholastic athletics,” and as such, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The letter demanded that these agencies “certify” that they would not implement Bylaw 300.D by June 9, 2025, “[t]o ensure compliance and to avoid legal liability.”

    In the lawsuit, Attorney General Bonta argues that U.S. DOJ has no right to make such a demand. Prevailing Ninth Circuit precedent holds that categorically prohibiting transgender students from participating in athletic programs in accordance with their gender identity violates the Equal Protection Clause. Furthermore, allowing athletic participation consistent with students’ gender identity is squarely within the State’s authority to ensure all students are afforded the benefits of an inclusive school environment, including participation in school sports, and to prevent the serious harms that transgender students would suffer from a discriminatory, exclusionary policy. Acceding to U.S. DOJ’s demands would force California school districts to violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and California’s antidiscrimination laws. While the certification demand letter purports that compliance with the Equal Protection Clause requires the categorical exclusion of transgender girls from girls’ sports, as courts have previously upheld, just the opposite is true: the Equal Protection Clause forbids such policies of total exclusion, as does California law.

    A copy of the lawsuit is available here. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Murray, DeLauro, Baldwin Blast Director Bhattacharya for Terminating Thousands of Active NIH Grants, Upending Research, Threatening Patient Treatment

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray

    Top Democratic appropriators call out NIH for cancelling at least 2,370 active grants, cutting off funding to over 210 institutions, and demand a comprehensive list of terminated grants and the impact on patients in clinical trials

    Lawmakers: “Grinding wide swaths of clinical trials to a screeching halt is completely illegal, reckless, unethical, and endangers patient health and safety. In addition to threatening our nation’s future in biomedical innovation and global leadership, this administration’s siege on science is putting millions of American lives at risk.”

    Washington, D.C. — Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair, Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-CT-03), Ranking Member of the House Appropriations Committee and the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Subcommittee, and Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, sent a letter to National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya calling out the Trump administration’s reckless decision to terminate at least 2,370 active NIH grants, an illegal move that has upended biomedical research and threatened patients’ access to treatment, and demanding that NIH provide the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations the legal authority being used to terminate grants, a comprehensive list of grant cancellations, details on the impact to clinical trials, and the criteria used for termination decisions.

    “We write in strong opposition to the termination of at least 2,370 active grants funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and to the agency’s decision to refuse to consider certain categories of pending grant applications,” write the lawmakers. “The cancellations of these grants have abruptly cut off funding to more than 210 recipient institutions, amounting to more than $4.9 billion in taxpayer funding. The reckless termination of ongoing grants, particularly in the context of other actions at NIH, have upended biomedical research across the country, cancelled clinical trials and cut off patients’ access to treatment, and put our national security, global competitiveness, and an entire generation of early career scientists at risk.”

    The lawmakers emphasize NIH was established by Congress and investment in the agency has made the United States a leader in biomedical research, “NIH is the largest funder of biomedical research in the world, responsible for the discovery of new ways to diagnose, prevent, and treat devastating diseases and conditions including cancer, rare diseases, ALS, diabetes, and Alzheimer’s disease, among many others. NIH funding represents about one-fifth of total U.S. federal research and development (R&D) funding and represents close to half of all federal R&D spending outside of the Department of Defense. That investment has paid off; NIH-funded research has led to more than 100 Nobel Prizes and supported more than 99 percent of the drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration from 2010 to 2019.”

    “Approximately 83 percent of NIH’s $48 billion budget is allocated for researchers at universities and research institutions, which are spread across all 50 states. This amounts to about 60,000 annual competitive grants to more than 300,000 researchers at more than 2,500 institutions across the country. In determining which research to fund, NIH has been guided by congressional mandate, regulatory requirements, and scientific expertise,” write the lawmakers.NIH funding decisions follow a highly competitive and rigorous process, and its peer review system is widely regarded as the gold standard, which is why grant terminations have been extremely rare.

    The lawmakers continue, “Shortly after the Trump Administration took office, NIH issued a series of directives to arbitrarily terminate large numbers of grants and to refuse to consider certain categories of pending grant applications. Rather than citing any scientific concerns with the rigor of the projects, any underlying data, or other project-specific concerns, termination notifications sent to impacted researchers simply state that the cancelled projects ‘no longer effectuate agency priorities.’ As a result, thousands of research projects, many of which had been underway for years and represent millions of hours of work and billions of taxpayer dollars, were abruptly cancelled, grant application reviews abandoned, and funding opportunities removed from NIH’s websites.”

    The lawmakers note many of the terminated institutional and training grants that were cancelled supported early-career researchers and scientists from underrepresented communities, and “the nationwide termination of biomedical training programs in every stage of the training pipeline from undergraduate students to tenure-track positions will irreparably weaken the scientific workforce, decimating the next generation of American scientists in academia and industry.”

    “As research institutions, scientists, and trainees struggle with the loss of staff, jobs, and income, patients enrolled in NIH-funded clinical trials face abrupt cancellations or delays in lifesaving treatment,” the lawmakers write. The letter further details the hundreds of active clinical trials that abruptly stopped, trials that were investigating treatments for HIV, cancer, COVID-19, and mental health.

    The lawmakers conclude, “Grinding wide swaths of clinical trials to a screeching halt is completely illegal, reckless, unethical, and endangers patient health and safety. In addition to threatening our nation’s future in biomedical innovation and global leadership, this administration’s siege on science is putting millions of American lives at risk. We demand that NIH provide to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a comprehensive list of grant terminations that have been made since January 20, 2025, to be updated on a weekly basis.”

    The full letter is available HERE and below:

    Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya

    Director

    National Institutes of Health

    9000 Rockville Pike

    Bethesda, Maryland 20892

    Dr. Bhattacharya,

    We write in strong opposition to the termination of at least 2,370 active grants funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and to the agency’s decision to refuse to consider certain categories of pending grant applications. The cancellations of these grants have abruptly cut off funding to more than 210 recipient institutions, amounting to more than $4.9 billion in taxpayer funding. The reckless termination of ongoing grants, particularly in the context of other actions at NIH, have upended biomedical research across the country, cancelled clinical trials and cut off patients’ access to treatment, and put our national security, global competitiveness, and an entire generation of early career scientists at risk.    

    Congress established NIH in 1930 through the Ransdell Act to ascertain “the cause, prevention, and cure of disease affecting human beings.” Today, NIH is the largest funder of biomedical research in the world, responsible for the discovery of new ways to diagnose, prevent, and treat devastating diseases and conditions including cancer, rare diseases, ALS, diabetes, and Alzheimer’s disease, among many others. NIH funding represents about one-fifth of total U.S. federal research and development (R&D) funding and represents close to half of all federal R&D spending outside of the Department of Defense. That investment has paid off; NIH-funded research has led to more than 100 Nobel Prizes and supported more than 99 percent of the drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration from 2010 to 2019.

    Approximately 83 percent of NIH’s $48 billion budget is allocated for researchers at universities and research institutions, which are spread across all 50 states. This amounts to about 60,000 annual competitive grants to more than 300,000 researchers at more than 2,500 institutions across the country. In determining which research to fund, NIH has been guided by congressional mandate, regulatory requirements, and scientific expertise. These funding decisions follow a highly competitive and rigorous process that involves layers of expert scientific review over many months. The NIH peer review system is widely regarded as the gold standard in research funding and is praised for its transparency, fairness, and ability to identify and fund the most promising research, contributing significantly to scientific advancements and the public’s understanding of health. Given this standardized, merit-based system, terminations of active NIH grants have been extremely rare—fewer than 20 terminations per year, on average, over the past decade.

    However, in the beginning of February 2025, shortly after the Trump Administration took office, NIH issued a series of directives to arbitrarily terminate large numbers of grants and to refuse to consider certain categories of pending grant applications. Rather than citing any scientific concerns with the rigor of the projects, any underlying data, or other project-specific concerns, termination notifications sent to impacted researchers simply state that the cancelled projects “no longer effectuate agency priorities.” As a result, thousands of research projects, many of which had been underway for years and represent millions of hours of work and billions of taxpayer dollars, were abruptly cancelled, grant application reviews abandoned, and funding opportunities removed from NIH’s websites.

    In addition to an ideological purge of thousands of research projects that benefit LGBTQ+ and non-white populations, the Administration is also targeting and terminating research related to vaccine hesitancy, COVID-19, HIV, women’s health, Alzheimer’s disease, suicide prevention, any studies involving entities in South Africa and China, and institutions of higher education that are not ideologically aligned with the President’s political agenda. These grant terminations are in direct defiance of Congress’ annual Appropriations Act, which mandates that NIH fund research to address health equity and health disparities, include diverse populations in its studies, and enhance diversity in the biomedical research enterprise.

