US waives FBI checks on caregivers at new migrant facilities

By Associated Press| March 27, 2021 at 3:14 PM EDT – Updated March 27 at 5:25 PM

HOUSTON (AP) — The Biden administration is not requiring FBI fingerprint background checks of caregivers at its rapidly expanding network of emergency sites to hold thousands of immigrant teenagers, alarming child welfare experts who say the waiver compromises safety.

In the rush to get children out of overcrowded and often unsuitable Border Patrol sites, President Joe Biden’s team is turning to a measure used by previous administrations: tent camps, convention centers and other huge facilities operated by private contractors and funded by U.S. Health and Human Services. In March alone, the Biden administration announced it will open eight new emergency sites across the Southwest adding 15,000 new beds, more than doubling the size of its existing system.

These emergency sites don’t have to be licensed by state authorities or provide the same services as permanent HHS facilities. They also cost far more, an estimated $775 per child per day.

And to staff the sites quickly, the Biden administration has waived vetting procedures intended to protect minors from potential harm.

Staff and volunteers directly caring for children at new emergency sites don’t have to undergo FBI fingerprint checks, which use criminal databases not accessible to the public and can overcome someone changing their name or using a false identity.

HHS issued a statement Friday saying that direct care staff and volunteers “must pass public record criminal background checks.” Public records checks generally take less time but are reliant on the subject providing correct information.

The agency says those giving direct care are supervised by federal employees or others who have passed fingerprint-based background checks. “In the Emergency Intake Sites, HHS is implementing the standards of care used for children in an emergency response setting,” the agency said.

During former President Donald Trump’s administration, HHS for months did not ensure FBI fingerprint checks or child welfare screenings were done for workers at a large camp in Tornillo, Texas. An Associated Press investigation in 2018 also found staff at another camp at Homestead, Florida, were not given routine screenings to rule out allegations of child abuse or neglect.

HHS’ inspector general warned then that FBI fingerprint checks “provide a unique safeguard” over most commercial background checks that search a person’s name.

“While the various background checks could identify some past criminal convictions or sexual offenses, these checks were not as extensive as the FBI fingerprint background checks,” the inspector general found.

Laura Nodolf, the district attorney in Midland, Texas, where HHS opened an emergency site this month, said that without fingerprint checks, “we truly do not know who the individual is who is providing direct care.”

“That’s placing the children under care of HHS in the path, potentially, of a sex offender,” Nodolf said. “They are putting these children in a position of becoming potential victims.”

Dr. Amy Cohen, a child psychiatrist who is executive director of the immigration advocacy group Every Last One, noted that HHS requires fingerprint checks of relatives who seek to take in children as part of a vetting process that takes more than 30 days on average.

“Failure to check fingerprints of frontline facility staff exposes vulnerable migrant children to a significant danger of physical and sexual abuse,” she said.

The Biden administration has 18,000 children and teenagers in its custody, a figure that has risen almost daily over the last several weeks. While Biden continues to expel most adults and many families crossing the border, he has declined to reinstate expulsions of unaccompanied immigrant children, which stopped last year after a now-stayed federal court order.

More than 5,000 youths are in border custody, many of them in a South Texas tent facility with limited space, food and access to the outdoors. But Border Patrol is apprehending hundreds more minors than HHS is releasing every day — a difference of 325 just on Thursday.

At the downtown Dallas convention center, one of HHS’ emergency sites, almost all of its 2,300 beds were filled just one week after it opened this month.

Child advocates say that rather than opening more unlicensed emergency facilities, the administration must speed up placing children with sponsors, especially the approximately 40% of youths in custody who have a parent in the country ready to take them.

HHS has tried to expedite processing of minors in recent weeks, allowing some youths to be placed with parents while fingerprint checks are pending and authorizing the use of government funds to pay for airfare when a child is released.

Ana, the mother of a 17-year-old teen detained in Dallas, told AP said her son fled gangs trying to recruit him in El Salvador and hoped to join her in Virginia. After an eight-day journey, the teenager crossed the U.S.-Mexico border on March 9. Eight days would pass until she heard from authorities at the border that they had him in custody.

She received a 10-minute call from him on March 20, after he was taken to the Dallas facility. It was the first time she’s spoken to him since he entered the country. She says she has repeatedly called HHS’ Office of Refugee Resettlement to ask if they would release him to her family, but they have refused, saying they have to process her case. In the meantime, she’s ready to present documentation proving she is his mother and fit to take him.

“I don’t understand why they are making it so difficult,” said Ana, who is not being identified by her last name to protect her son’s privacy. “I know that we are in a pandemic, but maybe I think that it is that they are behind schedule, that maybe there are a lot of people there.”

Tornillo and Homestead were sharply criticized by Democrats and child welfare experts who warned of the potential trauma of detaining thousands of teenagers without adequate support.

Volunteers from the American Red Cross provided care at the first two emergency HHS sites, a converted camp for oil workers in Midland, Texas, and the Dallas convention center. Those volunteers are now being phased out.

The Red Cross and HHS for several days refused to acknowledge that the volunteers weren’t given FBI fingerprint checks. The Red Cross first said that all of its volunteers underwent background checks when they joined the group. On Tuesday, the group said it was “refreshing” checks on about 300 volunteers sent to care for children and that it had not found any new red flags.

HHS spokesman Mark Weber said he could not yet identify which companies or groups will now step in. The department asked contractors in mid-March to submit bids to provide child care and transportation.

