[ By Dr. Kenneth J. Ryan, a criminologist at California State University. Read his Bio >> ]
Nervously fidgeting in a hot Lima courtroom, Joran Van der Slootlistened to his sentence at the end of a 2-hour hearing. The 3-judge panel sentenced Van der Sloot to spend 28 years in prison and pay $74,000 in reparations to the heirs of his victim Stephany Flores. The 2-hour hearing listed the charges and overviewed facts of the case. In the end, Van der Sloot was found guilty of the most serious crime of Qualified Murder, which is “murder for profit or pleasure.” Additionally, he was also found guilty of Simple Robbery for stealing the victim’s money, credit cards and vehicle after the murder. Van der Sloot was given credit for time already served, and will be released 28 years from the date of his arrest, on June 10, 2038. Once he's released from prison, he will be deported.
On January 11, 2012, Van der Sloot pled guilty and offered a “sincere confession” to the judges. Perhaps it was his smirking, his overt condescension of the proceedings, or perhaps it was his yawning throughout the hearing a few days before. The judges must not have believed the defendant’s sincerity in his brief statement of remorse (“I feel bad”). Or perhaps it was the way he beamed at the judges after pleading guilty to the brutal beating and strangulation of Stephany Flores. Perhaps the judges saw the happy, jubilant Van der Sloot as being prideful of his acts. And perhaps the judges were very correct in doing so. Van der Sloot offered the world a master’s class in how not to behave in a courtroom if one actually expects leniency. It rivals the American trial of Bob Ward, whose daughters pled for leniency in statements laced with profanities.
The judge chairing the panel sat behind a large crucifix on the bench, which is more than a little ironic. Jesus appeared as a criminal defendant only once in his short life and it did not work out well for him. Most scholars agree that the sentence he received was unjust, the charges trumped up, the witnesses false. Prominently displaying the image of an unjustly treated defendant in a modern courtroom probably is not the best message a panel of judges can convey. Nevertheless, by all appearances, on this day a criminal defendant was rightfully sentenced and justice was done
Consider that it was possible the judges in the Flores murder trial could have reduced Van der Sloot’s sentence to as little as 7 years. Instead, the sentenced was mitigated only 2 years from the maximum. Therefore, the sentence was reduced for what the sincere confession was worth. In America, we learn of this news with some satisfaction, knowing that the suspected murderer of Natalee Holloway has come to justice somewhere; however, at the cost of the life of another victim. There may be justice for Stephanie Flores today but it is likely there will never be justice for Natalee Holloway
[ By Dr. Kenneth J. Ryan, a criminologist at California State University. Read his Bio >> ]
Unable to refrain from smirking at the all-woman three judge panel, Joran Van der Sloot pled guilty to Murder today in Lima, Peru. He was charged in the June 2010 murder of Stephany Flores, a 21 year-old student and daughter of a prominent Peruvian family. Van der Sloot, responding to questions from the bench said, “I want to give a sincere confession. I am truly regretful for what I have done. I feel very bad." Van der Sloot did not make a narrative confession; however, attorney Luis Jimenez said on behalf of his client that, because it was the 5th anniversary of the disappearance of 17 year-old Natalie Hollowayon the island of Aruba, van der Sloot was very sensitive.
When Flores was caught going through Van der Sloot’s computer, allegedly to look for connections between Van der Sloot and Holloway’s disappearance, Van der Sloot was so sensitive that he snapped and killed Flores. After van der Sloot answered questions from the judge, he sat down and beamed at them.
With his “sincere confession” Van der Sloot enabled the judges to reduce his sentence. The prosecutors cannot rebut a confession in this case; nor would they, since it is the end-product of negotiations between the state and the defense. The defense blamed the murdered victim for inciting Van der Sloot to violence and with the full knowledge and acquiescence of the prosecutors. Although the bench warned that facts of another case (meaning the Holloway case) cannot be considered in sentencing, the genie was out of the bottle and the judges heard Jimenez’ statement nonetheless.
It is not a given that Van der Sloot’s sentence will be reduced to the minimum, but it is now virtually impossible for him to receive the 30 year maximum sentence. Jimenez’ argument was also ill-placed before the panel of judges; it presumes they are unable to reason.
Here’s why. Jimenez told the judges that Joran Van der Sloot is such a sensitive young man that, when confronted with the possibility that he had killed a young American girl, he brutally strangled and beat a Peruvian girl to death, robbed her and then fled the country. Frankly, that doesn’t sound like the kind of response one might expect from a sensitive guy falsely accused of a crime. Anticipate the judges will be able to see through this display of smoke and mirrors. On the other hand, one might also anticipate that Jimenez was trying to be as transparently contemptuous of his own client as his ethics would allow, offering a tissue thin excuse for murder. However, Van der Sloot’s sentence will be reduced because he sincerely confessed, even to nonsense; and so, as his client’s lawyer, he provided adequate representation.
On a final note, it is entirely possible that Van der Sloot may serve more time in the United States for Extortion than he will in Peru for Murder. If Van der Sloot serves only a few years for Murder, recall that he will be extradited to America thereafter to stand trial for extorting $25,000 from Natalie Holloway’s family. And a conviction in that matter could lead to a 10 year sentence in a federal penitentiary. After that, one can hope he will return to Aruba and live out his life without murdering anyone else. Well, one can hope.
Van der Sloot will be sentenced in Lima on Friday the 13th.
[ By Dr. Kenneth J. Ryan, a criminologist at California State University. Read his Bio >>]
Following the recommendations of court-ordered psychiatrists, Oslo prosecutors have announced that Anders Behring Breivik was insane at the time of his attacks on July 22, 2011, in which 77 people were killed. Breivik has confessed to exploding a bomb at a government building and later, dressed as a policeman, shooting attendees at a political youth camp. If the criminal court that shall hear Breivik’s case agrees with this finding, it is doubtful that the terrorist will ever be imprisoned for the greatest mass murder in peace time Norway.
The legal systems of Continental Europe differ substantially from those of the United States, as those who have followed recent cases such as that of Amanda Knox well know. For example, the civil law system of Norway uses police, prosecutors and examining magistrates as co-investigators of criminal cases. Therefore, for a prosecutor to announce that defendant Breivik was suffering from a psychotic break at the time of his murderous rampage, rather than hearing this news from Breivik’s own attorney, is to be expected. In the U.S., this revelation more likely would surface during the opening of the trial when a criminal defendant would plea “not guilty by reason of insanity” or, in some jurisdictions, “guilty but insane.”
In any of these circumstances and no matter if here or there, if a defendant is found to have been insane at the time of the offense, different guidelines apply at trial, notably that the defendant first must admit that he or she actually committed the crime; however, at the time the defendant did not know right from wrong or in some fashion misunderstood reality. Breivik’s psychiatrists have told prosecutors that he was suffering from paranoid-schizophrenia at the time of his terrorist attacks. In fact, at the time of the murders he believed that he was the leader of an organization that didn’t exist; an anti-Islamic movement; a counter-jihad, if you will. But he led nothing, he organized nothing, no one supported him.