    NIH cancelled a slew of institutional and individual training grants awarded by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) among other NIH Institutes and Centers. Many of the terminated grants supported scientists from underrepresented communities. On March 27, 2025, with no prior notice, NIH issued stop work orders for all 63 Undergraduate Research Training Initiative for Student Enhancement (U-RISE) programs and all 34 Maximizing Access to Research Careers (MARC) programs, which have supported undergraduate researchers for nearly 50 years. Other terminated training programs include the Post-Baccalaureate Research Education Program (PREP); the Bridges to the Doctorate Program, which trained masters students; the Initiative for Maximizing Student Development (IMSD), which supported graduate students; the Institutional Research and Academic Career Development Award (IRACDA), which aided postdoctoral researchers; and the Maximizing Opportunities for Scientific and Academic Independent Careers (MOSAIC) program, which funded individual scientists as they transitioned from postdoctoral to faculty positions. The nationwide termination of biomedical training programs in every stage of the training pipeline from undergraduate students to tenure-track positions will irreparably weaken the scientific workforce, decimating the next generation of American scientists in academia and industry.

    As research institutions, scientists, and trainees struggle with the loss of staff, jobs, and income, patients enrolled in NIH-funded clinical trials face abrupt cancellations or delays in lifesaving treatment. In early May, the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) estimated that 91 cancelled grants, amounting to $643 million and supporting 113 active clinical trials that investigated topics such as HIV, cancer, mental health, and COVID-19, were abruptly terminated by NIH. On March 10, the Living Healthy for Moms (LHMoms) clinical trial was terminated, undermining vital support for 600 new mothers managing postpartum depression or cardiovascular events following the birth of their babies. Most preventable maternal deaths and complications from mental health and cardiovascular conditions occur in the immediate postpartum period, and this study would have provided support for postpartum mothers for six months, covering a critical window to prevent long-term health consequences and address the maternal health crisis. On March 21, NIH terminated the research network supporting the Adolescent Trials Network for HIV/AIDS Intervention (ATN). In its 24-year history, the ATN enrolled more than 30,000 adolescents and young adults in 150 studies, and that research helped pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) medications get FDA approval. Terminating this grant disrupts seven clinical trials aimed at boosting HIV testing and PrEP adherence; depriving adolescents and young adults from access to diagnostic testing, prevention and treatment puts their health and lives at risk. A cervical-cancer-prevention clinical trial offering point of care screening and treatment for women with human papillomavirus (HPV) was also abruptly cancelled. Cervical cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths among women, and is almost entirely preventable.

    Grinding wide swaths of clinical trials to a screeching halt is completely illegal, reckless, unethical, and endangers patient health and safety. In addition to threatening our nation’s future in biomedical innovation and global leadership, this administration’s siege on science is putting millions of American lives at risk. We demand that NIH provide to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a comprehensive list of grant terminations that have been made since January 20, 2025, to be updated on a weekly basis. To better understand the scope of NIH grant terminations and NIH’s statutory compliance, we request responses to the following questions by June 13, 2025.

    1. Given that NIH appears to be relying on a regulatory change in 2 CFR Part 200.340 that does not take effect until October 1, 2025, what is NIH’s legal authority to terminate grants based on alleged “changes” in agency priorities?
    2. How many NIH grants, awarded to how many research institutions, have been terminated since January 20, 2025?
      1. How many of these grants were clinical trials?
      2. How many patients were enrolled in clinical trials that were cancelled?
      3. How many clinical trials were initially terminated and then later reinstated?
    3. What guidance has NIH provided to grantees of terminated clinical trials regarding the preservation of patient safety and navigation of orderly closeout procedures? Please provide a definition of both “patient safety” and “orderly closeout”.
      1. What is NIH’s policy on exceptions, and have any exceptions been made? If so, provide a list of grants that were provided exceptions.
      2. What is the process for grantees or NIH staff to petition for exceptions if there are concerns about patient safety?
      3. What guidance has NIH provided to grantees that may need to request funds to support patient safety and orderly closeout of the project? What is the process for grantees to request those funds, and what actions qualify?
    4. What is the total amount of NIH funding that has been terminated? For each terminated grant provide the:
      1. budget year of the grant when it was terminated;
      2. amount of unexpended funds on the current grant when it was terminated; and
      3. total award of the grant, including expected future non-competing continuation awards.
    5. Who at NIH made the decision to terminate these grants? Who inside and outside of NIH were involved in the decisions to terminate these grants?
      1. Was the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) involved in the identification of grants to be terminated? If so, what was their role?
    6. How were grants identified for termination and what criteria was used in determining which grants to terminate?
    7. How many institutional and individual training grants have been terminated by NIH?
      1. What percentage of all institutional and individual training grants awarded by NIH in FY24 does this represent?
      2. What is the justification for each training grant that NIH has terminated?

    Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Can Israel still claim self-defence to justify its Gaza war?

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Donald Rothwell, Professor of International Law, Australian National University

    On October 7 2023, more than 1,000 Hamas militants stormed into southern Israel and went on a killing spree, murdering 1,200 men, women and children and abducting another 250 people to take back to Gaza. It was the deadliest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.

    That day, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the country, “Israel is at war”. The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) immediately began a military campaign to secure the release of the hostages and defeat Hamas. Since that day, more than 54,000 Palestinians have been killed, mostly women and children.

    Israel has maintained its response is justified under international law, as every nation has “an inherent right to defend itself”, as Netanyahu stated in early 2024.

    This is based on the right to self-defence in international law, which is outlined in Article 51 of the 1945 United Nations Charter as follows:

    Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations[…]

    At the start of the war, many nations agreed Israel had a right to defend itself, but how it did so mattered. This would ensure its actions were consistent with international humanitarian law.

    However, 20 months after the October 7 attacks, fundamental legal issues have arisen around whether this self-defence justification still holds.

    Can Israel exercise self-defence ad infinitum? Or is it now waging a war of aggression against Palestine?

    Self-defence in the law

    Self-defence has a long history in international law.

    The modern principles of self-defence were outlined in diplomatic exchanges over an 1837 incident involving an American ship, The Caroline, after it was destroyed by British forces in Canada. Both sides agreed that an exercise of self-defence would have required the British to demonstrate their conduct was not “unreasonable or excessive”.

    The concept of self-defence was also extensively relied on by the Allies in the second world war in response to German and Japanese aggression.

    Self-defence was originally framed in the law as a right to respond to a state-based attack. However, this scope has broadened in recent decades to encompass attacks from non-state actors, such as al-Qaeda following the September 11 2001 terror attacks.

    Israel is a legitimate, recognised state in the global community and a member of the United Nations. Its right to self-defence will always remain intact when it faces attacks from its neighbours or non-state actors, such as Hamas, Hezbollah or the Houthi rebels in Yemen.

    However, the right of self-defence is not unlimited. It is constrained by the principles of necessity and proportionality.

    The necessity test was met in the current war due to the extreme violence of the Hamas attack on October 7 and the taking of hostages. These were actions that could not be ignored and demanded a response, due to the threat Israel continued to face.

    The proportionality test was also met, initially. Israel’s military operation after the attack was strategic in nature, focused on the return of the hostages and the destruction of Hamas to eliminate the immediate threat the group posed.

    The legal question now is whether Israel is still legitimately exercising self-defence in response to the October 7 attacks.

    This is a live issue, especially given comments by Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz on May 30 that Hamas would be “annihilated” unless a proposed ceasefire deal was accepted.

    These comments and Israel’s ongoing conduct throughout the war raise the question of whether proportionality is still being met.

    A test of proportionality

    The importance of proportionality in self-defence has been endorsed in recent years by the International Court of Justice.

    Under international law, proportionality remains relevant throughout a conflict, not just in the initial response to an attack.

    While the law allows a war to continue until an aggressor surrenders, it does not legitimise the complete destruction of the territory where an aggressor is fighting.

    The principle of proportionality also provides protections for civilians. Military actions are to be directed at the foreign forces who launched the attack, not civilians.

    While Israel has targeted Hamas fighters in its attacks, including those who orchestrated the October 7 attacks, these actions have caused significant collateral deaths of Palestinian civilians.

    Therefore, taken overall, the ongoing, 20-month military assault against Hamas, with its high numbers of civilian casualties, credible reports of famine and devastation of Gazan towns and cities, suggests Israel’s exercise of self-defence has become disproportionate.

    The principle of proportionality is also part of international humanitarian law. However, Israel’s actions on this front are a separate legal issue that has been the subject of investigation by the International Criminal Court.

    My aim here is to solely assess the legal question of proportionality in self-defence and international law.

    Is rescuing hostages in self-defence?

    Israel could separately argue it is exercising legitimate self-defence to rescue the remaining hostages held by Hamas.

    However, rescuing nationals as an exercise of self-defence is legally controversial. Israel set a precedent in 1976 when the military rescued 103 Jewish hostages from Entebbe, Uganda, after their aircraft had been hijacked.

    In current international law, there are very few other examples in which this interpretation of self-defence has been adopted – and no international consensus on its use.