Leecia Welch, an attorney for the nonprofit National Center for Youth Law who monitors the treatment of immigrant children, said lawyers would pay “close attention to whether this temporary waiver becomes standard operating practice.”

“Given the urgency of the current placement crisis, families deserve the same flexibility as the for-profit companies contracting with the federal government,” she said.

Safety concerns have already been raised about the Midland camp. One official working there noted a lack of new clothes and caseworkers when teenagers initially arrived, and state regulators last week warned that the water on site may not be safe, forcing U.S. authorities to give teens bottles until they could arrange for water deliveries.

Michelle Saenz-Rodriguez, a Dallas-based immigration lawyer, described the Dallas convention center as reminiscent of a barracks but “very welcoming.” She visited the convention center in its first days as a volunteer for Catholic Charities and said that cots for more than 2,000 boys have been placed in socially distanced rows in a ballroom.

After being bused to the site, the boys get clean clothes, a pillow, a blanket and a COVID-19 test, Saenz-Rodriguez said. She saw them last week sitting together at tables, talking and playing card games. Most did not understand why they’d been brought to Dallas or what would happen to them next, she said.

“Their number one question is ‘How long are we going to be here? What’s going to happen to us?’” Saenz-Rodriguez said.

Associated Press journalist Jake Bleiberg in Dallas contributed to this report.

Source: https://www.walb.com/2021/03/27/us-waives-fbi-checks-caregivers-new-migrant-facilities/

NYC prosecutor leading Trump probe won’t seek re-election

By MICHAEL R. SISAK| March 12, 2021 at 8:10 AM EST – Updated March 12 at 8:35 AM

NEW YORK (AP) — The veteran New York City prosecutor overseeing a criminal investigation into former President Donald Trump said Friday that he will not seek re-election, opting against a primary fight with progressive candidates who say he’s a relic unfit for the reform era.

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. made the announcement in a memo to his staff, ending months of speculation about his future. His term expires at the end of the year.

Vance, a Democrat, counted Harvey Weinstein’s rape conviction a year ago among his crowning achievements but faced withering criticism over other high-profile cases, including dropping rape charges against French financier Dominique Strauss-Kahn in 2011 and declining to prosecute Ivanka and Donald Trump Jr. over fraud allegations in 2012.

“I never imagined myself as District Attorney for decades like my predecessors. I never thought of this as my last job, even though it’s the best job and biggest honor I’ll ever have. I said twelve years ago that change is fundamentally good and necessary for any institution,” Vance wrote in a statement about his decision.

Vance’s decision not to run for re-election was widely anticipated, but he held off on making it official while the U.S. Supreme Court was weighing whether his office could obtain Trump’s tax records. The court ruled in Vance’s favor last month.

Vance, 66, raised little money this election cycle and stayed curiously quiet as other Democrats campaigned to replace him. Eight candidates are on the ballot for the party’s June primary, an election that will likely decide Vance’s successor because Manhattan is so heavily Democratic.

The Feb. 22 Supreme Court ruling giving Vance’s office access to Trump’s taxes was a capstone for his tenure as district attorney, ending an 18-month fight with the former president’s lawyers and bolstering a grand jury investigation that has drawn worldwide attention.

Vance is conducting a wide-ranging investigation that includes examining whether Trump or his businesses lied about the value of assets to gain favorable loan terms and tax benefits, and hush-money payments paid to women on Trump’s behalf.

Vance will continue to lead the Trump probe through the end of this year with his general counsel, Carey Dunne, who made appeals court arguments on the office’s behalf. He recently hired former mafia prosecutor Mark Pomerantz to assist in the probe. In a statement after the Supreme Court ruled, Vance said: “The work continues.”

Vance’s exit, however, means it will almost certainly be a brand-new D.A. who sees the Trump case through. And, in the short term, legal observers say, his announcement could hasten the departure of prosecutors who’ve been loyal to him and won’t want to work for his successor.

Vance’s successor will be just the fourth elected district attorney in Manhattan in the last 80 years. Frank Hogan, the namesake of the street where the office is located, served for 31 years. Robert Morgenthau was in office for 34 years, and Vance will leave after 12.

It’s one of the most high-profile prosecution jobs in the world, dramatized on TV’s “Law and Order” and “Blue Bloods.” The district attorney oversees a staff of 500 lawyers and has a budget of about $125 million.

A separate forfeiture fund bankrolled by Wall Street settlements and worth more than $800 million is used for grants to criminal justice and community organizations and big initiatives, like testing backlogged rape kits — a push celebrated by the likes of “Law & Order: SVU” star Mariska Hargitay.

Vance, whose father was President Jimmy Carter’s secretary of state, served as an assistant district attorney under Morgenthau in the 1980s. Practicing law in Seattle for 16 years, he represented Vili Fualaau, who as a preteen became involved in a sexual relationship with his sixth-grade teacher, Mary Kay Letourneau, and fathered two of her children.

Vance returned to New York in 2004 and was elected district attorney five years later. Running as a death penalty opponent, he was buoyed by endorsements from Morgenthau and former Mayor David Dinkins.

Vance positioned himself as a national criminal justice innovator, taking interest in national and global efforts to prevent cyberattacks and gun violence. He has testified before Congress about cellphone encryption and financial transparency.

After Vance made a made a campaign pledge to re-examine the 1979 disappearance of 6-year-old Etan Patz, a 2012 tip led to a new suspect and ultimately a conviction.