And so, for argument’s sake, let’s assume for a moment that Breivik was insane at the time he murdered 77 people. What will possibly happen to him? To show how the systems differ, it is possible that in the United States he could be set free. If the psychiatric evaluation shows that the defendant was suffering from a psychotic break at the time of the offense but is no longer impaired and no longer poses a danger to himself or to society, the court might simply release the defendant. In Norway things are a little more structured and a defendant found insane but guilty must serve a minimum of three years in a psychiatric institution. Thereafter, the defendant’s case will receive periodic review. And so, an insane defendant will serve somewhere between three years and life, depending on the conduct of the defendant. In the U.S., the reality is that more often than not a defendant found not guilty by reason of insanity will suffer the same fate. American criminal courts frequently sentence those who have been found to be insane at the time of their respective offenses to indeterminate times of incarceration in psychiatric hospitals. One need look no further than the case of would-be presidential assassin John Hinkley for an example of one who was adjudged insane and soon may be released from confinement.
Another question that has surfaced is this: if Breivik was insane and the terrorist organization was only a figment of his imagination, were his murders actually terrorist acts? Oddly enough, the answer has some rather expansive ramifications. The families of the victims stand to receive compensation for terrorist acts; but if the acts were merely those of a madman, they might not. In this case, I believe that we should take Breivik at his word. His motives were that of a terrorist and his victim targeting was specific, not random, and intended to send a message. No matter how sane or insane Breivik was at the time of the murders, his motive was terror. There is no requirement in law that a terrorist must belong to a terrorist organization to commit a terrorist act (a nuance that al Qaeda has benefited from for years). And that should demonstrate to all that even the most pathetic among us can strike terror at will.
The preliminary date for Breivik’s trial is set for April 10, 2012.
[ By Dr. Kenneth J. Ryan, a criminologist at California State University. Read his Bio >> ]
A review of DNA evidence that convicted Amanda Knox and former boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito is under appeal this week in Italy. Defense attorneys claim that police and forensic examiners mishandled and fabricated DNA evidence against the appellants; therefore, the convictions should be overturned.
For example, there are claims that those who handled critical DNA evidence contaminated samples seized at the murder scene by wearing dirty rubber gloves. Other charges leveled at Italian investigators suggest that DNA test results pointing at Knox’s guilt were fabricated because, in one example, there was an insufficient latent sample to test for DNA. An insufficient sample infers that Italian lab technicians lied about the results. Italian police officials have defended their procedures, saying that no contamination occurred, there were sufficient samples for testing and the results are what the results are.
Although this suggests a rather brief, black and white examination in court of whether or not scientific procedures were followed (and an anti-climactic judgment shall soon follow), there is substantially more at stake. The Italians see the appellate case as a referendum on the honor of the Italian police. Would Italian authorities fabricate evidence, fabricate a confession, fabricate laboratory evidence to convict a criminal defendant? If the trial was being held here in the United States, the answer is a resounding, “of course they would,” and there are myriad precedents to suggest as much. Fortunately, most of these precedents are quite dated and, especially since the civil rights movement, countless watchdog organizations have permeated law enforcement, correction and judicial systems. That isn’t to say that American criminal justice won’t persecute as well as prosecute any longer, but it seems that to do so is to invite indictment of the offenders (kindly recall the Duke University lacrosse team rape case). But what about the Italian criminal justice system?
As I mentioned in an earlier article, the Italian system is far different than our own: it seeks to “find the truth” as opposed to “find legal guilt”. But police and prosecutors count wins versus losses on both sides of the Atlantic. The Knox defense asks: would the Italian police fabricate a case against an innocent defendant? Of course, to answer “no” is to fly in the face of the human condition; in a zero sum game, it’s winner take all and loser takes none, no matter where the game is played. And, as everywhere else in the world, there are human beings populating the criminal justice system in Italy. However, the real question is, very narrowly: are they telling the truth in this matter; and not, would they ever fabricate evidence?
And so, there’s a problem in this appeal for Knox and Sollecito. The defendants aren’t asserting in this appellate court hearing that a widespread conspiracy is in place to convict them (although organized Knox supporters argue as much). Instead the appellants assert that Italian authorities were both sloppy and untruthful. Oddly enough, one really can’t have it both ways.
For those who believe that convicted murderers Knox and Sollecito are truly not guilty, a dichotomy forms: Were the Italians cold, steely planners of a falsely constructed case against Knox and Sollecito or were they total incompetents? If indeed they were incompetent, it would have been difficult to engineer a DNA case against the defendants without a massive conspiracy among all the players. This seems impractical if not impossible; the number of players is large and they are not internally coordinated. And certainly, if the Italian authorities were careful, dastardly planners they would have been more circumspect about releasing photos of dirty rubber gloves handling the bra clasp of the decedent.
In law and in research academia, we have a saying that goes something like this: “Let the evidence speak for itself.” This seems to be an adequate warning for the Italian appellate courts. If the DNA evidence is patently inadmissible because of mishandling and contamination, then the court must determine if there is sufficient other evidence to allow the conviction to stand. If the DNA evidence is not successfully challenged, the defendants will continue to serve their respective sentences. If not, they must be released. And, thereafter, Knox will stand trial for slandering the police during the course of the initial investigation. Then we will hear all about the honor of the Italian police.
[ By Dr. Kenneth J. Ryan, a criminologist at California State University. Read his Bio >> ]
London recently has been torn by riots along with other metropolitan areas of England, this much is certain. But the reasons why the riots occurred are a bit murky. Speaking on BBC, British historian David Starkey pointed out that the riots began in predominately minority neighborhoods and suggested that rioting whites have adopted black culture; therefore, whites have adopted black tactics to vent frustration with the status quo. Particularly, he cited immigration and, of all things, Jamaican culture. You’ll be pleased to know that these remarks did not go unchallenged as being patently racist. Responding to charges of racism, Starkey said that the causes of the riots were cultural, not race-related. Incredibly, Prime Minister David Cameron has said that he too believes the riots were of cultural origin. Both Starkey and Cameron are quite far from the truth; however, there is calculated method in their madness.
Tottenham, where the riots originated, is among the most impoverished neighborhoods in North London and is minority dominated but remains diverse. When riots began, it was not merely among the majority black population or any single culture. Instead, the characteristic that rioters shared was poverty. The world learned decades ago that poverty generates frustration and that frustration generates violence (it’s called strain theory among those of us in the criminology business). With the global downward-spiraling economy, negative effects felt in the UK are much the same as in the United States, such as high rates of unemployment, particularly among minorities. Surely this must have been understood by the British government -- factoids such as this aren’t kept secret. Additionally, in a 1974 report to the Home Office on the heels of violent riots in Manchester, British Lord Leslie Scarman warned of the dire consequences stemming from a police force separated from its public. To suggest that local police were separated from the residents of Tottenham would be a massive understatement, to be sure, and charges of racism among the police toward residents of Tottenham are being leveled even as the smoke clears. But it isn’t racism, it’s discrimination based on economic status, no matter the race. And in Tottenham, the poor are minorities.
One cannot help but speculate how or if recent changes at the top of the Metropolitan Police Department may have affected how the Met approached the riots. The recent loss of Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson and the brilliant Assistant Commissioner John Yates in the phone-hacking scandal may have left the Met without seasoned leadership at a critical time. Both resigned after accepting subordinates’ reports that phone-hacking of royalty was isolated, which was later shown to be untrue. Acting Commissioner Tim Godwin has blamed the riots on street gangs, suggesting that he is no closer to the truth than the prime minister.