    In Gaza, the size, scale and duration of Israel’s war goes far beyond a hostage rescue operation. Its aim is also to eliminate Hamas.

    Given this, rescuing hostages as an act of self-defence is arguably not a suitable justification for Israel’s ongoing military operations.

    An act of aggression?

    If Israel can no longer rely on self-defence to justify its Gaza military campaign, how would its actions be characterised under international law?

    Israel could claim it is undertaking a security operation as an occupying power.

    While the International Court of Justice said in an advisory opinion last year that Israel was engaged in an illegal occupation of Gaza, the court expressly made clear it was not addressing the circumstances that had evolved since October 7.

    Israel is indeed continuing to act as an occupying power, even though it has not physically reoccupied all of Gaza. This is irrelevant given the effective control it exercises over the territory.

    However, the scale of the IDF’s operations constitute an armed conflict and well exceed the limited military operations to restore security as an occupying power.

    Absent any other legitimate basis for Israel’s current conduct in Gaza, there is a strong argument that what is occurring is an act of aggression. The UN Charter and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court prohibit acts of aggression not otherwise justified under international law.

    These include invasions or attacks by the armed forces of a state, military occupations, bombardments and blockades. All of this has occurred – and continues to occur – in Gaza.

    The international community has rightly condemned Russia’s invasion as an act of aggression in Ukraine. Will it now do the same with Israel’s conduct in Gaza?

    Donald Rothwell receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. Can Israel still claim self-defence to justify its Gaza war? – https://theconversation.com/can-israel-still-claim-self-defence-to-justify-its-gaza-war-257822

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Five Men Plead Guilty for Their Roles in Global Digital Asset Investment Scam Conspiracy Resulting in Theft of More than $36.9 Million from Victims

    Source: US State of California

    Five men have pleaded guilty for their roles in laundering more than $36.9 million from victims of an international digital asset investment scam conspiracy that was carried out from scam centers in Cambodia.

    According to court documents, Joseph Wong, 33, of Alhambra, California; Yicheng Zhang, 39, of China; Jose Somarriba, 55, of Los Angeles; Shengsheng He, 39, of La Puente, California; and Jingliang Su, 44, of China and Turkey, were part of an international criminal network that induced U.S. victims, believing they were investing in digital assets, to transfer funds to accounts controlled by co-conspirators and that laundered victim money through U.S. shell companies, international bank accounts, and digital asset wallets.

    As part of the conspiracy, co-conspirators residing overseas would contact U.S. victims directly through unsolicited social media interactions, telephone calls, text messages, and online dating services and gain the victims’ trust. The co-conspirators then promoted fraudulent digital asset investments to the victims. Scammers would tell victims that their investments were appreciating in value when, in fact, those funds were stolen and not invested at all. Instead, more than $36.9 million in victim funds were transferred from U.S. bank accounts controlled by the co-conspirators to a single account at Deltec Bank in the Bahamas, opened in the name of Axis Digital Limited. Somarriba, He, and Su directed Deltec Bank to convert victim funds to the stablecoin Tether (USDT) and to transfer the converted funds to a digital asset wallet controlled by individuals in Cambodia. From there, co-conspirators in Cambodia transferred the USDT to the leaders of scam centers throughout the region including in Sihanoukville, Cambodia.

    Somarriba and He founded Axis Digital and opened the Deltec Bank account. Su joined Axis Digital as a director and participated in the digital asset conversions and transfers of victim funds.

    Wong managed a network of money launderers in Los Angeles who registered shell companies, opened U.S. bank accounts, and wired victim funds to international bank accounts. Zhang opened and operated two U.S. bank accounts used to launder victim proceeds.

    Zhang and Wong pleaded guilty to money laundering conspiracy. They each face a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. Zhang has been in custody since May 2024. He, Somarriba, and Su pleaded guilty to conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money services business. He, Somarriba, and Su each face a maximum penalty of five years in prison. Su has been in custody since November 2024. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    Eight co-conspirators have pleaded guilty so far, including Daren Li, a national of China and St. Kitts and Nevis and former resident of Cambodia and the United Arab Emirates who has been in U.S. custody since April 2024, and Lu Zhang, a Chinese national illegally in the United States who managed a network of U.S.-based money launderers, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit money laundering on Nov. 12, 2024 and May 13, 2024, respectively.

    Matthew R. Galeotti, Head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Bilal A. Essayli for the Central District of California, and Special Agent in Charge William Mancino of the U.S. Secret Service (USSS) Criminal Investigative Division made the announcement.

    USSS’s Global Investigative Operations Center is investigating the case. The Homeland Security Investigations’ El Camino Real Financial Crimes Task Force, Customs and Border Protection’s National Targeting Center, U.S. Department of State’s Diplomatic Security Service, Dominican National Police, and U.S. Marshals Service provided valuable assistance.

    Trial Attorneys Stefanie Schwartz of the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, Tamara Livshiz of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Maxwell Coll, Nisha Chandran, and Alexander Gorin for the Central District of California are prosecuting these cases.

    If you or someone you know is a victim of a digital asset investment fraud, report it to IC3.gov. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Five Men Plead Guilty for Their Roles in Global Digital Asset Investment Scam Conspiracy Resulting in Theft of More than $36.9 Million from Victims

    Source: United States Attorneys General 7

    Five men have pleaded guilty for their roles in laundering more than $36.9 million from victims of an international digital asset investment scam conspiracy that was carried out from scam centers in Cambodia.

    According to court documents, Joseph Wong, 33, of Alhambra, California; Yicheng Zhang, 39, of China; Jose Somarriba, 55, of Los Angeles; Shengsheng He, 39, of La Puente, California; and Jingliang Su, 44, of China and Turkey, were part of an international criminal network that induced U.S. victims, believing they were investing in digital assets, to transfer funds to accounts controlled by co-conspirators and that laundered victim money through U.S. shell companies, international bank accounts, and digital asset wallets.

    As part of the conspiracy, co-conspirators residing overseas would contact U.S. victims directly through unsolicited social media interactions, telephone calls, text messages, and online dating services and gain the victims’ trust. The co-conspirators then promoted fraudulent digital asset investments to the victims. Scammers would tell victims that their investments were appreciating in value when, in fact, those funds were stolen and not invested at all. Instead, more than $36.9 million in victim funds were transferred from U.S. bank accounts controlled by the co-conspirators to a single account at Deltec Bank in the Bahamas, opened in the name of Axis Digital Limited. Somarriba, He, and Su directed Deltec Bank to convert victim funds to the stablecoin Tether (USDT) and to transfer the converted funds to a digital asset wallet controlled by individuals in Cambodia. From there, co-conspirators in Cambodia transferred the USDT to the leaders of scam centers throughout the region including in Sihanoukville, Cambodia.

    Somarriba and He founded Axis Digital and opened the Deltec Bank account. Su joined Axis Digital as a director and participated in the digital asset conversions and transfers of victim funds.

    Wong managed a network of money launderers in Los Angeles who registered shell companies, opened U.S. bank accounts, and wired victim funds to international bank accounts. Zhang opened and operated two U.S. bank accounts used to launder victim proceeds.

    Zhang and Wong pleaded guilty to money laundering conspiracy. They each face a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. Zhang has been in custody since May 2024. He, Somarriba, and Su pleaded guilty to conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money services business. He, Somarriba, and Su each face a maximum penalty of five years in prison. Su has been in custody since November 2024. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    Eight co-conspirators have pleaded guilty so far, including Daren Li, a national of China and St. Kitts and Nevis and former resident of Cambodia and the United Arab Emirates who has been in U.S. custody since April 2024, and Lu Zhang, a Chinese national illegally in the United States who managed a network of U.S.-based money launderers, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit money laundering on Nov. 12, 2024 and May 13, 2024, respectively.

    Matthew R. Galeotti, Head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Bilal A. Essayli for the Central District of California, and Special Agent in Charge William Mancino of the U.S. Secret Service (USSS) Criminal Investigative Division made the announcement.

    USSS’s Global Investigative Operations Center is investigating the case. The Homeland Security Investigations’ El Camino Real Financial Crimes Task Force, Customs and Border Protection’s National Targeting Center, U.S. Department of State’s Diplomatic Security Service, Dominican National Police, and U.S. Marshals Service provided valuable assistance.

    Trial Attorneys Stefanie Schwartz of the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, Tamara Livshiz of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Maxwell Coll, Nisha Chandran, and Alexander Gorin for the Central District of California are prosecuting these cases.

    If you or someone you know is a victim of a digital asset investment fraud, report it to IC3.gov. 

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Huntington Man Sentenced for Child Pornography Crime

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    HUNTINGTON, W.Va. – Mark Radford, 33, of Huntington, was sentenced today to time served and 15 years of supervised release for possession of child pornography. Radford must also register as a sex offender.