Weinstein’s conviction in the landmark #MeToo case last year boosted Vance’s lagging legacy, giving him a career-defining win a decade into a tenure clouded by concerns that he repeatedly gave powerful people special treatment, such as sidestepping an effort to pursue charges against Weinstein in 2015.

In addition to Strauss-Kahn, whose charges were dropped amid concerns about inconsistencies in the account of the hotel maid who accused him, a Vance prosecutor once took the unusual step of seeking low-level sex offender status for Jeffrey Epstein, alarming the judge who said she had “never seen a prosecutor’s office do anything like this.” Vance’s office also struck a deal in 2016 so well-connected gynecologist Robert Hadden could avoid prison for allegedly sexually abusing patients.

Source: https://www.walb.com/2021/03/12/nyc-prosecutor-leading-trump-probe-wont-seek-re-election/

UK royals absorb shock of revealing Harry, Meghan interview

By JILL LAWLESS and DANICA KIRKA| March 8, 2021 at 7:17 AM EST – Updated March 8 at 8:19 AM

LONDON (AP) — Britain and its royal family absorbed the tremors Monday from a sensational television interview by Prince Harry and Meghan, in which the couple said they encountered racist attitudes and a lack of support that drove the duchess to thoughts of suicide.

In a two-hour soul-baring interview with Oprah Winfrey, the couple painted a deeply unflattering picture of life inside the royal household, depicting a cold, uncaring institution that they had to flee to save their lives.

Meghan told Winfrey that at one point “I just didn’t want to be alive anymore” and that she had uncontrollable suicidal thoughts. She said she sought help through the palace’s human resources department but was told there was nothing they could do.

Meghan, 39, admitted that she was naive at the start of her relationship with Harry and unprepared for the strictures of royal life.

The former television star, who identifies as biracial, said that when she was pregnant with son, Archie, there were “concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he’s born.”

Harry confirmed the conversation, saying: “I was a bit shocked.” He said he would not reveal who made the comment.

The pair, known as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, announced they were quitting royal duties last year, citing what they said were the unbearable intrusions and racist attitudes of the British media. That split became official earlier this year, and the interview was widely seen as their first opportunity to explain their decision.

UK media criticized for racist coverage of Meghan Markle

The implications for the interview — which was broadcast Sunday night in the United States and will air in Britain on Monday night — are only beginning to be understood. Emily Nash, royal editor at Hello! Magazine, said the revelations had left her and many other viewers “shell-shocked.”

“I don’t see how the palace can ignore these allegations, they’re incredibly serious,” she said. “You have the racism allegations. Then you also have the claim that Megan was not supported, and she sought help even from the HR team within the household and was told that she couldn’t seek help.”

Anti-monarchy group Republic said the interview gave a clearer picture of what the royal family is like — and it’s not pretty.

“Whether for the sake of Britain or for the sake of the younger royals this rotten institution needs to go,’’ Graham Smith of the campaign group said.

Harry, born a royal prince, described how his wife’s experience had helped him realize how he and he rest of the family were stuck in an oppressive institution.

“I was trapped, but I didn’t know I was trapped,” Harry said. “My father and my brother, they are trapped.”

Meghan, he said, “saved me.”

The younger royals — including Harry, Meghan, Harry’s brother, Prince William, and William’s wife, Catherine — have made campaigning for support and awareness around mental health one of their priorities. But Harry said the royal family was completely unable to offer that support to its own members.

“For the family, they very much have this mentality of ‘This is just how it is, this is how it’s meant to be, you can’t change it, we’ve all been through it,’” Harry said.

The couple had faced severe criticism in the United Kingdom before the interview. Prince Philip, Harry’s 99-year-old grandfather, is in a London hospital after recovering from a heart procedure, and critics saw the decision to go forward as being a burden on the queen — even though CBS, rather that Harry and Meghan, dictated the timing of the broadcast.

In the United States, sympathy for the couple poured in after the interview. Britain could be less forgiving, since some see Meghan and Harry as a couple who put personal happiness ahead of public duty.

Tennis star Serena Williams, a friend who attended Harry and Meghan’s wedding, said on Twitter that the duchess’s words “illustrate the pain and cruelty she’s experienced.”

“The mental health consequences of systemic oppression and victimization are devastating, isolating and all too often lethal,” Williams added.

Meghan — then known as Meghan Markle, who had starred on the American TV legal drama “Suits” — married Harry, a grandson of Queen Elizabeth II, at Windsor Castle in May 2018.

But even that was not what it seemed: The couple revealed in the interview that they exchanged vows in front of Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby three days before their spectacular wedding ceremony at the castle.

“We called the archbishop and we just said, ‘Look, this thing, this spectacle is for the world, but we want our union between us,’” Meghan said.

Archie was born the following year and in a rare positive moment in the interview, the couple revealed their second child, due in the summer, would be a girl.

Holding hands, Harry and Meghan sat opposite Winfrey while she questioned them in a lush garden setting. The couple lives in Montecito, California, where they are Winfrey’s neighbors.

Harry said he had lived in fear of a repeat of the fate of his mother, Princess Diana, who was covered constantly by the press and died in a car crash in Paris in 1997 while being pursued by paparazzi.

“What I was seeing was history repeating itself, but definitely far more dangerous — because then you add race in, and you add social media in,” Harry said.

Both Meghan and Harry praised the support they had received from the monarch.

“The queen has always been wonderful to me,” Meghan said.