But why are the English so reluctant to admit the causes of the riots may be economic rather than cultural? The answer is simple: if the causes are cultural, there is nothing the British government can do about it. On the other hand, if the causes of the riots were the economy, unemployment and the relationship between the police and the poor, the government would be required to act. PM Cameron has stated his position and to his great detriment. Threats of arrest and punishment are the only solutions heard from the top. It’s a solution that offers no positive change for either side.
Photo Caption: A local resident tries to argue his passage with anti-riot police in Hackney, North London, Britain, Aug. 8, 2011, during the third day of violence in which police have clashed with rioters in Hackney. More than 200 people have been arrested and 35 police officers injured. Violence erupted in reaction to a fatal shooting in Tottenham on Aug. 4, where 29-year-old Mark Duggan was killed by armed officers. (Credit: EPA/KERIM OKTEN)
[ By Dr. Kenneth J. Ryan, a criminologist at California State University. Read his Bio >> ]
The convictions of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito are under scrutiny once again amidst charges that Italian police botched the collection and processing of DNA evidence. Whereas, allegations that the police botched evidence collection are nothing new in criminal trials on either side of the Atlantic, it is important that the charges have been made in Italy. It’s a distinction that boils down to this: the Italian court system is vastly different from ours; therefore, how the court reacts to new evidence is not as predictable there as it is here.
Simply put, in the United States we have an adversarial court system in which prosecution and defense are expected to face off and play by the rules of court and the law. In Italy, an inquisitorial court system is in place (as is true throughout most of Europe). In an inquisitorial system, where the judicial mission is to seek truth, the judge (or judges) jointly occupies the positions of magistrate and chief investigator. But, in seeking the truth, the defendant is expected to cooperate with the investigative trial process. And that puts Amanda Knox in a rather awkward position as she faces charges of slander against the Italian police, after earlier falsely accusing an acquaintance of murdering roommate Meredith Kercher. Although lying to police might have made the defendant appear very clever to a Florida jury, it makes Knox look uncooperative in the eyes of the Italians. In Italy, being uncooperative is viewed as a sign of deception and, therefore, guilt.
Local thief Rudy Guede already has pleaded guilty to the rape and murder of Kercher, with plenty of evidence to support a conviction. Therefore, one must wonder aloud how it happens that Knox and Sollecito are even implicated. DNA evidence, is the Italian police response, although one might logically expect Knox’s DNA and that of boyfriend Sollecito to be found in Knox’s own residence. The Italian police would point out that Knox confessed to participating in Kercher’s murder. This is true, but she later retracted the confession saying that the Italian police abused and beat her into confessing. And that is what the slander trial is all about; nonsense, say the police. Once again, alleging police abuse puts the prosecution on the defensive in America and it may be perceived as a clever ploy in an Orlando courtroom; however, it forces the defense to prove the allegations in Italy. Once again, this is not a good position for someone already found culpable in falsely accusing an innocent man.
Several possibilities loom for Amanda Knox and not many are positive. Indeed, the court may find that the botched DNA evidence has tainted the criminal trial; therefore, the convictions of Knox and Sollecito are vacated. Or because the court is an investigative body as much as it is a trial court, it may decide that there is sufficient evidence without DNA evidence to uphold the convictions. Worse, now that the case is reopened, the sentences may be reviewed and prolonged by the Italian court to life imprisonment for either defendant. And finally, it is equally possible that Knox will be acquitted of murder but convicted for slander. And in Italy, slander is a criminal offense for which one can be imprisoned; back to square one, in other words.
Amanda Knox became ensnared in an Italian murder investigation whilst visions of the American criminal justice system danced in her head. Being clever in American law may have been her undoing in Italy.
Photo Caption: Amanda Knox chats with her lawyer Luciano Ghirga as she attends a session of her appeal against her murder conviction in Perugia's Court of Appeal on July 30, 2011 in Perugia, Italy. American Amanda Knox and her Italian ex-boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito were convicted of the murder of Knox's former British flatmate Meredith Kercher in 2007. Their trial took place in December 2009 with Knox and Sollecito receiving sentences of 26 and 25 years respectively. Rudy Guede, an unemployed man from Ivory Coast, was also convicted of the Meredith Kercher's murder. (Photo by Franco Origlia/Getty Images)
[ By Dr. Kenneth J. Ryan, a criminologist at California State University. Read his Bio >> ]
A little after three in the afternoon on a cloudy but pleasant day, office conversations doubtless had begun to drift away from government business and wander in the direction of weekend plans. Traditionally hard-working Norwegians hunched over their tasks had already begun to relax a bit in anticipation of soon walking away for a few days off of family and friends; a birthday party here, a picnic if it doesn’t rain, and maybe repairing the garden fence. Only a moment later in a blinding flash, 10 lay dead and many were injured in a bomb blast that ripped apart the building. There was no warning, no preparation, no fear. There were only hopes for the upcoming weekend and then in an instant, no hope at all.
A few hours later a uniformed policeman entered a youth camp organized by a political party for teenagers. It would have been unusual to see a uniformed police officer on the campgrounds, but he would not have been unwelcome. The curious doubtless would have speculated what would have brought the man to their camp, wondering aloud as to whom the policeman was there to see. Then, to the shock and horror of the campers, the policeman opened fire, killing as many as were in his path. Many children perished, whose only crime was to attend a political party’s youth camp on a lovely Friday afternoon. Other victims would be found later, already murdered. It would have been a weekend in Norway in which there were parties and picnics, speeches and cheering and maybe repairing the garden fence. Instead, a nation mourns.
Terrorism, according to Bruce Hoffman, is “violence for effect.” Victor LeVine called terrorism “violence against one target to influence the behavior of another intended target.” These acts in Norway were not random; they were not “the acts of a madman,” as the police reported. The targets were carefully selected and the methods used by the killer were designed to maximize casualties. And the murders were designed to send a message. And, as in all things terror-related, the message steels the recipient against the sender and his cause.
The people of Norway are fiercely independent and the nation is one of the very few in Europe that is not a member of the EU. If the attacker, alleged (at this writing) to be a Norwegian right-wing extremist, intended that somehow his murderous acts would move the nation toward his cause, then he is fundamentally naïve. Whatever organizations the attacker may be associated with are doubtless moving far away from him now. This was one very small, pathetic man with one murderous plan, a naïve plan, a tragic plan. The Norwegian criminal justice system will have its chance to deal with the attacker and one day the nation will mourn no more. But on another day, in another location when it is cool and pleasant and minds wander toward weekend plans, it will happen again.
While our attention has been focused upon the News of the World voicemail hacking scandal, revelation of another, potentially much more serious electronic breach went almost unnoticed. Last week, U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn III disclosed that in March, computer hackers penetrated the network of an unnamed defense contractor and stole 24,000 sensitive files.
Lynn blamed the theft on a foreign power. But computer security experts say such missions often are contracted out by spy agencies to shadowy gangs of cybercriminals, who crack the security of both government computers and corporate networks with alarming frequency.
News of the cyber-attack on the defense contractor comes in the wake of an admission in June by Citigroup that hackers had penetrated its Citi Account Online website is just the latest evidence of cybercriminals' growing ability to penetrate the electronic defenses of the financial institutions upon which the global economy depends.
The attack, the hackers were able to obtain the names, account numbers and contact information of about 210,000 Citi credit card customers across North America, comes in the wake of recent assaults on targets ranging from Sony to Google's Gmail system. Keyboard buccaneers even had the boldness to attack RSA, a security firm that provides electronic passcode keys to companies, and then utilize the stolen information to try to break into defense contractor Lockheed Martin's network.