    According to court documents and statements made in court, on or about November 3, 2020, law enforcement officers seized Radford’s cell phone. A forensic examination of the cell phone revealed approximately 22 images depicting minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct. Radford admitted to downloading the images from the internet. Radford further admitted that some of the images depicted prepubescent children engaged in sexual conduct.

    Acting United States Attorney Lisa G. Johnston made the announcement and commended the investigative work of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

    United States District Judge Robert C. Chambers imposed the sentence. Assistant United States Attorneys Lesley C. Shamblin and Julie M. White prosecuted the case.

    This case was prosecuted as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative of the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse. Led by the United States Attorney’s Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to locate, apprehend, and prosecute those who sexually exploit children, and to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.justice.gov/psc.

    A copy of this press release is located on the website of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of West Virginia. Related court documents and information can be found on PACER by searching for Case No. 3:22-cr-61.

    ###

     

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Memphis Man Sentenced to Seventeen Years for Trafficking 17-Year-Old Female to Perform Commercial Sex Acts

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    NEW ORLEANS, LA – Acting U.S. Attorney Michael M. Simpson announced that DOMINIQUE PEEPLES (“PEEPLES”), age 28, from Memphis, Tennessee, was sentenced on May 28, 2025, after previously pleading guilty to Sex Trafficking of a Minor, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1591(a)(1), 1591(b)(2), 1594(a), and 2.

    According to court documents, PEEPLES brought a seventeen-year-old female (“Minor Victim”) from Memphis, Tennessee to New Orleans, Louisiana; Jackson, Mississippi; and Houston, Texas, and required her to engage in commercial sex acts.  During this time, PEEPLES was aware of Minor Victim’s age.  PEEPLES advertised Minor Victim on websites commonly used to advertise sexual services in exchange for money and kept all or most of the proceeds from her work.   PEEPLES waited in a vehicle and watched Minor Victim while she solicited commercial sex “dates.”  Minor Victim worked under PEEPLES’ supervision between August of 2020 and her escape in mid-January 2021.  After Minor Victim ran away, PEEPLES posted a video on social media in which he boasted about exploiting Minor Victim and pointed firearms at the screen.

    U.S. District Court Judge Sarah S. Vance sentenced PEEPLES to seventeen (17) years in prison.  PEEPLES was also sentenced to ten (10) years of supervised release after release from prison. Judge Vance further ordered PEEPLES to pay $120,000 in restitution to Minor Victim, and a $100 mandatory special assessment fee.  PEEPLES will also have to register as a sex offender.

    This case was part of a broader investigation involving defendants JEREMY TALBERT and MACEO ROBERTS, both of whom have pleaded guilty for related sex trafficking crimes.  In February 2025, U.S. District Court Judge Susie Morgan sentenced ROBERTS to 22.5 years of imprisonment for conspiring to traffic three minors and two adults.  In March 2025, U.S. District Court Judge Lance Africk sentenced TALBERT to 18 years for trafficking a fourteen-year-old minor to New Orleans.

    These cases were brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice.  Led by United States Attorneys’ Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (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.

    Acting U.S. Attorney Simpson praised the work of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the New Orleans Police Department, and the Memphis Police Department in investigating this matter.  Assistant United States Attorneys Maria M. Carboni of the Financial Crimes Unit and Jordan Ginsberg, Supervisor of the Public Corruption Unit, are in charge of the prosecution.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Box Elder Woman Sentenced to Federal Prison for Committing an Assault within the Pine Ridge Reservation

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    RAPID CITY – United States Attorney Alison J. Ramsdell announced today that U.S. District Judge Camela C. Theeler has sentenced a Box Elder, South Dakota, woman convicted of Assault Resulting in Serious Bodily Injury. The sentencing took place on June 2, 2025.

    Samatha Wright, 27, was sentenced to one year and six months in federal prison, followed by three years of supervised release, and ordered to pay a $100 special assessment to the Federal Crime Victims Fund.

    Wright was indicted for Discharge of a Firearm During the Commission of a Crime of Violence, Assault Resulting in Serious Bodily Injury, and Assault with a Dangerous Weapon by a federal grand jury in June 2024. She pleaded guilty on March 21, 2025.

    The charges stemmed from a domestic dispute between Wright and the victim, her then-husband, while they lived within the Pine Ridge Reservation. Wright shot the victim with a handgun, hitting him three times and causing serious bodily injury.

    This matter was prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office because the Major Crimes Act, a federal statute, mandates that certain violent crimes alleged to have occurred in Indian Country be prosecuted in Federal court as opposed to State court.

    This case was investigated by the Oglala Sioux Tribe Department of Public Safety Criminal Investigations Division. Assistant U.S. Attorney Anna Lindrooth prosecuted the case.

    Wright was immediately remanded to the custody of the U.S. Marshals Service. 

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Mexican commercial fishermen plead guilty to illegal red snapper harvesting

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    All now face federal prison time for unlawfully fishing in U.S. waters

    BROWNSVILLE, Texas – Four members of a Mexican fishing crew have admitted they unlawfully transported fish taken from the Gulf of America, announced U.S. Attorney Nicholas J. Ganjei.

    Jose Daniel Santiago-Mendoza, 22, has now pleaded guilty, while Miguel Angel Ramirez-Vidal, 32, Jesus David Luna-Marquez, 20, and Jesus Roberto Morales-Amador, 27, all citizens of Mexico, previously entered their pleas. All have admitted to knowingly transporting approximately 315 kilograms of illegally taken red snapper.

    On April 16, the four-man crew left Playa Bagdad, Mexico, at night in a 25-foot open fishing vessel without running lights. They then traveled into the Exclusive Economic Zone in U.S. waters, ultimately deploying about four miles of longline containing approximately 1,200 hooks. The gear was set approximately 18 miles north of the Maritime Boundary Line with Mexico and about 25 miles east of South Padre Island (SPI).

    When authorities apprehended the crew, they were in possession of approximately 693 pounds of red snapper and four sharks. The men knew the catch would be seized if they were caught in U.S. waters but chose to take the risk due to the limited supply of red snapper in Mexican waters.

    They intended to sell the catch once they returned to Mexico. The snapper they unlawfully took from U.S. waters have an estimated retail value of over $9 thousand.

    Ramirez-Vidal, the captain of the boat, had been arrested on 28 prior occasions for illegal fishing. The others also have similar previous arrests.

    U.S. District Judge Rolando Olvera will impose sentencing for Ramirez-Vidal Aug. 13. Santiago-Mendoza, Luna-Marquez and Morales-Amador pleaded guilty and are also pending sentencing. At their respective hearings, each faces up to five years in federal prison and a possible $250,000 maximum fine.

    They have been and will remain in custody pending sentencing.

    Immigration and Customs Enforcement – Homeland Security Investigations, Coast Guard Investigative Services, Coast Guard Station SPI, Customs and Border Protection Air and Marine Operations, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Texas Parks and Wildlife and South Padre Island Police Department conducted the joint investigation.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney William Hagen is prosecuting the case.

    The arrest and prosecution of Mexican commercial fisherman marks a change in policy concerning the protection of U.S. marine resources. In past instances, authorities would seize the catch and destroy the vessel but release violators back to Mexico. Any commercial fisherman now apprehended in U.S. waters caught violating the Lacey Act face potential fines and imprisonment.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: New Orleans Woman Guilty of Wire Fraud for Fraudulent Vehicle Purchase Scheme

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA – Acting United States Attorney Michael M. Simpson announced that KENDRA WALKER (“WALKER”), age 41, a resident of New Orleans, pled guilty on June 5, 2025 before United States District Judge Barry W. Ashe on June 5, 2025, to conspiracy to commit wire fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1349. 

    According to court documents, in 2022, WALKER conspired with her father, Kenneth Richmond, to use fake and stolen personal identifying information to make fraudulent vehicle purchases from a local car dealership.  The vehicle purchases were financed through a financial institution, and several of the loans went into default.  WALKER also made three vehicle purchases in her own name using a fake Social Security Number in Georgia.  In total, WALKER caused the financial institution to approve approximately $216,939 in loans for fraudulent applications.  Richmond was also charged in this case and pled guilty for his role in this scheme in May 2025.

    In pleading guilty, WALKER faces up to twenty (20) years in prison and up to three (3) years of supervised release.  WALKER also faces a fine of up to $250,000, and payment of a mandatory special assessment fee of $100.

    Judge Ashe set sentencing in this matter for September 25, 2025.

    Acting U.S. Attorney Simpson praised the work of the United States Secret Service, St. John the Baptist Parish Sheriff’s Office, and the Louisiana Department of Public Safety.  The prosecution of this case is being handled by Assistant United States Attorney Maria M. Carboni of the Financial Crimes Unit.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Police release images in Papakura wounding incident

    Source: New Zealand Police

    Police need your help in investigating a cowardly attack on a Papakura man last month.

    Still images are being released of a person that Police is still working to identify, and we need to hear from you today.