But Harry revealed he currently has a poor relationship with William and said things got so bad with his father that at one point Prince Charles stopped taking his calls.

“There is a lot to work through there,” Harry said about his relationship with his father. “I feel really let down. He’s been through something similar. He knows what pain feels like. And Archie is his grandson. I will always love him, but there is a lot of hurt that has happened.”

While clips of the interview have been shared online, and the British press covered the major points, much of Britain won’t see the full interview until Monday night — and many will want to know how the palace addresses this saga. The palace has not responded to the interview.

The royal family has known scandal before — most recently over Prince Andrew’s friendship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. That led Andrew, Harry’s uncle, to being sidelined from royal duties.

“I’m very sad for the queen,’’ said Ernest Lee, 76, when questioned in London. “I think she has a lot of problems at the moment, what with one of her sons (Andrew) and scandals and now her grandson busting up, pulling away from the royal family. … We have enough problems in this world without people making more.”

Source: https://www.walb.com/2021/03/08/uk-royals-absorb-shock-revealing-harry-meghan-interview/

Harry, Meghan to delve into tough royal split with Oprah

LOS ANGELES (AP) — The time has finally come for audiences to hear Meghan and Harry describe the backstory and effects of their tumultuous split from royal life.

Sunday night’s airing of a two-hour special hosted by Oprah Winfrey will provide the first, and unprecedented, peek into the couple’s departure from royal duties and the strains it has placed on them.

How it’s received is likely to depend on which side of the Atlantic Ocean viewers are on.

The show, which includes Winfrey’s interviews with Meghan and Harry, will air first in the United States — Meghan’s home country — at 8 p.m. Eastern on CBS. Hours earlier, Harry’s grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, will deliver a royal address before Commonwealth Day.

This image provided by Harpo Productions shows Prince Harry, left, and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, in conversation with Oprah Winfrey. “Oprah with Meghan and Harry: A CBS Primetime Special” airs March 7, 2021. (Source: Joe Pugliese/Harpo Productions via AP, File)

British audiences will wake up Monday to headlines and social media posts about Winfrey’s special, but won’t be able to see the full interview until Monday night when it airs on ITV.

Royal interviews that aren’t tied to a specific topic are rare, and prior televised sessions have often proved problematic. Prince Andrew’s 2019 BBC interview about his links with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein led to his own departure from royal duties after he failed to show empathy for Epstein’s victims.

Harry and Meghan’s departure from royal duties began in March 2020 over what they described as the intrusions and racist attitudes of the British media toward the duchess, who is biracial.

Clips released ahead of the airings suggest that at least Meghan will have some pointed criticisms of royal life. In one she describes the royal family as “the firm,” a nickname that is sometimes used affectionately and sometimes critically.

Meghan Markle accuses Buckingham Palace of ‘perpetuating falsehoods’

At one point, Winfrey asked Meghan how she felt about Buckingham Palace “hearing you speak your truth today?”

“I don’t know how they could expect that after all of this time we would still just be silent if there was an active role that the firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us,” she said. “And if that comes with risk of losing things, I mean, there’s been a lot that’s been lost already.”

In another clip, Harry invoked the memory of his late mother, Princess Diana, who had to find her way alone after her divorce from Prince Charles.

“I’m just really relieved and happy to be sitting here talking to you with my wife by my side, because I can’t begin to imagine what it must have been like for her going through this process by herself all those years ago,” Harry said, adding, “because it’s been unbelievably tough for the two of us.”

In Britain, the interview is seen as poorly timed. It will air while Harry’s 99-year-old grandfather Prince Philip remains hospitalized in London after undergoing a heart procedure.

Meghan is shown in a clip released Friday contrasting the conversation the two women were able to have now versus in 2018 ahead of her wedding. Meghan described not being able to talk to Winfrey, who was seeking an interview, without royal minders present.

“As an adult who lived a really independent life to then go into this construct that is um.. different than I think what people imagine it to be, it’s really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes,” Meghan told Winfrey.

It is unclear what public reaction, if any, the queen and other royal family members will have to Sunday’s interview. The U.K.’s Sunday Times newspaper, citing an anonymous source, reported that the queen would not watch it.

On Wednesday, the palace said it was launching a human resources investigation after a London newspaper reported that a former aide had accused Meghan of bullying staff in 2018.

Palace to investigate Meghan bullying accusations

A spokesman for the duchess said she was “saddened by the latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself.”

The snippets already released provide some details about the interview, which includes Winfrey speaking one-on-one with Meghan and a joint session with the couple.

Holding hands, Harry and Meghan sat opposite Winfrey while she questioned them in a lush garden setting. The couple lives in Montecito, California, where they are Winfrey’s neighbors.

Meghan, who recently announced she is pregnant with the couple’s second child, wore an empire-style black dress with embroidery. Harry wore a light gray suit and white dress shirt, minus a tie.

As Meghan Markle, the actor starred in the TV legal drama “Suits.” She married Harry at Windsor Castle in May 2018, and their son, Archie, was born a year later.

Harry and Meghan’s departure from royal life was supposed to be reviewed after a year. On Feb. 19, Buckingham Palace confirmed that the couple would not return to royal duties and Harry would relinquish his honorary military titles — a decision that made formal, and final, the couple’s split from the royal family.

Kelvin Chan in London contributed to this report.