Those attacks against major companies are just a part of the growing global wave of cybercrime, which targets ordinary people as well as institutions and businesses. "Phishing," in which cybercriminals use booby-trapped emails to lure unwary Internet users to fake bank and credit card websites that steal their passwords and/or social security numbers, caused an estimated $1 billion in losses in 2010 in the U.S. alone.
But the cybercrime problem could become far worse, warns, Hemanshu "Hemu" Nigam, a former federal computer-crime prosecutor who now heads SSP Blue, an online security firm whose clients include Microsoft and News Corporation, among others. Nigam sees the recent hacking incidents as part of a evolution of electronic crime over the past decade and a half, in which the random, malicious pranks of an antisocial few have morphed gradually into massive, coordinated attacks launched all over the globe, often at the behest of organized crime syndicates, terrorist groups and even governments.
Nigam says that unless more is done to thwart cybercrime, hackers eventually may succeed in crippling major targets such as major stock or commodities exchanges, and trigger a market crash that would lead to a global depression. Another catastrophic scenario could result from hackers attacking publicly-traded companies and crippling their Internet operations in order to drive down the value of their shares, in order to enrich corrupt short-sellers. "Some people may think that I'm a doomsday prophet, but these things could happen," he says.
Nigam says that cybercrime has been permitted to take root and flourish because society persists in seeing it as a victimless crime, an annoyance rather than a grave threat. "If you rob someone at gunpoint and take her money, the community is outraged," he explains. "If you steal her passwords and drain her bank account so she doesn't have enough money to live on, it doesn't evoke the same response, even though she's going to suffer just as much. We've got to start thinking of cybercrime as a crime in which people are victims, not computers."
But controlling — let alone stopping — cybercrime isn't going to be simple or easy. Nigam says it will require a concerted global effort, in which governments, businesses and ordinary people all become more vigilant and cooperate in warning one another about threats. He's still hopeful that some future advance in security technology will be a game-changer. In particular, Nigam would like to see identification technologies that utilize biometric data — such as retinal scans — to create the digital equivalent of a fingerprint, and provide a hack-proof means of verifying that Internet users are who they say they are. Another solution may involve combining such identification technology with multiple other digital checkpoints, such as passwords or behavioral analysis, in which a system watches for uncharacteristic behavior by a user.
Osama bin Laden, founder of the terror group al-Qaeda and mastermind of the attacks on September 11, 2001 that killed thousands of innocent men, women, and children, has been killed.
President Barack Obama made the announcement late Sunday evening during an address that was televised around the world. The president said he had been briefed by the intelligence community last August that bin Laden may be located at a compound in Pakistan. By mid-February, the president said it was determined that there was sound basis for that intelligence and, on Sunday, he issued the order to take action.
"Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound," the president said from the East Room of the White House. "A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability."
The attack against bin Laden took place at a compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. The team of soldiers was involved in a brief firefight, during which Osama bin Laden and three adult males were killed. U.S. officials believe two of the men were couriers and the third was bin Laden's son. One woman, rumored to be one of bin Laden's wives, was also killed when she was used as a shield by a male combatant. No Americans were harmed during the raid.
Bin Laden had been on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list as well as the State Department's Most Wanted Terrorists list. The United States Department of State had been offering a reward of up to $25 million for information leading directly to his apprehension or conviction.
According to the FBI's website, bin Laden was wanted for "murder of U.S. nationals outside the United States; conspiracy to murder U.S. nationals outside the United States and attack on a federal facility resulting in death."
The terrorist mastermind was wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. Those attacks killed more than 200 people. In addition, bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world, including the orchestration of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, which claimed the lives of more than 3,000 people.
Bin Laden's body was prepared for burial in accordance with Islamic practice and tradition and was then buried at sea within 24 hours of his death.
"The cause of securing our country is not complete. But tonight, we are once again reminded that America can do whatever we set our mind to," President Obama said. "That is the story of our history, whether it's the pursuit of prosperity for our people, or the struggle for equality for all our citizens; our commitment to stand up for our values abroad, and our sacrifices to make the world a safer place."
The president added, "Let us remember that we can do these things not just because of wealth or power, but because of who we are: one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. May God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America."
An Alabama man learned the hard way that it's not always a good idea to partake in booze during long-distance flights.
Robert Wade Prince, 49, of Mobile, pleaded guilty Friday to charges of assault and interfering with the crew during a Continental flight last year from Amsterdam to Houston, Texas.
The incidents occurred on Feb. 13, 2010. Prince reportedly consumed several alcoholic beverages at the beginning of the nine hour flight and displayed loud and obnoxious behavior. A few hours into the flight, he grabbed the arm of a female flight attendant, causing her pain. When the attendant asked him to let go, he refused, stating, "I just got back from the Middle East and I am not going to rape you," the FBI said.
Another flight attendant had to intervene to free the woman. An undercover air marshal was then notified of the encounter.
As the flight progressed, Prince became more disruptive, prompting two young female passengers seated next to him to ask to be reseated. They said they were fed up with the constant harassment and touching to which Prince had reportedly subjected them. The air marshal agreed to exchange seats with them.
When the air marshal attempted to sit next to Prince, he tried to push the air marshal out of the seat and allegedly told him, "You can't sit here. This seat is for my girlfriend."
The air marshal identified himself as a U.S. Air Marshal and asked Prince to calm down. Instead, Prince elbowed the air marshal in his chest. The air marshal then handcuffed Prince and began to escort him to the back of the plane. Prince became even more disruptive and yelled offensive racial slurs at the air marshal for the remainder of the flight.
After accepting his guilty plea, U.S. District Judge Melinda Harmon convicted and sentenced Prince to six months' incarceration on each of the two counts of conviction and further ordered him to pay a $10,000 fine. The sentences are to be served concurrently.
Ten individuals who pleaded guilty in Manhattan federal court to conspiring to serve as unlawful agents of the Russian Federation within the United States will be immediately expelled from the United States, the Justice Department announced Thursday.
"This was an extraordinary case, developed through years of work by investigators, intelligence lawyers, and prosecutors, and the agreement we reached today provides a successful resolution for the United States and its interests," Attorney General Eric Holder said.
In hearings before Judge Kimba M. Wood, each of the 10 defendants arrested on June 27 pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to act as an agent of a foreign government within the United States without notifying the U.S. Attorney General.
Under their plea agreements, the defendants were required to disclose their true identities in court and to forfeit certain assets attributable to their criminal offenses.
The defendants, Richard Murphy, aka, Vladimir Guryev; Cynthia Murphy, aka Lydia Guryev; Vicky Pelaex; Anna Chapmen; Mikhail Semenko; Michael Zottoli, aka, Mikhail Kutsik; Patricia Mills, aka, Natalia Pereverzeva; Donald Howard Heathfield, aka Andrey Bezrukov; Tracey Lee Ann Foley, aka, Elena Vavilova; and Juan Lazaro, aka Mikhail Anatonoljevich Vasenkiv, admitted that they are Russian citizens and agents of the Russian Federation.
The prosecution was handled by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael Farbiarz, Glen Kopp, and Jason Smith of the Terrorism and International Narcotics Unit of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York and Trial Attorneys Kathleen Kedian and Richard Scott of the Counterespionage Section of the Justice Department's National Security Division.
