The Circuit concludes that the district court appropriately sanctioned the D.A.'s Office for making misleading statements about whether it had conferred with a crime victim's family.
My amicus brief to the Third Circuit argues that the district court appropriately sanctioned the Philadelphia D.A.'s Office for making misleading representations about whether they had conferred with a crime victims' family.
Today's oral argument in Counterman v. Colorado--the "true threats" case--highlights the importance of protecting stalking victims from objectively threatening communications.
The families argue that they should have been given an opportunity to confer with prosecutors under the Crime Victims' Rights Act before Boeing's deferred prosecution agreement was finalized.
While expressing great sympathy for the victims' families, Judge O'Connor concludes that no remedy is available for the Justice Department's failure to enforce the families' right to confer under the Crime Victims' Rights Act.
The Arizona Supreme Court becomes the first state Supreme Court to thoroughly incorporate crime victims' rights in its rules of criminal procedure. Others should follow.
My filings yesterday on behalf of the fifteen families who lost loved ones in the Boeing 737 MAX crashes explains why the Justice Department could not keep victims' families in the dark when it negotiated its immunity deal with Boeing.
My cert petition to the U.S. Supreme Court asks it review the Eleventh Circuit en banc's decision concluding that Epstein's victims cannot enforce their right to confer with prosecutors under the Crime Victims' Rights Act because the Department never formally filed charges against Epstein.
The en banc ruling calls the sordid deal a "national disgrace" but concludes the courts are powerless to enforce crime victims' rights in pre-charging situations--a disturbing ruling that I hope will be quickly overturned.