Source: https://www.walb.com/2021/03/07/harry-meghan-delve-into-tough-royal-split-with-oprah/

No winners: UK waits for Harry, Meghan’s take on royal split

LONDON (AP) — The timing couldn’t be worse for Harry and Meghan.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will finally get the chance to tell the story behind their departure from royal duties directly to the public on Sunday, when their two-hour interview with Oprah Winfrey is broadcast.

But back home in Britain, events have conspired to overshadow the tale of a prince and his American bride. On top of the pandemic and record economic slump, Prince Philip, Harry’s 99-year-old grandfather is now recovering from a heart procedure.

CBS announced the program Feb 15. The next day, Philip was admitted to hospital.

“Harry and Meghan are hugely popular,’’ Pauline Maclaran, a professor of marketing and author of “Royal Fever: The British Monarchy in Consumer Culture,” told The Associated Press. “But I think that some people who might otherwise have supported them will find this just a little bit distasteful, that they’re drawing all this attention to themselves … just at this time when Prince Philip appears to be quite seriously ill.”

Though it is the choice of CBS when to air its pre-recorded interview, critics are already lining up to deride it as a brand-building exercise by the pair, who left Britain saying they wanted to live a normal life but have been accused of continuing to use their royal status to open doors and make money.

Prince Harry: ‘The Crown’ more truthful than British press

The sit-down with America’s queen of celebrity interviews is a chance for the couple to explain what led them to quit royal life, citing what they said were the unbearable intrusions and racist attitudes of the British media. A book about their departure, “Finding Freedom,” also alleges that senior royals had little respect for Meghan, a biracial former actor, and that courtiers treated her badly.

Pre-released clips have already shown Harry talking about his fears that history would repeat itself after his mother, Princess Diana, died in a car crash while pursued by paparazzi. In another clip from the interview, Winfrey asks Meghan how she feels about the palace “hearing you speak your truth today?”

“I don’t know how they could expect that, after all of this time, we would still just be silent if there was an active role that the firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us,” the duchess replies.

“The firm” is a nickname for the royal family, sometimes used with affection and sometimes with a note of criticism.

Ahead of the broadcast, relations with the palace are increasingly strained. First there was Queen Elizabeth II’s decision to strip Harry and Meghan of the handful of royal patronages they had retained in the one-year trial period following their departure last year. The couple responded with a terse statement promising to live a life of service — a move many in the U.K. saw as disrespectful to the queen, as she usually has the final word. Then on Wednesday, the palace said it was launching a human resources investigation after a newspaper reported that a former aide had accused Meghan of bullying staff in 2018.

Palace to investigate Meghan bullying accusations

One of the authors of “Finding Freedom,’’ Omid Scobie, compared the recent commentary about Harry and Meghan in the British media to the Salem Witch Trials, while noting Americans have had more sympathy them. His tweet linked to a discussion on the U.S. television program “The View,’’ including comments from Meghan McCain, a conservative columnist and daughter of the late U.S. Sen. John McCain.

“I think we can’t ignore the elephant of the room that there’s probably a racial angle to this,’’ McCain said. “There’s a lot of racism directed at this woman, in a lot of different ways she threatens a lot of people in the patriarchy. … It just looks like they are bullying her in the press.’’

It was all supposed to be so different.

At the time Harry started dating Meghan, the British public seemed smitten with the beautiful young woman who starred for seven seasons on the U.S. television drama “Suits.” When they married in 2018, newspapers were filled with optimistic stories about how the energetic couple would help make the monarchy relevant for a new, multicultural Britain.

But less than two years later they decamped to North America. After a brief stay in Canada, the couple settled in Meghan’s home state of California, buying a house in the exclusive Santa Barbara County enclave of Montecito that reportedly cost more than $14 million. Among their neighbors: Oprah Winfrey.

Then came deals with Netflix and Spotifiy, reportedly worth millions. The commercial deals and headline-grabbing amounts are uncomfortable for the royal family, which has devoted itself to public service as a justification for its wealth and privilege. The queen, among the richest people in Britain, has spent her life supporting charities, cutting ribbons at hospitals and traveling the world to represent her country.

“The main thing that the royal family is so good at is serving the nation, serving the nation and the Commonwealth, basically serving us rather than serving themselves,’’ royal historian Hugo Vickers told ITV News. “And I’m sorry, if you’re sitting in an $11 million mansion in California and making fantastic deals, that is trading in on your royal heritage. And it’s all wrong, frankly.”

Prince Harry on royals split

Others are concerned that the interview will include damaging revelations about the royal family.

The royals rarely grant interviews, and when they do the questions are usually narrowly focused on specific issues. For instance, Harry and his brother, William, have tried to remove the stigma from mental health problems by talking about their own struggles after the death of their mother.

More free-ranging interviews have often gone badly. Interviews with Prince Charles and Princess Diana, Harry and William’s parents, around the time of their divorce led to embarrassing revelations about infidelity.

More damaging for the palace was the interview Prince Andrew, Harry’s uncle, did with the BBC in 2019. Andrew tried to address rumors about his links with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, but he was forced to give up royal duties after failing to show empathy for Epstein’s victims.

“I think it’s a bigger danger than the Prince Andrew car-crash interview,’’ Maclaran said of the Oprah interview, “because I think that Meghan is going to get a lot of sympathy, particularly from American audiences, about her position being untenable.”

Regardless of what’s actually said, the interview is a threat to the stature of the monarchy because it further blurs the line between celebrity and royalty — tarnishing the royal mystique, Maclaran said.