The United States has since agreed to transfer all of the individuals to the custody of the Russian Federation. In exchange, the Russian Federation has agreed to release four individuals who are incarcerated in Russia for alleged contact with Western intelligence agencies.
"Counterintelligence is a top FBI investigative priority, and this case in particular represents the dedicated efforts of the men and women who have worked tirelessly behind the scenes to counter the efforts of those who would steal our nation's vital secrets," said FBI Director Robert S. Mueller.
The case was the result of a multi-year investigation conducted by the FBI and other elements of the U.S. intelligence community, including the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York and the Counterespionage Section and the Office of Intelligence within the Justice Department's National Security Division.
A federal grand jury in New York has returned a 10-count indictment charging Faisal Shahzad for allegedly driving a car bomb into Times Square on May 1.
Shahzad, 30, a naturalized U.S. citizen born in Pakistan, was taken into custody at John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK Airport) on May 3, after he was identified by the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Customs and Border Protection while attempting to leave the United States on a commercial flight to Dubai. Shahzad was then charged in a five-count criminal complaint. On May 18, he was presented in Manhattan federal court before U.S. Magistrate Judge James C. Francis, IV.
Shahzad will be arraigned by U.S. District Judge Miriam Cedarbaum on June 21.
"The facts alleged in this indictment show that the Pakistani Taliban facilitated Faisal Shahzad's attempted attack on American soil," said Attorney General Eric Holder. "Our nation averted serious loss of life in this attempted bombing, but it is a reminder that we face an evolving threat that we must continue to fight with every tool available to the government."
According to the indictment and the criminal complaint:
In December 2009, Shahzad received explosives training in Waziristan, Pakistan, from explosive trainers affiliated with Tehrik-e-Taliban, a militant extremist group based in Pakistan. On Feb. 25, Shahzad received approximately $5,000 in cash in Massachusetts sent from a co-conspirator (CC-1) in Pakistan whom Shahzad understood worked for Tehrik-e-Taliban. Approximately six weeks later, on April 10, Shahzad received an additional $7,000 in cash in Ronkonkoma, N.Y., which was also sent at CC-1's direction.
On March 15, Shahzad purchased a semi-automatic 9-millimeter Kel-Tec rifle in Connecticut. This rifle was found, loaded, in Shahzad's car on the day of his arrest.
In April, Shahzad contacted the seller of a Nissan Pathfinder after seeing an advertisement posted on a website. Thereafter, on April 24, Shahzad and the seller of the Pathfinder agreed to meet in a supermarket parking lot in Connecticut, where Shahzad paid the seller $1,300 for the Pathfinder. In April 2010, Shahzad also purchased components for the improvised explosive and incendiary devices that he loaded into the Pathfinder on May 1.
Shahzad drove the Pathfinder, loaded with the improvised explosive and incendiary devices, to Manhattan and parked the Pathfinder in Times Square in the vicinity of 45th Street and Seventh Avenue. After parking the Pathfinder, Shahzad attempted to begin the detonation process of the improvised explosive and incendiary devices. Thereafter, Shahzad abandoned the Pathfinder and returned to his residence in Connecticut.
Shahzad drove from Connecticut to JFK Airport as he attempted to flee to Dubai. He was arrested later that same day at JFK. After his arrest, Shahzad admitted that he had recently received bomb-making training in Pakistan. He also admitted that he had brought the Pathfinder to Times Square and attempted to detonate it.
The indictment charges Shahzad with 10 offenses, which carry the following potential penalties:
Count 1 – Attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction, life in prison. Count 2 – Conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction, life in prison. Count 3 – Possession of a firearm during and in relation to a conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction, life in prison. Count 4 – Attempted act of terrorism transcending national boundaries, life in prison. Count 5 – Conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism transcending national boundaries, life in prison. Count 6 – Attempted use of a destructive device during and in relation to a conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism transcending national boundaries, life in prison. Count 7 – Transportation of an explosive, 10 years in prison. Count 8 – Conspiracy to transport an explosive, 10 years in prison. Count 9 – Attempted destruction of property by fire and explosive, 20 years in prison. Count 10 – Conspiracy to destroy property by fire and explosive, 20 years in prison.
Counts three, nine and 10 each carry a mandatory minimum penalty of five years in prison. Count six carries a mandatory minimum penalty of 30 years in prison. If there are convictions for count three and six, a sentence of life in prison is mandatory.
U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara stated: "Today's 10-count indictment returned in the Southern District of New York charges Faisal Shahzad with conspiring with the Pakistani Taliban to wreak death and destruction in Times Square. This office will continue to work in lock-step with our partners at the FBI and the NYPD to protect New York City from the threat posed by terrorists and those who would support them."
Last week, a thief broke into the Modern Art Museum in Paris and stole five paintings valued at $135 million to $151 million. The theft is the fourth largest art heist to occur in France in the past three years.
"It's an enormous crime, one of the biggest in art history," an unnamed source told mirror.co.uk.
According to Christophe Girard, the Deputy Mayor for Culture, the Wednesday night thefts were conducted with an “extreme level of sophistication.” The details of the crime, however, are highly suggestive of someone with inside knowledge.
Surprisingly, there was no need for the thief to commit to a Catherine Zeta-Jones style entry. There was no rappelling and no a dodging of laser light beams. Instead, the thief resorted to a prison-break style entry, sawing off an outside window grill lock and popping out the window and its frame.
Once inside, the “master thief” had little else to fear. The museum’s video surveillance system was malfunctioning and its multi-million dollar alarm system was inoperative. In fact, the system, which was not working due to a fairly inexpensive repair that had yet to be completed, had not been operational for nearly two months.
And what of the half dozen guards who had been assigned to patrol the gallery? They later told police they "saw nothing,” leading investigators to believe they were asleep at the time of the break in.
Interestingly, two of the CCTV cameras that were functioning – one which covered only part of the roof and another inside, and which only sporadically worked, only caught quick glimpses of the thief – a subject dressed in a ski mask or skull cap. The images captured from the inside camera shows the thief deliberately avoiding its prying lens – suggesting he or she was well aware of its presence.
Slipping past the broken sensors and sirens, the thief, who apparently knew exactly where he was going, made his way to three of the museum’s 20 galleries, where he spent less than 15 minutes cutting the artwork out of their frames and slipping away into the night.
The stolen works are Picasso's "Dove with Green Peas," Matisse's "Pastorale," Georges Braque's "Olive Tree near l'Estaque," Modigliani's "Woman on the Range" and Fernand Leger's "Still Life with Candlesticks."
The thefts went undetected until the following morning, giving the perpetrator plenty of time to make his getaway.
To add insult to injury, it has since been revealed that the paintings may not have been insured, due to their huge value.
In an effort to locate the stolen masterpieces, Interpol has issued a global alert to 188 countries and has added them to its database of stolen artwork.
"These extraordinary paintings by these great masters are so recognizable that they will be difficult to sell in any market," Jean-Michel Louboutin, Interpol's executive director of police services, said in a statement Sunday.
One cannot help but think of the 1990 heist at Boston’s Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum. Over a dozen masterpieces, including three Rembrandts, were stolen and to date not a single piece has been recovered. To date, the Boston crime is considered the largest unsolved art heist in history.
TLC will be premiering a film on Amanda Knox's trial this weekend. The film gives in-depth analysis to the extraordinary case, including unique access to Amanda Knox's family and her closest friends, as well as the prosecutors and lawyers who found her guilty of this vicious crime. "The Trials of Amanda Knox" will air on TLC March 28 at 8pm. Click here for the schedule.