    The wounding occurred on Friday 16 May at about 11.40am on Settlement Road in Papakura.

    “A man in his 70s was walking alone in a westerly direction at the time, outside Papakura Intermediate School,” Detective Senior Sergeant Simon Taylor, of Counties Manukau South CIB says.

    “Around the same time a person was walking on the opposite side of the road heading in the other direction.”

    For reasons unknown, this person crossed the road towards the victim.

    “They have approached the victim and lunged towards him, making contact,” Detective Senior Sergeant Taylor says.

    “Immediately after the offender fled the scene, and the victim realised he had suffered a stab wound.

    “The victim required hospital treatment and is recovering from this cowardly and unprovoked attack.”

    Police need to hear from anyone who recognises the person in images being released.

    “People in the community will know who this person is and they need to do the right thing and speak up.”

    Anyone with information can update Police online now or call 105 using the reference number 250516/1021.

    Information can also be provided anonymously via Crime Stoppers on 0800 555 111.

    ENDS.

    Jarred Williamson/NZ Police

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: LEADER JEFFRIES: “EXTREME MAGA REPUBLICANS HAVE ZERO CREDIBILITY WHEN IT COMES TO ISSUES OF LAW AND ORDER”

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Hakeem Jeffries (8th District of New York)

    Know Your Immigration Rights

    If you or a loved one encounter immigration enforcement officials, it is essential that you know your rights and have prepared your household for all possible outcomes.

    Ask for a warrant: The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution protects you from unreasonable search and seizure. You do not have to open your door until you see a valid warrant to enter your home or search your belongings.

    Your right to remain silent: The Fifth Amendment protects your right to remain silent and not incriminate yourself. You are not required to share any personal information such as your place of birth, immigration status or criminal history.

    Always consult an attorney: You have a right to speak with an attorney. You do not have to sign anything or hand officials any documents without speaking to an attorney. Try to identify and consult one in advance.

    The New York City Office of Civil Justice and the Mayor’s Office of Immigrant Affairs (MOIA) support a variety of free immigration legal services through local nonprofit legal organizations. To access these resources, dial 311 and say “Action NYC,” call the MOIA Immigration Legal Support Hotline at 800-354-0365 Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. or visit MOIA’s website.

    Learn more here: KNOW YOUR IMMIGRATION RIGHTS  – Congressman Hakeem Jeffries

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: State Director & Chair Positions Confirmed

    Source: US State of New York

    overnor Kathy Hochul today announced the confirmation of director and chair positions in New York State government. Joshua Norkin today was confirmed by the New York State Senate to serve as Director of the Authorities Budget Office. Additionally, Jessica García was confirmed by the New York State Senate today to serve as Chair of the Cannabis Control Board.

    “New Yorkers deserve the best and the brightest individuals serving them, working to make New York safer, more affordable and more liveable — these two individuals will do just that,” Governor Hochul said. “My administration remains laser focused on ensuring experienced individuals are serving at every level of government, delivering for families statewide.”

    About Director Joshua Norkin

    Joshua Norkin was confirmed by the New York State Senate on June 9 to serve as Director of the Authorities Budget Office. Joshua Norkin previously served as Assistant Counsel to the Governor before being promoted to Deputy Counsel to the Governor in 2022, and Senior Advisor to the Governor in 2024. As Deputy Counsel to the Governor, Joshua oversaw the introduction, negotiation, and disposition of all legislation on behalf of the Executive Chamber.

    Mr. Norkin has practiced law in both the nonprofit and private sectors since 2008. Joshua Norkin earned his Juris Doctorate from the University of Denver Sturm College of Law.

    About Chair Jessica García

    Jessica García was confirmed by the New York State Senate on June 9 to serve as Chair of the Cannabis Control Board. Jessica García has served as a board member on the Cannabis Control Board since 2021.

    Jessica García is Assistant to the President of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union (RWDSU), a national labor union representing workers along the food supply chain, as well as workers in non-food retail and healthcare. She previously served as Deputy Political Director for the RWDSU, where she worked to advance the union’s legislative and political agendas. Additionally, Jessica García currently serves as President of the Board of Directors of the New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health and a member of the Safe Passage Project. In 2021, she was appointed by the U.S. Secretary of Labor to serve on the National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health (NACOSH). Jessica García earned her Bachelor of Arts degree in Anthropology from Harvard University and Master of Social Work from the Hunter College School of Social Work.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Capito Joins Colleagues in Introducing Energy Choice Act of 2025

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for West Virginia Shelley Moore Capito

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Recently, U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, helped introduce the Energy Choice Act of 2025, legislation led by U.S. Senator Jim Justice (R-W.Va.).

    “America needs more energy, and our state and local governments shouldn’t discriminate against baseload energy generation that increases security, affordability, and creates good paying across the country, simply because it doesn’t align with their political agendas. I’m proud to join my colleagues in introducing this legislation to prohibit restrictions on reliable energy that American families need,” Senator Capito said.

    “I am an energy guy from an energy-rich state. I know how important freedom of energy production is – which is why I’m proud to introduce Energy Choice Act of 2025. President Trump has stated the need to unleash American energy, and this bill helps facilitate just that. We have too great an energy crisis in this country, and we don’t have the luxury of picking the winners and losers when it comes to energy production. Americans ought to have the right to choose what is best for their energy needs,” Senator Justice said.

    BACKGROUND:

    • West Virginia has a storied history of energy production.
    • The Energy Choice Act would prohibit states and local governments from restricting or limiting the connection, reconnection, modification, installation, transportation, distribution, or expansion of a source of energy that is sold in interstate commerce to be delivered to an end-user of such services.
    • Representative Nick Langworthy (R-N.Y.-23) leads the House version of this bill, along with 37 cosponsors.

    Read more about the bill in Fox News.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Metairie Resident Sentenced for Receipt of Child Sexual Abuse Material

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    NEW ORLEANS, LA – Acting U.S. Attorney Michael M. Simpson announced today that CARSON RIESS (“RIESS”), age 41, of Metairie, Louisiana, was sentenced on May 27, 2025, to 60 months imprisonment followed by 15 years of supervised release by U.S. District Judge  Jay C. Zainey after previously pleading guilty to receipt of child pornography, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 2252(a)(2) and (b)(1).  Additionally, RIESS was ordered to pay $172,500 in restitution to numerous victims as well as a $100 mandatory special assessment fee.

    According to court documents, the case against RIESS stemmed from an online Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) investigation by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).  On May 20, 2024, HSI special agents, along with members of the Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office, executed two federal search warrants at RIESS’ Metairie home.  HSI agents seized a computer from RIESS’ residence during the search, confirmed this laptop contained Child Sexual Abuse Material, and subsequently arrested RIESS and charged him with the receipt of CSAM.  HSI’s investigation revealed RIESS received images and videos depicting the sexual exploitation of minors.

    This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice.  Led by United States Attorney’s Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (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.projectsafechildhood.gov.

    Acting U.S. Attorney Simpson praised the work of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office.  This case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Stuart Theriot of the Narcotics Unit.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Rapid City Man Sentenced to Just Over Ten Years in Federal Prison for Voluntary Manslaughter

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    RAPID CITY – United States Attorney Alison J. Ramsdell announced today that U.S. District Judge Karen E. Schreier has sentenced a Rapid City, South Dakota, man convicted of Voluntary Manslaughter. The sentencing took place on June 6, 2025.

    Vincent Boesem, age 32, was sentenced to ten years and one month in federal prison, followed by three years of supervised release, and ordered to pay a $100 special assessment to the Federal Crime Victims Fund.

    A federal grand jury indicted Boesem in March 2023. He pleaded guilty on March 14, 2025.

    Between July 3, 2022, and July 4, 2022, Boesem and his elderly uncle had been drinking together at the uncle’s home within the Pine Ridge Reservation. While intoxicated with alcohol and methamphetamine, Boesem became enraged and beat the victim about his head, face, and body. Although Boesem ultimately called 911 to get medical help, the victim succumbed to his injuries. Boesem acted in the heat of passion, that is, in an uncontrollable rage and with an extreme emotional disturbance.

    This matter was prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office because the Major Crimes Act, a federal statute, mandates that certain violent crimes alleged to have occurred in Indian country be prosecuted in Federal court as opposed to State court.

    This case was investigated by the FBI and the Oglala Sioux Tribe Department of Public Safety. Assistant U.S. Attorney Heather Knox prosecuted the case.

    Boesem was immediately remanded to the custody of the U.S. Marshals Service.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: VIDEO: Rep. Pressley Condemns Trump’s Authoritarian Assault on Harvard, Nonprofits

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07)

    Trump Admin. Weaponizing Tax Laws to Silence Dissent, Attack Nonprofits Providing Essential Services to Vulnerable People

    “This is about Trump and Republicans punishing people who disagree with them. It is about attacking nonprofits of all sizes that serve the vulnerable and marginalized and stand in the gap for our communities. It’s about trying to intimidate every charity and nonprofit in this country and spark a fear that if you speak up – if you do something the Republicans don’t like – you could be next.”