Late night chat show host James Corden underscored the threat to the royal brand during a tongue-in-cheek segment with Harry broadcast last week in which Corden suggested the prince and his wife might move into the mansion that provided the backdrop for the 1990s sitcom “The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air.”

“If it was good enough for the Fresh Prince, it’s good enough for a real prince,” Corden said.

The line put Harry, whose father and brother will be king one day, on the same footing as a TV character who fled west Philadelphia for a posh life in Southern California.

Royal watchers wonder what could possibly be next.

“It’s just such a mess,” said Penny Junor, who has written several books about the royals, including a biography of Harry. “I don’t think there are going to be any winners in it.”

Source: https://www.walb.com/2021/03/05/no-winners-uk-waits-harry-meghans-take-royal-split/

Ex-NFL player Kellen Winslow II gets 14 years for rapes

SAN DIEGO (AP) — Former NFL player Kellen Winslow II was sentenced Wednesday to 14 years in prison for multiple rapes and other sexual offenses against five women in Southern California, including one who was homeless when he attacked her in 2018.

The 37-year-old son of San Diego Chargers Hall of Fame tight end Kellen Winslow appeared via videoconference at the hearing in San Diego Superior Court in Vista, a city north of San Diego. He declined to comment before his sentence, saying his lawyers had advised him not to speak.

“In the future, I do plan to tell my story,” said the former Cleveland Browns star, once the highest-paid tight end in the NFL.

San Diego County Superior Court Judge Blaine Bowman said Winslow can only be described in “two words and that is a sexual predator.”

The judge said he preyed on women who were especially vulnerable, befriending a homeless woman, picking up a 54-year-old hitchhiker, and attacking a teen after she had passed out at a party.

Bowman called them “brazen” crimes. He noted that Winslow continued to prey on women even after his first arrest. He performed a lewd act in front of a 77-year-old woman at a gym while hiding his GPS monitoring ankle bracelet with a towel. He also exposed himself to a 57-year-old neighbor who was gardening despite having a bike app that gave his location at the time.

“The vulnerability of the victims was no accident,” Bowman said. “It was the type of victim that you sought out yourself because you felt that perhaps they wouldn’t report the crime” or “wouldn’t be deemed credible by the jurors.”

The 14-year-sentence was the maximum allowed under a plea deal. He was convicted of forcible rape, rape of an unconscious person, assault with intent to commit rape, indecent exposure, and lewd conduct in public.

Four of the women gave statements Wednesday, including one victim who had the prosecutor read hers. All described suffering for years after their attacks from fear and emotional trauma.

The woman who was homeless and raped in Winslow’s home town of Encinitas, a beach community north of San Diego, called into the hearing via video conference from the San Diego County District Attorney’s office, where she watched the proceedings with another victim.

She said since she was raped she has had trouble raising her head and walking. She feels afraid constantly, and checks under beds and in closets when she stays at her brother’s house.

“I don’t ever feel safe inside or outside,” she said. “You brought so much damage to my life.”

Once a first-round NFL draft pick for the Cleveland Browns, Winslow played also for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, New England Patriots and the New York Jets. He earned more than $40 million over his 10 seasons. He was injured in a motorcycle accident and left the NFL in 2013.

“This is somebody who has been allowed to utilize his financial privilege and celebrity to evade jail while awaiting trial, which is when he victimized me,” the 77-year-old woman said Wednesday. “It shows this is a defendant who does not learn from his mistakes, who shows no respect to our laws.”

Winslow’s attorney Marc Carlos said he suffered from head trauma from the many blows to his head playing football, which can only explain why he “went off the rails,” going from a star athlete to a convicted sexual predator. He said his client has accepted responsibility and intends to get help.

Winslow was first convicted after a trial in June 2019 when jurors found him guilty of forcible rape and two misdemeanors — indecent exposure and a lewd act in public.

The same jurors failed to agree on other charges, including the alleged 2018 rape of the 54-year-old hitchhiker, and the 2003 rape of the unconscious 17-year-old high school senior who went to a party with him when he was 19.

Before he was retried on those charges, he pleaded guilty to raping the teen and sexual battery of the hitchhiker. Those pleas spared him the possibility of life in prison.

The father of two, whose wife filed for divorce after he was convicted, had faced up to 18 years in prison for all the charges.

But both sides agreed to reduce the sexual battery charge to assault with intent to commit rape last month. That reduced the maximum sentence to 14 years.

Winslow must also register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.

Source: https://www.walb.com/2021/03/03/ex-nfl-player-kellen-winslow-ii-gets-years-rapes/

Epstein’s ex-girlfriend seeks dismissal of charges she faces

By Associated Press| January 26, 2021 at 7:07 AM EST – Updated January 26 at 7:07 AM

NEW YORK (AP) — A British socialite charged with recruiting teenage girls for financier Jeffrey Epstein to sexually abuse in the 1990s asked a judge Monday to dismiss the case on multiple grounds, including that a deal years ago not to prosecute Epstein and others should shield her from prosecution.

Lawyers for Ghislaine Maxwell said the indictment against their client was obtained unjustly and doesn’t allege crimes specific enough to bring before a jury.

But they listed first among 12 separate arguments attacking the indictment that a non-prosecution deal Epstein reached with the federal government a dozen years ago should shield Maxwell from prosecution too.

The agreement sought to protect Epstein and those around him, but Maxwell was not identified by name in the document that was signed as Epstein agreed to plead guilty to state charges in Florida that forced him to register as a sex offender afterward.