Now that you've seen a sneak peek, be sure to read this in-depth article on the case, written by true crime writers David Lohr and Gary C. King:
The Meredith Kercher Murder Case
On Nov. 2, 2007, Meredith Kercher, a 21-year-old British exchange student attending Leeds University in Italy, was found dead in the bedroom of her Perugia apartment. She was partially nude, and her throat had been slashed.
Evidence collected at the scene suggested Amanda Knox was involved in the crime. At the time, Knox was a 20-year-old exchange student from the United States. The women were not acquainted before traveling to Italy, but shortly after their arrival, they began to share an apartment in Perugia with two other girls.
During police questioning, Knox initially said she was not in the apartment at the time of Kercher's murder but admitted she had been doing drugs and was confused. During further questioning, she said she was present at the time Kercher was killed but implicated another person, Patrick Lumumba, in the murder.
According to Knox, Lumumba and Kercher had gone into the bedroom together, and a short time later, she heard Kercher scream but was too afraid to do anything. However, not long after making this revelation, Knox retracted her statement and reverted to her original contention that she was not home.
Knox's boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, was also a suspect. While he denied any involvement, authorities claimed to have found a knife with DNA from both Knox and Kercher at his residence.
When police questioned Lumumba, he denied being at the apartment on the night of the murder and claimed he was working at his bar. Due to a lack of physical evidence, Lumumba was released from police custody.
The final suspect in the case was Rudy Hermann Guede. According to police, his DNA was found on the victim. His statements did not sit well with investigators, and following his extradition from Germany, he was put in jail with Knox and Sollecito.
"The motive appears sexual, but Meredith was morally innocent," Perugia Police Chief Arturo de Felice told The Daily Telegraph of London. "She was the victim, not a participant."
The police chief said that Meredith died while trying to fight off a sexual attack. When Meredith's body was discovered in her room, her bloodied shirt was found bunched up around her slashed and punctured neck. According to the coroner's report, Meredith died a "slow, agonizing death."
Despite all the alleged evidence, all three suspects pleaded innocent to charges of murder, sexual violence and robbery.
Rudy Guede was the first of the three suspects to go to trial. Court proceedings in his case began on Oct. 16, 2008.
Guede claimed that on the night of the murder, he was in the bathroom when he heard Kercher screaming for her life. He said when he came out, he discovered a man he did not know standing over Kercher with a knife in his hand. Guede said he fought with the man and was cut by the knife, at which time the man fled the scene.
Following the scuffle, Guede said he attempted to save Kercher but was unable to stop the flow of blood.
The prosecution called Guede's version of events "highly improbable" and presented evidence showing that his DNA was found mixed in the blood at the crime scene.
On Oct. 28, 2008, Guede was found guilty of assaulting and murdering Kercher. He was initially sentenced to 30 years in prison, but the Corte d'Appello later reduced his sentence to 16 years.
The trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito began on Jan. 16, 2009.
During the trial, the prosecution presented a multitude of forensic evidence, including bloody footprints and the kitchen knife retrieved from Sollecito's apartment that contained the DNA of both Knox and Kercher. The knife was, the prosecution claimed, the murder weapon. Prosecutors also pointed out that neither Knox nor Sollecito had an alibi during the time of the murder.
When it came time for the defense to present its case, professor Carlo Torre, a medical examiner and expert witness hired by the defense, testified that the knife in question could not be the murder weapon.
Torre, who is based in Turin, Italy, is considered to be a renowned forensic consultant in that country who has performed at least 5,000 autopsies and has worked on a number of high-profile cases.
While the prosecution contended that a kitchen knife with a six-and-a-half-inch blade recovered from Sollecito's apartment with Knox's DNA on its handle and Kercher's DNA on its blade was the murder weapon, Torre told the court that the knife used to kill Kercher had only a three-inch blade. He also testified that it was his opinion that only one knife was used in the slaying and that only one person took part in the killing.
"There are no elements or traces to suggest anyone else was involved…nothing to make me think that more than one person was involved," Torre said.
Although testimony had been elicited from Torre indicating that he could not rule out the possibility that two knives had been used, he retorted that if that had been the case, "it would be the first time in history that a murder was done with two knives." Torre also testified that the knife that killed Kercher appeared to be similar to a "survival" type of knife that might be used by a commando, but most knives of that type have larger blades.
Torre also testified that the prosecution's knife was not compatible with some of the wounds on Kercher's throat. Kercher's throat was cut three times, and one cut was larger than the others, according to testimony.
"The smaller wound is absolutely incompatible with the knife in question," Torre testified.
According to trial testimony, Knox's DNA was not found in Kercher's bedroom, the room where the killing took place, but Kercher's blood was somehow combined with Knox's DNA in a number of areas in the blood-spattered bathroom, in such places as the sink, on a Q-tip box, and on the bidet. It was also found in one of the other resident's bedrooms where a break-in had purportedly occurred. Knox's attorney argued that since Knox was a resident in the same house, there were possible explanations about how traces of her DNA could have become mixed with the victim's. Gino also testified that laboratory errors could have been made during the DNA testing.
Another argument put forth by Torre concerned the contention by a medical examiner hired by Sollecito's defense team who believed that Kercher had been killed while lying face-down, which would place her killer behind her. Torre testified that he believed she was killed while lying on her back. Torre also testified that there was evidence of strangulation because Kercher's hyoid bone had been broken, an indication that the small neck bone gave way to some kind of pressure having been applied to her neck. The prosecution contended that Kercher was killed from behind, allegedly held by Sollecito and Guede with Knox utilizing the knife.
Despite the lack of solid forensic evidence in the case, both Knox and Sollecito were found guilty on Dec. 4, 2009.
Knox was sentenced to 26 years in prison for murder, sexual assault and obstruction of justice. Sollecito received a 25-year sentence for murder and sexual assault.
Following the ruling, Knox's family issued a statement saying they still believed in her innocence.
"We know she is innocent as there is no forensic evidence that puts her in Meredith's room, no evidence of her at the scene of this horrible crime," the statement read.
Each of the three defendants is currently appealing. A mystery remains: Who killed Meredith Kercher?
One would think authorities would have a relatively easy time tracking down a fugitive who regularly taunts them using the Internet; however, police in Britain are finding that to be easier said than done.
According to Suffolk police, Craig "Lazie" Lynch, 28, escaped from Hollesley Bay prison in eastern England this past September, where he had been serving a seven-year sentence for aggravated burglary. Since that time, Lynch has continued to evade police, while at the same time allegedly posting status updates to the social networking Web site Facebook.com. Officials at Facebook have since deleted Lynch's profile; however, a fan page he allegedly contributes to remains on the site, with some 43,000 followers.
Lynch reportedly squashed rumors that he was not affiliated with the page by posting a photo of himself holding a turkey in one hand and displaying the middle finger on the other – both 'birds' an alleged message for police and his detractors. On Christmas Day, Lynch allegedly wrote, "Merry xmas i (sic) made it." He purportedly followed up that comment two days later with, "Quick question....HOW MANY COPS ARE IN HERE TONIGHT!?"
The newswire service AFP reports that police are "confident the Craig Lynch featured on Facebook was the on-the-run convict."