    Video (YouTube)

    WASHINGTON – Today, in a House Oversight Subcommittee hearing, Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) condemned Donald Trump’s targeted, authoritarian assault on nonprofit organizations it disagrees with. Congresswoman Pressley discussed the Trump Administration’s efforts to revoke the tax-exempt status of Harvard University as part of Republicans’ broader campaign to punish dissent and attack organizations that serve vulnerable communities.

    A full transcript of the Congresswoman’s remarks is below and the video is available here.

    Transcript: Pressley Condemns Trump’s Authoritarian Assault on Harvard, Nonprofits

    House Oversight DOGE Subcommittee

    June 4, 2025

    REP. PRESSLEY: Thank you to our witnesses for being here today. 

    What we are witnessing from Occupant Trump, his Administration, and Republicans writ-large is not governance – it is a targeted, dangerous assault on the independence of our nonprofit organizations. 

    We’ve seen these attacks take many forms, perhaps most visibly in my own district – the Massachusetts 7th – as the administration continues its unlawful campaign against Harvard University. Trump has threatened to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status, freeze billions in federal funding for scientific research to save lives, might I add, and publicly vilify students and faculty – all part and parcel of his attacks on education. 

    But let me make it plain: this isn’t just about Harvard and it’s definitely not about government efficiency – the name of this subcommittee. 

    This is about Trump and Republicans punishing people who disagree with them. 

    It is about attacking nonprofits of all sizes that serve the vulnerable and marginalized and stand in the gap for our communities. 

    It’s about trying to intimidate every charity and nonprofit in this country and spark a fear that if you speak up – if you do something the Republicans don’t like – you could be next.

    A hospital that provides abortion care. A local food pantry that feeds immigrants. Or an advocacy group that fights for civil rights.

    Donald Trump is weaponizing our tax laws to attack nonprofits at the same time he is pushing for tax cuts for Elon Musk and billionaires.

    Ms. Yentel, can the President or Executive Branch legally revoke a nonprofit’s tax-exempt status simply because it disagrees with that organization’s lawful speech or mission?

    DIANE YENTEL: They can’t. The statute is very clear that that is illegal.

    REP. PRESSLEY: Thank you. Republicans think the answer is yes, but that would mean every nonprofit in America is just one tweet away from being targeted by the federal government.

    I am proud that in the Massachusetts 7th, community-based organizations are speaking up and fighting back against Republican attacks. And I know they are doing it at risk of serious threat.

    Ms. Yentel, can you make plain what are the consequences to charities and nonprofits losing tax-exempt status?

    MS. YENTEL: Well, tax exempt status is given to nonprofit organizations that do essential work to meet needs in their local communities, in exchange for significant transparency and accountability. And if nonprofit organizations lose their tax exempt status, it could create significant challenges for them to be able to do their work related to how and where they get their funding, and it could cause them to have to shut down their work altogether.

    REP. PRESSLEY: Their work which is to the betterment of us all, which is to the collective, our shared constituents. 

    MS. YENTEL: Yes.

    REP. PRESSLEY: Very good. Let’s put this in perspective:

    Trump is firing government workers that administer programs like Head Start and Social Security while also attacking non-profits that provide resources and supports to vulnerable populations.

    Trump and his Republican cult do not care about helping people who are struggling. Instead, they want to make them suffer more.  

    Now, before I yield back, let me ask the Republican witnesses: if you all think Trump is right for revoking tax-exempt status for nonprofits for their political views, raise your hand then if you think the Heritage Foundation – who wrote Project 2025 – should also lose their tax-exempt status? 

    Show of hands, by the logic that is being applied. 

    MR. WALTER: I’m not aware of any nonprofit that’s had its status revoked. 

    REP. PRESSLEY: Again, the question that I’m posing is, would you please raise your hand if you think the Heritage Foundation who wrote Project 2025 should also lose their tax exempt status? 

    Show of hands.

    MR. WALTER: It’s a perfectly a reasonable speech by a nonprofit. 

    REP. PRESSLEY: So none of you, so none of you, none of you.

    The shame and the sham of it all.

    Before I yield back, Ms. Yentel, I know that you have been harangued intensely throughout today’s proceedings. Is there anything that you would like to set the record straight on or respond to in my remaining time? 

    MS. YENTEL: Thank you, Congresswoman. I would like to use the remaining time to remind us all and every member of this committee of the vital, essential work that nonprofit organizations do in each of your communities, for your constituents, and the work that we do to support them in that work. Nonprofit organizations are local. They are transparent and accountable. They are non-partisan, by law and in practice, and they do essential work to meet the needs of all of your communities and all Americans. Thank you.

    REP. PRESSLEY: Thank you. I yield back.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Action Taken by Governor Phil Scott on Legislation – June 9, 2025

    Source: US State of Vermont

    Montpelier, Vt. – Governor Phil Scott announced action on the following bills, passed by the General Assembly.

    On June 9, Governor Scott signed bills of the following titles:

    • S.53, An act relating to certification of community-based perinatal doulas and Medicaid coverage for doula services
    • S.59, An act relating to amendments to Vermont’s Open Meeting Law

    When signing S.53, Governor Scott issued the following statement:

    “While I support greater access to perinatal care in Vermont, I believe outstanding operational concerns must be addressed before we seek to amend our Medicaid plan to allow Medicaid reimbursement for community-based perinatal doulas. We must ensure that community-based perinatal doula professional certification standards are consistent with federal expectations before Medicaid reimbursement is finalized. If this requires further legislation next year, it’s my hope the Legislature will address this area of concern.”

    On June 9, Governor Scott returned without signature and vetoed S.125, An act relating to collective bargaining and sent the following letter to the General Assembly:

    Dear Mr. Bloomer:

    Pursuant to Chapter II, Section 11 of the Vermont Constitution, I am returning S.125, An act relating to collective bargaining, without my signature because of my objections described herein:

    This bill would effectively unionize a group of Judiciary employees with a simple definitional change. I’m concerned that despite unions testifying this was a priority for their organization, employees who would be impacted by this bill were not consulted or asked to testify.

    The Judiciary has advised this change could have a negative impact on the effective management of courthouses and fear a workplace marked by divisiveness and angst were this bill to pass. At a time when our court system is managing a significant backlog, we should be focusing on improving efficiencies within the system.

    Further, this bill seeks to bolster existing unions by significantly increasing the voting threshold for union decertification. This means it will be much more difficult for employees who do not feel well represented to consider their alternatives.  

    I support collective bargaining, but I believe employees should have choices for which union they belong to. This bill seeks to make it harder for employees, if they choose, to seek union representation from other organizations. I believe the threshold to trigger a vote for certification should be the same as decertification.

    Our employees should be heard and respected and for this reason I cannot allow this bill to go into law. 

    Sincerely,

    /s/

    Philip B. Scott

    Governor

    To view a complete list of action on bills passed during the 2025 legislative session, click here.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The Racial Discrimination Act at 50: the bumpy, years-long journey to Australia’s first human rights laws

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Azadeh Dastyari, Director, Research and Policy, Whitlam Institute, Western Sydney University

    On June 11, Australia marks 50 years since the Racial Discrimination Act became law. This important legislation helps make sure people are treated equally no matter their race, skin colour, background, or where they come from.

    But the act didn’t happen overnight. It took nearly ten years for Australia to follow through on the promises it made to the world to fight racism when it signed the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination in 1966.

    When Australia first signed that agreement, it still had laws and attitudes shaped by the White Australia Policy.

    Even after Australia started moving away from the White Australia Policy, federal leaders held off on making anti-racism laws. They weren’t sure it was allowed under the Constitution, worried about the cost, and didn’t want to upset the states. Many also feared that Australians wouldn’t support it.

    It took the courage of Gough Whitlam, Australia’s 21st prime minister, to pass Australia’s first anti-discrimination law. Between 1973 and 1975, Whitlam and his government made four attempts to pass laws against racial discrimination. The act was the result of their fourth try – this time, it worked.

    An uphill battle

    The first time the Racial Discrimination Bill was introduced was in 1973, it was alongside a Human Rights Bill. Together, they were part of a bigger plan to give people in Australia more rights and fair treatment.

    People had mixed feelings about the idea of a law to protect individual rights. Most of the concern was about the Human Rights Bill, but some also doubted whether a Racial Discrimination Act was needed.

    There was debate about whether it would really work or just be a symbolic step, and whether or not it would take away from people’s freedoms.

    In the end, the 1973 bill lapsed and did not become law.

    The Whitlam government reintroduced the bill twice more in 1974, once in April and then again in October.

    The April version added protections for immigrants and focused more on conciliation and education, but it wasn’t debated before an election.

    The bill returned in October with minor updates, mainly to strengthen education efforts and clarify that it used civil, not criminal, enforcement.