Lawyers for Epstein had planned to argue that the deal with federal prosecutors in Florida in 2008 protected him against sex trafficking charges lodged against him in July 2019 in New York City.

Manhattan federal prosecutors maintained they could proceed against Epstein or those who worked for him regardless. Epstein killed himself at a Manhattan federal lockup a month after his arrest.

Maxwell, 59, was arrested last July and has remained jailed on grounds she might flee.

She has pleaded not guilty to charges that she recruited three teenage girls, including a 14-year-old, for Epstein to sexually abuse from 1994 to 1997. The indictment alleged she sometimes joined in the abuse.

Federal prosecutors declined through a spokesperson to comment. They will file arguments in response in a few weeks.

Maxwell’s trial is scheduled for July. In a recent bail application, Maxwell revealed that she had set aside $7.67 million to be spent on lawyers out of $22.5 million in assets belonging to herself and her husband.

In the event Maxwell’s lawyers can’t force a dismissal of the charges against her, they also made requests that would reduce the number of charges she faces.

Among the more unusual filings was a claim that the indictment should be thrown out because it was obtained from a grand jury seated outside New York City in White Plains, where the lawyers said Black and Hispanic grand jurors would have been underrepresented.

They said the coronavirus outbreak was used as an excuse to seat the grand jury outside of New York City when the pandemic was killing thousands of city residents. In a footnote, they wrote: “The fact that Ms. Maxwell herself is neither Black nor Hispanic does not deprive of her of standing to raise this challenge.”

They said the fact that a Manhattan grand jury convened as early as June 25 showed there was no reason for prosecutors not to wait “other than a publicity-driven desire to arrest Ms. Maxwell on the anniversary of the Epstein indictment.”

The lawyers also asked that Maxwell be tried separately on charges that she committed perjury when she testified in a civil case brought by one of Epstein’s accusers. They said prosecutors were using those charges improperly as a way to introduce evidence from after the 1990s.

Source: https://www.walb.com/2021/01/26/epsteins-ex-girlfriend-seeks-dismissal-charges-she-faces/

Justice Dept.: ‘Poor judgment’ used in Epstein plea deal

By Associated Press | November 12, 2020 at 1:54 PM EST – Updated November 12 at 10:10 PM

WASHINGTON (AP) — A Justice Department report has found that former Labor Secretary Alex Acosta exercised “poor judgment” in handling an investigation into wealthy financier Jeffrey Epstein when he was a top federal prosecutor in Florida. But it also says he did not engage in professional misconduct.

The 350-page report, obtained by The Associated Press, marks the culmination of an investigation by the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility into Acosta’s handling of a secret plea deal with Epstein, who had been accused of sexually abusing dozens of underage girls.

Though the report faulted Acosta for his judgment, it concluded that his actions in arranging the deal did not constitute misconduct, and that none of the prosecutors involved committed misconduct in their interactions with the victims. The conclusions are likely to disappoint the victims, who have long hoped the internal investigation would hold Justice Department officials accountable for actions they say allowed Epstein to escape justice.

In a statement, Acosta expressed vindication at the report’s conclusion that he had not committed misconduct, saying it “fully debunks” allegations that he had cut a sweetheart deal for Epstein. He said the report confirmed that his decision to open an investigation into Epstein had resulted in a jail sentence and a sex offender registration for the financier.

“OPR’s report and public records document that without federal involvement, Epstein would have walked free,” Acosta said in the statement.

Under the 2008 non-prosecution agreement — also known as an NPA — Epstein pleaded guilty to state charges in Florida of soliciting and procuring a minor for prostitution. That allowed him to avert a possible life sentence, instead serving 13 months in a work-release program. He was required to make payments to victims and register as a sex offender.

Epstein was later charged by federal prosecutors in Manhattan for nearly identical allegations in 2019, but he took his own life while in federal custody as he awaited trial. Acosta said the “Epstein affair” was vastly “more lurid and sweeping” than when he was first involved, an allusion to some of the high-profile names referenced in media reports as friends or associates of Epstein, and the fact that more evidence has now been assembled as additional victims have come forward.

In a separate statement, Marie Villafana, who was a lead prosecutor in the Florida investigation, said she was pleased OPR had completed the report but was “disappointed that it has not released the full report so the victims and the public can have a fuller accounting of the depth of interference that led to the patently unjust outcome in the Epstein case.

“That injustice, I believe, was the result of deep, implicit institutional biases that prevented me and the FBI agents who worked diligently on this case from holding Mr. Epstein accountable for his crimes,” she said.

Brad Edwards, an attorney for several of Epstein’s victims, called the report a “disappointing sidestep of the issue. He said the Justice Department “appears to have backed in to a desired result that is difficult to reconcile with the facts.”

“We are left still wondering why Jeffrey Epstein got the sweetheart deal he did and who exactly made the decision to transform a lengthy sex trafficking indictment into a non-prosecution agreement,” Edwards said.

The report was also condemned by Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska, who has questioned Justice Department officials about the plea deal repeatedly.

“Letting a well-connected billionaire get away with child rape and international sex trafficking isn’t ‘poor judgment’ – it is a disgusting failure. Americans ought to be enraged,” Sasse said. “Jeffrey Epstein should be rotting behind bars today, but the Justice Department failed Epstein’s victims at every turn.”