Lynch's exploits have turned him into somewhat of an Internet sensation and the media has dubbed him the "Facebook Fugitive." In addition, American country singer Kent Crawford has written a song dedicated to Lynch, which he uploaded to the video sharing Web site YouTube. The song, titled Crazy Craig Lazy Lynch, carries the following chorus:
"Crazy Craig Lazy Lynch, Busted out of prison like it was a sin, The English bounty police are hot on your trails, Can they catch you only time can tell."
In wake of the positive attention Lynch is receiving, several other groups have popped up on Facebook, with titles such as, "Where is Craig 'Lazie' Lynch?" and "We Hate Craig Lynch." Both groups are attracting members; however, the numbers are nowhere near those seen on Lynch's fanpage.
According to CNN, police have been working with officials at Facebook to track Lynch down.
"We have spoken to Facebook and we are trying to trace him from the information we have, but it's one of those things that we're also asking for help from members of the public," Suffolk police spokeswoman Anne-Marie Breach told CNN.
As of this writing, the status update on Lynch's fan page reads, "GUESS WHOS (sic) BACK."
Suffolk police are asking anyone with information on Craig Lynch's whereabouts to contact them at 01473 613 500. (From the United States, dial 011-44 before dialing the remainder of the telephone number.)
Photo Credit: Suffolk Police
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission from Discovery Communications. All quotes must include a link back.
Last week I brought you the story of Rekha Kumari-Baker, a 41-year-old woman from the United Kingdom who recently went on trial for the 2007 murders of her two teenage daughters. The jury finished its deliberations in the case, and a verdict was announced yesterday.
During the two-week trial, prosecutors told the Cambridge Crown Court jury how Kumari-Baker murdered 16-year-old Davina Michelle Baker and 13-year-old Jasmine Baker in cold blood on the morning of June 13, 2007. Prosecutor John Farmer said that Kumari-Baker had launched a "frenzied" attack on the girls while they slept, stabbing them multiple times.
Farmer told the jury that Kumari-Baker killed her daughters because she was unhappy over the custody arrangement she had with her ex-husband. She disliked his new partner, and she resented the close relationship he had with the girls. The murders were, according to Farmer, intended to "wreak havoc in [David Baker's] life."
Kumari-Baker's lawyers did not attempt to deny she had killed her children. Instead, they argued that she suffered from a mental abnormality, which diminished her responsibility. They hoped she would be found guilty of nothing more than manslaughter.
The jury in the case deliberated for just 35 minutes yesterday before announcing that they had unanimously found Kumari-Baker guilty on both counts of murder.
During today's sentencing hearing, Farmer read extracts from a victim impact statement that was written by the girl's father, David Baker. It read in part:
"My words may not be sufficient. Having them taken away from me in such a brutal way and by the woman who was their mother has had an incalculable effect. I am haunted by the horror of the events of that night and probably will remain so for a long time."
One of the cases I covered for CourtTV in 2007 involved Rekha Kumari-Baker (photo here), a 39-year-old woman from the United Kingdom, who was arrested for allegedly stabbing her two teenage daughters to death as they slept. That case finally went to court earlier this month in Cambridge Crown Court. The jury is still hearing the evidence; however details that have since been released paint a very bleak picture of the events leading up to the girl's deaths.
On the morning of June 13, 2007, Kumari-Baker called a friend, Natalie Boyes-Bartlett - who also happens to be a police constable – and allegedly told her: "I've killed the kids. The children are dead."
Not long after the call, Boyes-Bartlett and a colleague, Sgt Jenny Johnstone, arrived at Kumari-Baker's three-bedroom home in Stretham. When they entered the home they discovered the bodies of 16-year-old Davina Michelle Baker and her sister, 13-year-old Jasmine, in an upstairs bedroom. Both of the girls had been stabbed repeatedly. Following the discovery of the bodies, police arrested Kumari-Baker on suspicion of murder.
According to a 2007 online report by The Guardian, Detective Superintendent Jeff Hill described the murders as a "terrible, tragic situation," adding, "We are not looking for anyone else in connection with this inquiry."
Kumari-Baker and her husband, David Baker, had divorced in 2003. According to friends, Jasmine lived with her mother and Davina lived with her father.
In the wake of the girl's deaths, it was discovered that they had both created profiles on the social networking Web site Bebo.com.
"My family means more than life its self to me, but I don't always show it … everything happens for a reason … Plenty of time to sleep when I die. Never look forward. Never look back. Have respect. Be a dreamer and believe. Jasmine is my number one."
On her own Bebo.com profile, Jasmine went by the screen name "THiis is Thee SHHIIZZLE du-de." She listed some of her likes as, "people, make-up, family, meeting people, being happy, child hood, imagination and life."
On June 10, 2007, Jasmine left the following unedited comment on Davina's Bebo.com profile:
"Missing youu. its soo gay. momz like why do i alwayz have to take you jasmine, why cant yur dad take you and all this bllaa bllaa bllaa. you know how it is. lovee you soo muchh and really want to see you. Jaziixxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx w//b."
Davina then responded with her own comment to Jasmine's profile:
"u can cum dis weekend if mum will bring u or sumfin … see you soon. i love you so much more that words can say."
Jasmine had left several other comments for her sister. Many of them described her sadness regarding their separation—"I miss you soooooooooo muchhhhhh"—and in others she expressed her feelings: "I love you to so unbelivablyy much -- you know that."
She had also created a photo album on her profile, which included 26 photos of the two girls. One of the most touching is a photo of the girls holding hands, which they titled, "Will never let go."
So while it is obvious the girls had a solid relationship, what of their mother and what was the motive behind the murders? Those are two key questions that prosecutors have been addressing since the start of Kumari-Baker's trial.
Earlier this month, police in Brazil accused Wallace Souza, the former host of the true crime television show "Canal Livre," of commissioning a variety of criminal acts - including at least 5 murders - to bolster the show's ratings. Since that time, officials have filed multiple charges against Souza and prosecutors are now saying that he even attempted to have a federal judge assassinated.
The most recent accusation in the case was made yesterday by Ronaldo Andrade, the lead prosecutor in the case. According to Andrade, Souza tried to orchestrate the murder of Judge Jaiza Fraxe in 2007, because of Fraxe's role in the arrest of one of Souza's associates. Andrade said the assassination plot was ultimately foiled when Souza's alleged gunman, Luiz Joao Macedo, refused to participate. Macedo was later murdered, leading to speculation that Souza was behind his killing.
Andrade also announced yesterday that his office suspects Souza was involved in as many as 19 killings.
Souza has yet to be arrested on a single murder count; however police have charged him with other crimes; including drug trafficking, gang formation and weapons possession. Despite those charges, Souza, a state congressman, remains free because of legislative immunity. Nevertheless, police say he is still under investigation and a state judiciary committee is expected to determine whether he should face further charges.
Prior to becoming a media personality and congressman, Souza worked as police officer. That career, which began in 1979, came to an abrupt end in 1987, when, according to state police intelligence chief Thomaz Vasconcelos, Souza was fired for his alleged involvement in a series of scams involving fuel theft and pension fraud. Souza has always denied the allegations, claiming that he was forced to resign because of a fraud scheme he was investigating.
Ten years later, in 1989, Souza launched "Canal Livre," a TV show intended to give viewers a behind-the-scenes look at what he once described as "naked and raw reality" – everything from police pursuits and arrests to homicide cases.