    Still, it was withdrawn in early 1975 because of ongoing political instability.

    The 1975 Racial Discrimination Bill was the Whitlam government’s final, and successful, push to make laws tackling racism.

    Familiar debates

    Labor MPs backed the 1975 version of the bill, highlighting its importance for Indigenous people and other marginalised groups.

    But the Liberal–Country Party Coalition, then in opposition, pushed back hard.

    While the opposition claimed to support equality, they questioned the legal basis of the bill, feared it gave too much power to the race relations commissioner and warned it might threaten free speech.

    Some opposition voices, especially in the Senate, went further, downplaying racism altogether. Senator Ian Wood claimed Australia was “singularly free of racial discrimination”.

    Senator Glen Sheil argued immigration was the issue:

    Australia over recent years has adopted an immigration policy that has allowed the immigration into this country of blacks, whites, reds, yellows and browns […] because of these problems, once again created by governments, we are now faced with this Racial Discrimination Bill. In my opinion if this bill is implemented it will create more discrimination, not less.

    The opposition successfully weakened the bill by removing several key parts, including:

    • criminal penalties for inciting racial discrimination

    • the ability of the commissioner to start legal proceedings in court or ask a court to make someone give evidence

    • and criminal penalties for publishing, distributing or expressing racial hostility.

    Despite these setbacks, the Racial Discrimination Act passed.

    Change takes time

    Even with all the compromises, the passing of the act was a major moment in Australian history.

    As Whitlam acknowledged:

    it is of course extraordinarily difficult to define racial discrimination and outlaw it by legislative means. Social attitudes and mental habits do not readily lend themselves to codification and statutory prohibition.

    The act has not erased racial discrimination, nor is it perfect.

    It continues to spark debates and needs to be further strengthened to meet the changing needs of our society.

    However, the laws have been used in real cases to protect people’s rights, shown the federal government does have the power under the Constitution to make laws about human rights, and has sent a strong message that everyone deserves to be safe and free from discrimination, regardless of their race, colour or national or ethnic origin.

    The story of the Racial Discrimination Act is a reminder that real change takes time, resolve and tenacity.

    While the laws finally passed, the Human Rights Bill introduced alongside it in 1973 did not.

    More than 50 years later, Australia still does not have a national Human Rights Act. As more people call for stronger human rights protections in our laws, the Racial Discrimination Act stands as both a reminder of what progress can look like and a challenge to imagine what bold leadership could achieve today.

    A Human Rights Act is now needed more than ever to protect those most at risk. It will take the same political will, moral clarity, and bravery that brought the Racial Discrimination Act to life.

    Azadeh Dastyari 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.

    – ref. The Racial Discrimination Act at 50: the bumpy, years-long journey to Australia’s first human rights laws – https://theconversation.com/the-racial-discrimination-act-at-50-the-bumpy-years-long-journey-to-australias-first-human-rights-laws-257245

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Padilla, Schiff, Schumer Demand Answers from Trump Administration on Arrest and Detention of SEIU Union Labor Leader David Huerta

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)

    Padilla, Schiff, Schumer Demand Answers from Trump Administration on Arrest and Detention of SEIU Union Labor Leader David Huerta

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senators Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee, Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) are demanding answers from top Trump Administration officials regarding the arrest and detention of David Huerta, President of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) California and SEIU-United Service Workers West. Mr. Huerta was injured, arrested, and detained by federal officials in Downtown Los Angeles while exercising his lawful right to observe the conduct of immigration enforcement personnel on Friday, June 6, 2025. He currently remains detained in federal custody. 

    “It is deeply troubling that a U.S. citizen, union leader, and upstanding member of the Los Angeles community continues to be detained by the federal government for exercising his rights to observe immigration enforcement,” wrote the Senators.  

    “As U.S. Senators, we are privileged and proud to represent Americans like Mr. Huerta, who are pillars of their community and stand up for the fundamental rights of all Californians. We have a constitutional duty to conduct oversight of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice and its components to ensure that the rights of Californians are upheld. As such, we demand a complete and comprehensive response to the following requests regarding this incident by Friday, June 13, 2025,” concluded the Senators. 

    The Senators are voicing their serious concerns to Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Todd M. Lyons.

    Yesterday, Senator Padilla joined MSNBC’s “The Weekend: Primetime” to condemn the Trump Administration’s ICE raids across Los Angeles and President Trump’s ensuing unprecedented deployment of nearly 2,000 members of California’s National Guard to the region. Padilla also joined Los Angeles outlets KTLA and KNX last night to discuss the fear and chaos the Trump Administration is stoking in Los Angeles and across California. On Friday, Padilla issued a statement condemning the Los Angeles ICE raids.

    Full text of the letter is available here and below:   

    Dear Secretary Noem, Acting Director Lyons, and Attorney General Bondi:

    We write to express our grave concerns regarding the arrest and detention of David Huerta, the President of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) California and SEIU United Service Workers West.

    On Friday, June 6, 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), and several other federal agencies conducted numerous immigration enforcement actions throughout Southern California. During a workplace enforcement action, Mr. Huerta, a well-known and deeply respected community leader, was exercising his lawful right to observe the conduct of immigration enforcement personnel. In the course of doing so, Mr. Huerta suffered an injury and law enforcement personnel apprehended and subsequently arrested him. It is deeply troubling that a U.S. citizen, union leader, and upstanding member of the Los Angeles community continues to be detained by the federal government for exercising his rights to observe immigration enforcement.

    As U.S. Senators, we are privileged and proud to represent Americans like Mr. Huerta, who are pillars of their community and stand up for the fundamental rights of all Californians. We have a constitutional duty to conduct oversight of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice and its components to ensure that the rights of Californians are upheld. As such, we demand a complete and comprehensive response to the following requests regarding this incident by Friday, June 13, 2025:

    1. We request that the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice undertake a review to determine which federal agencies and personnel were involved in the actions that resulted in the injuries sustained by Mr. Huerta and what disciplinary actions may be necessary for relevant federal personnel.

    2. We request that the Department of Justice state the legal authority under which Mr. Huerta is currently being detained.

    Thank you for your prompt attention to this urgent matter.

    Sincerely,

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Waterbury Teen Sentenced to 3 Years in Federal Prison for Salem Gun Theft, Trafficking Offenses

    Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

    David X. Sullivan, United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut, announced that EDUARDO CRUZ, 19, of Waterbury, was sentenced today by U.S. District Judge Michael P. Shea in Hartford to 36 months of imprisonment, followed by three years of supervised release, for offenses related to the theft of firearms from a federally-licensed gun dealer in Salem, and the trafficking of some of the stolen firearms.

    According to court documents and statements made in court, in the early morning of March 15, 2024, Cruz and others drove a car into the entryway doors of Statewide Pawn Shop, a federal firearms licensee in Salem, and stole 21 firearms from the store.  Later that day, law enforcement made a controlled purchase of three of the stolen firearms from Cruz and a juvenile in Waterbury.  On March 18, 2024, investigators purchased another of the stolen firearms from Cruz, who arrived at the meeting location with two juveniles.  Cruz was arrested at that time, and law enforcement recovered two additional stolen firearms, one that was carried by one of the juveniles, and one from Cruz’s vehicle.

    Two of the stolen firearms were also found in the home of one of Cruz’s associates on March 18, 2024.  Thirteen of the stolen firearms are still missing.

    Cruz has been detained since his arrest.  On March 7, 2025, he pleaded guilty to one count of theft of firearms from a licensee and one count of firearms trafficking.

    This matter is being investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), the Connecticut State Police, and the Waterbury, Stamford, and Wolcott Police Departments.

    U.S. Attorney Sullivan thanked the State’s Attorney for the Judicial District of Waterbury and the State’s Attorney for the Judicial District of New London for their cooperation in investigating and prosecuting this matter.

    The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Sean Mahard through Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a program bringing together all levels of law enforcement and the communities they serve to reduce gun violence and other violent crime, and to make our neighborhoods safer for everyone. For more information about Project Safe Neighborhoods, please visit www.justice.gov/psn.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Harrison County Man Admits to Methamphetamine Charge

    Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)

    CLARKSBURG, WEST VIRGINIA – James Leonard Bailey, III, age 41, of Stonewood, West Virginia, has admitted to conspiring to possess with the intent to distribute five grams or more of methamphetamine.  

    According to court documents, Bailey was found with 32 grams of methamphetamine and a firearm in Harrison County.

    Bailey is facing at least five and up to 40 years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Christie Utt is prosecuting the case on behalf of the government.

    The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the Stonewood Police Department investigated.

    U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael John Aloi presided.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Founder of Orange County Based Non-Profit Charged in 15-Count Indictment Alleging He Bribed County Supervisor in $12 Million Scheme

    Source: US FBI

    SANTA ANA, California – The founder of a now-shuttered non-profit organization has been indicted on federal charges alleging he bribed then-Orange County Supervisor Andrew Hoang Do to obtain approximately $12 million in COVID-19 pandemic-related funds, pocketed the bulk of that money, then laundered it to avoid detection by law enforcement, the Justice Department announced today.