The OPR investigation centered on two aspects of the Epstein case — whether prosecutors committed misconduct by resolving the allegations through a non-prosecution agreement, and also whether they failed to keep victims adequately in the loop on developments in the case.

The report concluded that prosecutors did not commit misconduct in their interactions with the victims because there was no “clear and unambiguous duty” to consult with them before entering into the non-prosecution agreement. But it says the lack of consultation reflected poorly on the Justice Department and “is contradictory to the Department’s mission to minimize the frustration and confusion that victims of a crime endure.”

The internal probe also concluded that Acosta’s decision to resolve the federal investigation through the non-prosecution agreement constituted poor judgment. Investigators found that although it was within his broad discretion and did not result from “improper factors,” the agreement was nonetheless “a flawed mechanism for satisfying the federal interest that caused the government to open its investigation of Epstein.”

Still, the report concluded that Acosta had the authority as U.S. attorney “to resolve the case as he deemed necessary and appropriate, as long as his decision was not motivated or influenced by improper factors.”

The office said its investigation had turned up no evidence that Acosta was swayed by “impermissible considerations, such as Epstein’s wealth, status, or associations” and in fact had resisted efforts by defense lawyers to return the case to the state for whatever outcome the state wanted.

The report also did not find that a well-publicized 2007 breakfast meeting with one of Epstein’s attorneys led to the non-prosecution agreement — which had been signed weeks earlier — “or to any other significant decision that benefited Epstein.” Records reviewed by the professional responsibility office show that prosecutors weighed concerns about witness credibility and the impact of a trial on victims, as well as Acosta’s concerns about the Justice Department’s proper role in prosecuting solicitation crimes.

“Accordingly,” the report said, “OPR does not find that Acosta engaged in professional misconduct by resolving the federal investigation of Epstein in the way he did or that the other subjects committed professional misconduct through their implementation of Acosta’s decisions.”

Associated Press writer Jim Mustian in New York contributed to this report.

Source: https://www.walb.com/2020/11/12/justice-dept-poor-judgment-used-jeffrey-epstein-plea-deal/

Lee Co. Sheriff’s Office looking for wanted sex offender

By WALB News Team | November 12, 2020 at 11:08 AM EST – Updated November 12 at 11:08 AM

LEESBURG, Ga. (WALB) – The Lee County Sheriff’s Office said Thursday that the agency is asking for help finding a wanted sex offender.

Jimmie Ray Williams is wanted for failing to register as a sex offender and failure to appear, the sheriff’s office said.

Williams is described as 5′4, 155 pounds, and has brown hair and hazel eyes.

The sheriff’s office said Williams is known to visit the Bainbridge area and has family in Jackson County, Fla.

Anyone with information on Williams’ whereabouts is asked to call the Lee County Sheriff’s Office at (229) 759-6012.

Source: https://www.walb.com/2020/11/12/lee-co-sheriffs-office-looking-wanted-sex-offender/

Former Pelham resident sentenced for distributing child pornography

By Krista Monk| November 10, 2020 at 5:20 PM EST – Updated November 10 at 5:20 PM

ALBANY, Ga. (WALB) – A former Pelham resident was sentenced to federal prison after he was caught distributing large amounts of child pornography on social media while he was also attempting to foster a child, according to Charlie Peeler, the U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Georgia.

A press release from Peeler’s office says Michael King, 42, of Little Falls, New York, formerly of Pelham, was sentenced after pleading guilty to distribution of child pornography.

King was caught by Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), according to Peeler.

Peeler said HSI agents determined that Kik app user “Silent Dream 78” had posted images of child pornography to a Kik messenger chat group from July to August 2018, and the user was likely King.

A search warrant was executed at King’s Pelham home on January 17, 2019, where agents found seven computer media items that contained child pornography, according to the press release.

King admitted that his Kik user names were “Silent Dream 78” and “SilentDream1977” and that he had been downloading and viewing child pornography “for forever,” Peeler reported. On five occasions, King used the Kik chat messenger app to share child pornography, including images involving very young children.

During sentencing, the court noted that King engaged in highly detailed ideation in the form of online text messages with another online collector of child pornography about having sex with a foster or adopted child and allowing another sex offender to have sex with the child when the child arrived, according to Peeler’s office.

The release states that King claimed that the text messages were fantasy. However, the court noted that the defendant and his wife were well along in the foster/adoption process. The defendant has been in custody since the execution of the search warrant at his home in January 2019.

“It is deeply disturbing that King was attempting to foster a child, while at the same time fantasizing about sexually harming a foster child and allowing another sexual predator to do the same. HSI agents stopped a child predator from doing irreparable harm to an innocent child. We must continue to bring the full force of the law against child sexual predators. Those individuals caught distributing child pornography will be prosecuted and will face federal prison, without parole,” said Peeler. “We will not stop working alongside our federal, state and local partners to protect Georgia’s children and bring child predators to justice.”

King was sentenced to 15 years and eight months in federal prison, to be followed by 10 years of supervised release. King will also have to register as a sex offender upon release from federal prison. There is no parole in the federal system.

“No sentence will ever bring back the innocence that this monster has stolen from countless helpless children,” said Special Agent in Charge Katrina W. Berger, who oversees HSI operations in Georgia and Alabama. “HSI will continue to aggressively pursue those who seek to victimize our most vulnerable members of society and prosecute those predators to the fullest extent of the law.”

Source: https://www.walb.com/2020/11/10/former-pelham-resident-sentenced-distributing-child-pornography/