The original reporting, along with Souza's outspoken personality, proved to be popular with viewers, and the show was soon a hit. Banking on his new-found fame, Souza was eventually elected to the state legislature; however, even after winning the position, he continued to host the program.
Souza's TV success did not go unnoticed; eventually, authorities began to question how he was able to get to so many crime scenes ahead of anyone else – including the authorities.
Authorities in Brazil have accused Wallace Souza, the former host of the true crime television show "Canal Livre," of commissioning a variety of criminal acts - including at least 5 murders - to bolster the show's ratings.
Launched in 1989, "Canal Livre" was intended to give viewers a behind-the-scenes look at what Souza once described as "naked and raw reality" – everything from police pursuits and arrests to homicide cases.
The original reporting, along with Souza's outspoken personality, proved to be popular with viewers, and the show was soon a hit. Banking on his new-found fame, Souza was eventually elected to the state legislature; however, even after winning the position, he continued to host the program.
Souza's TV success did not go unnoticed; eventually, authorities began to question how he was able to get to so many crime scenes ahead of anyone else – including the authorities.
In one particular episode, a reporter filming a freshly burned corpse related to the viewers that it smelled like "barbecue."
A police probe was soon launched into the show, and when the investigation intensified late last year, it went off the air.
According to state police intelligence chief Thomaz Vasconcelos, the investigation revealed that Souza allegedly worked with a gang of former police officers who were involved in drug trafficking. Vasconcelos told the Associated Press that the killings served two purposes – to eliminate rivals and to increase ratings.
"We believe that they organized a kind of death squad to execute rivals who disputed with them the drug trafficking business," Vasconcelos said, adding, "[Souza] would eliminate his rival and use the killing as a news story for his program."
"The ninth annual Trafficking in Persons Report sheds light on the faces of modern-day slavery and on new facets of this global problem. The human trafficking phenomenon affects virtually every country, including the United States. In acknowledging America’s own struggle with modern-day slavery and slavery-related practices, we offer partnership. We call on every government to join us in working to build consensus and leverage resources to eliminate all forms of human trafficking." - Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
Police in the Haizhu district of South China's Guangzhou province have arrested a 13-year-old boy for brutally murdering a three-year-old girl and then having sex with her corpse.
According to statements made by the victim's family, Wang Xiaoyi was playing outside on the evening of May 19, when she suddenly disappeared.
"When she didn't return till dark, we got worried," Xiaoyi's father, Wang Long, told the South China Metropolis Daily. "We went out to search for her, and at about 8 p.m. we noticed police barricades near an apartment building nearby. There was word that a little girl had fallen to her death from the building. We stepped closer and found it was our daughter."
The incident was initially believed to be a tragic accident; however, closer inspection of the body revealed trauma that was not consistent with a fall. A postmortem examination on May 21 confirmed those suspicions. According to the medical examiner, the girl was first murdered and then sexually assaulted. The criminal investigation then led police to a troubled teen, who they say has confessed to the crime.
"We have arrested the boy and are interrogating him to determine the motive of the murder," said a spokesperson with the Haizhu district public security bureau.
According to police, the boy, whom they have not identified, was walking home from school when he noticed Xiaoyi playing near his apartment building. When no one was looking, the accused grabbed the girl and took her to his house, where he allegedly bound her hands and feet before drowning her in a basin of water.
After killing the child, police say the suspect had sex with her corpse and then threw her body out the window of his fifth-floor apartment.
Neither of the suspect's parents was home at the time of the incident.
Police have yet to comment on a motive in the case; however, local psychologists are pointing the finger at pornography and the Internet. At this time, there is no indication that the boy had access to either.
While the reason behind the crime remains unclear, it is painfully clear to the victim's family that their daughter's killer cannot be punished for taking her life.
"The court cannot punish anyone below the age of 14 with criminal sanctions," Huang Aihua, a lawyer at the Guangzhou Hebang Law Firm, said in an interview with chinadaily.com.
According to Aihua, the suspect, if found guilty, would only face civil liabilities.
"The victim's family can request compensation for mental anguish, death, and funeral charges," he said.
Since the suspect in this case - an individual who is obviously very troubled - will not serve a single day behind bars, one must wonder what further acts he is capable of committing and - most importantly - will he strike again? After all, his age gives him a free pass to murder...
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission from Discovery Communications. All quotes must include a link back.
Some have vanished without a trace while others left a string of mysteries in their wake. Learn more about some unsolved cases and see what you can do to help.
Newly discovered evidence suggests that Aribert Heim, a former SS member known as "Dr. Death," died in Egypt more than 16 years ago. Heim is accused of torturing and murdering hundreds of Jewish prisoners at the Mauthausen concentration camp in Austria.
Investigation Discovery first brought you Heim's story in July 2008. At that time, the Simon Wiesenthal Center announced that they had strong evidence suggesting that Heim, who would now be 94 years of age, was alive and residing in either southern Chile or Argentina. Dr. Efraim Zuroff, Nazi hunter and director of the center, refused to comment about the information he received regarding Heim's living in Chile. However, he did say that he expected Heim to be in custody within a "couple of weeks."
Heim never was taken into custody and the investigation appeared to stall until yesterday, when the German television channel ZDF and The New York Timesreported that they had uncovered new evidence that Heim had spent much of his time on the run living in Egypt under a false identity.
Heim's son, Rüdiger Heim, has confirmed that he knew his father was living in Egypt and now claims to have been at his side when he died.
Evidence pointing to Heim's life in Egypt was recently found in a briefcase that had been in storage for nearly 20 years. Inside the briefcase, reporters found letters written by Heim, financial records, medical reports and other supporting documents. Some were in Heim's name, while others were in the name of his alleged alias, Tarek Farid Hussein.
ZDF and The New York Times have since obtained a certified copy of Tarek Farid Hussein's death certificate, which states he died of rectal cancer on August 10, 1992. Following his death, Hussein was interred, without identification, in a common grave.
According to public records, Aribert Heim was born on June 28, 1914, in Bad Radkersburg, Austria-Hungary. His father was a policeman and his mother was a housewife. Little is known about his early years; however, Heim later became a professional hockey player.
At the age of 21, Heim joined the local Nazi party in 1935. During that time, Heim also began to study medicine in Vienna. He continued his studies until 1940, when he joined the Waffen-SS, a group of select soldiers who committed themselves to Nazi ideology and the decimation of the Jewish people.
Heim's ruthlessness reportedly peaked in October 1940, when he was sent to Mauthausen concentration camp to perform medical experiments on Nazi captives. It was there that Heim received the nickname "Dr. Death" because of the manner in which he tortured and murdered hundreds of Jewish prisoners.
According to an account later related by Karl Lotter, a political prisoner who survived the concentration camp, Heim murdered an 18-year-old Jewish man who was being treated at the clinic for foot inflammation. Lotter reported that Heim was more interested in the teenager's fit physical condition. After questioning the man about his life, Heim allegedly anesthetized him and cut him open. He then removed the man's kidneys and castrated him before removing his head, which Heim then de-fleshed and used as a paper weight.
"He needed the head because of its perfect teeth," Lotter stated during a 1950 court proceeding. "Of all the camp doctors in Mauthausen, Dr. Heim was the most horrible."
Another witness allegedly reported that Heim once removed the tattooed skin of one of his victims and fashioned it into a seat cover.
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Keep up with the latest in all things crime and criminals right here. Get the details on the Casey Anthony Trial and other daily reports as they unfold.
Recent Comments