    Peter Anh Pham, 65, of Garden Grove, is charged with one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, one count of conspiracy to commit honest services wire fraud, six counts of wire fraud, six counts of concealment money laundering, and one count of bribery.

    Also charged in the indictment is Thanh Huong Nguyen, 61, of Santa Ana, who is charged with one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, one count of wire fraud, and one count of concealment money laundering.

    Pham is considered to be a fugitive from justice. Nguyen’s initial appearance and arraignment are expected to occur on Monday in U.S. District Court in Santa Ana.

    “These two defendants are charged with conspiring with a corrupt politician to pad their pockets while the nation suffered under the weight of COVID-19,” said United States Attorney Bill Essayli. “My office and our law enforcement partners will continue our efforts to prosecute individuals who cashed in on government aid intended to help those impacted by the largest public health emergency in a century.”

    “This conspiracy was a house of cards built on lies, betrayal, and insatiable greed,” said Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer. “Today’s indictments are another critical step in ensuring accountability – and consequences – for those who conspired to use the County of Orange’s COVID-19 funds as their personal ATMs – and to return those stolen funds to their rightful owners – the community for which these funds were originally intended.” 

    According to the indictment that was returned on Wednesday and unsealed today, Pham was a friend and associate of Do, 62, of Santa Ana, who served on the Orange County Board of Supervisors from 2015 until his resignation in October 2024. In that role, Do was one of five supervisors on the Board, which is responsible for the county’s $9 billion annual budget.

    Do pleaded guilty in October 2024 to one count of conspiracy to commit bribery concerning programs receiving federal funds and is scheduled to be sentenced on June 9, when he will face a sentence of up to five years in federal prison. 

    From June 2020 to October 2024, Do used his official position as a county supervisor to vote for millions of dollars in county funds to be allocated in his district, subject to disbursement at his sole discretion. Do then steered county contracts and grants to Pham and Nguyen, the indictment alleges. 

    For example, in June 2020, Do voted to approve an agenda item that, in part, allocated $5 million in federal COVID-19 pandemic-relief funding to a county nutrition program. As part of this agenda item, Do authorized himself a budget of $1 million to develop that nutrition program in his district, which he could distribute without further approval from the rest of the Board. Eight days after Do voted to approve the agenda item, Pham founded the Huntington Beach-based non-profit organization Viet America Society (VAS).

    Pham, through VAS, and Nguyen, through a Garden Grove-based group called Hand-to-Hand Relief Organization Inc. (H2H), entered into contracts and beneficiary agreements with the county. In many of these contracts, VAS and H2H falsely represented that they would reimburse the county for any funds not spent for the contract’s intended purpose. In each of the beneficiary agreements, VAS and H2H falsely certified that all funds would be used solely for the grant’s intended purpose.

    In exchange for Pham’s bribes in the form of payments to his two daughters, Do used his official position as a county supervisor to advocate for VAS and H2H so county employees would approve contracts and beneficiary agreements between the county and these organizations. Do and his staff – including his chief of staff – edited the terms of those contracts and agreements to make them more favorable to Pham and Nguyen. Through the influence of Do and his staff, the county wired funds to Pham and Nguyen. 

    After receiving county funds, Pham and Nguyen transferred most of the money to other entities they controlled. They then spent large portions of the funds to pay personal expenses such as rent and bills, to pay off debts owed by their other businesses, and to make personal investments such as purchasing commercial and residential real estate. Pham and Nguyen also used county funds to bribe Do through payments to his daughters.

    Pham also used county money to pay the eventual wife of Do’s chief of staff, under the guise that she was providing consulting services to VAS. Do’s chief of staff then used his position in Orange County’s government to help VAS and H2H obtain county contracts, edited the contracts’ terms to make them more favorable to VAS and H2H, and helped those organizations fulfill reporting requirements and get paid.

    When required to submit invoices to the county to account for how the money was being spent, Pham and Nguyen submitted false documents, claiming to have used all the funds – all solely for legitimate purposes and according to the contracts’ terms.

    To disguise the funds’ source, Pham and an associate caused checks from county funds to be written to a Westminster-based company called D Air Conditioning Co. LLC. This company then issued checks from its corporate bank account to Pham, Pham’s associate, and one of Do’s daughters.

    In total, Pham and Nguyen unlawfully acquired approximately $12 million in county funds through this conspiracy.

    An indictment contains allegations that a defendant has committed a crime.  Every defendant is presumed innocent until and unless proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

    If convicted of the charges, Pham and Nguyen would face a statutory maximum sentence of 20 years in federal prison for the conspiracy count, each wire fraud count, and each money laundering count. Pham also would face up to 10 years in federal prison for the bribery count. 

    The FBI, the Orange County District Attorney’s Office Bureau of Investigation, and IRS Criminal Investigation are investigating this matter.      

    Assistant United States Attorneys Nandor F.R. Kiss and Rosalind Wang of the Orange County Office, Assistant United States Attorney Tara Vavere of the Asset Forfeiture and Recovery Section, and Senior Deputy District Attorney Avery T. Harrison and Deputy District Attorney Anthony J. Schlehner of Orange County District Attorney’s Office are prosecuting this case.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Chinese National Pleads Guilty to Acting at the Direction of North Korea to Export Firearms, Ammo, and Technology to North Korea

    Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division

    An illegal alien from China pleaded guilty today to federal criminal charges for illegally exporting firearms, ammunition and other military items to North Korea by concealing them inside shipping containers that departed from the Port of Long Beach, California, and for committing this crime at the direction of North Korean government officials, who wired him approximately $2 million for his efforts.

    Shenghua Wen, 42, of Ontario, California, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and one count of acting as an illegal agent of a foreign government. Wen has been in federal custody since his arrest in December 2024.

    According to his plea agreement, Wen is a citizen of the People’s Republic of China who entered the United States in 2012 on a student visa and remained in the U.S. illegally after his student visa expired in December 2013.

    Prior to entering the United States, Wen met with officials from North Korea’s government at a North Korean embassy in China. These government officials directed Wen to procure goods on behalf of North Korea.

    In 2022, two North Korean government officials contacted Wen through an online messaging platform and instructed him to buy and smuggle firearms and other goods – including sensitive technology – from the United States to North Korea via China.

    In 2023, at the direction of North Korean government officials, Wen shipped at least three containers of firearms out of the Port of Long Beach to China en route to their ultimate destination in North Korea. Wen took steps to conceal that he was illegally shipping firearms to North Korea by, among other things, filing false export information regarding the contents of the containers.

    In May 2023, Wen purchased a firearms business in Houston, paid for with money sent through intermediaries by one of Wen’s North Korean contacts. Wen purchased many of the firearms he sent to North Korea in Texas and drove the firearms from Texas to California, where he arranged for them to be shipped.

    In December 2023, one of Wen’s weapons shipments – which falsely reported to U.S. officials that it contained a refrigerator – left the Port of Long Beach and arrived in Hong Kong in January 2024. This weapons shipment was later transported from Hong Kong to Nampo, North Korea.

    In September 2024, Wen – once again acting at the direction of North Korean officials – bought approximately 60,000 rounds of 9mm ammunition that he intended to ship to North Korea.

    In furtherance of the conspiracy and at the direction of North Korean officials, Wen also obtained sensitive technology that he intended to send to North Korea. This technology included a chemical threat identification device and a handheld broadband receiver that detects known, unknown, illegal, disruptive or interfering transmissions.

    Wen also acquired or offered to acquire a civilian airplane engine and a thermal imaging system that could be mounted on a drone, helicopter, or other aircraft, and could be used for reconnaissance and target identification.

    During the scheme, North Korean officials wired approximately $2 million to Wen to procure firearms and other goods for their government.

    Wen admitted that at all relevant times he knew that it was illegal to ship firearms, ammunition, and sensitive technology to North Korea. He also admitted to never having the required licenses to export ammunition, firearms, and the above-described devices to North Korea. He further admitted to acting at the direction of North Korean government officials and that he had not provided notification to the Attorney General of the United States that he was acting in the United States at the direction and control of North Korea as required by law.

    Wen faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison on the count of violating the IEEPA and a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison on the count of acting as an illegal agent of a foreign government. Sentencing is scheduled for Aug. 18. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    Assistant Attorney General for National Security John Eisenberg, U.S. Attorney Bilal A. Essayli for the Central District of California, and Assistant Director Roman Rozhavsky of the FBI Counterintelligence Division made the announcement.

    The FBI, Homeland Security Investigations, Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), and the Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) are investigating the case.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Sarah E. Gerdes for the Central District of California and Trial Attorney Ahmed Almudallal of the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section are prosecuting the case.

    MIL Security OSI –