The J. Edgar Hoover FBI Building is seen on Jan. 28, 2019, in Washington, D.C. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images).

Violent crime and property crime in the United States dropped in 2023, continuing a downward trend following higher rates of crime during the pandemic, according to the FBI’s latest national crime report.

Murders and intentional manslaughter, known as non-negligent manslaughter, fell by 11.6% from 2022. Property crime dropped by 2.4%.

Overall, FBI data shows that violent crime fell by 3%.

Violent crime has become a major issue in the 2024 presidential race, with former President Donald Trump claiming that crime has been “through the roof” under the Biden administration.

On the campaign trail, Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, has cited findings from a different source — the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey — to argue that crime is out of control.

While the FBI’s data reflects only crimes reported to the police, the victimization survey is based on interviews conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau and includes both reported and unreported crimes. Interviewees are asked whether they reported the crime to the police. But the survey does not include murder data and only tracks crimes against individuals aged 12 and older.

The victimization survey, released in mid-September, shows that the violent crime victimization rate rose from 16.4 per 1,000 people in 2020 to 22.5 per 1,000 in 2023. The report also notes that the 2023 rate is statistically similar to the rate in 2019, when Trump was in office.

Many crime data experts consider both sources trustworthy. But the agencies track different trends, measure crimes differently and collect data over varying time frames. Unlike the victimization survey, the FBI’s data is largely based on calls for service or police reports. Still, most crimes go unreported, which means the FBI’s data is neither entirely accurate nor complete.

The victimization surveys released throughout the peak years of the pandemic were particularly difficult to conduct, which is a key reason why, according to some experts, the FBI and the survey may show different trends.

As a result, these differences, which are often unknown or misunderstood, make it easier for anyone — including politicians — to manipulate findings to support their agendas.

Political candidates at the national, state and local levels on both sides of the aisle have used crime statistics in their campaigns this year, with some taking credit for promising trends and others using different numbers to flog their opponents. But it’s difficult to draw definitive conclusions about crime trends or attribute them to specific policies.

“There’s never any single reason why crime trends move one way or another,” said Ames Grawert, a crime data expert and senior counsel for the Brennan Center for Justice’s justice program. The Brennan Center is a left-leaning law and policy group.

“When an answer is presented that maybe makes intuitive sense or a certain political persuasion, it’s all too natural to jump to that answer. The problem is that that is just not how crime works,” Grawert told Stateline.

At an August rally in Philadelphia, the Democratic vice presidential candidate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, said: “Violent crime was up under Donald Trump. That’s not even counting the crimes he committed.”

During Trump’s first three years in office, the violent crime rate per 100,000 people actually decreased each year, according to the FBI, from 376.5 in 2017, to 370.8 in 2018, to 364.4 in 2019.

It wasn’t until 2020 that the rate surged to 386.3, the highest under Trump, which is when the country experienced the largest one-year increase in murders.

Walz’s comments overlook the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the social upheaval following George Floyd’s murder by a Minneapolis police officer in 2020. And despite the increase that year, the violent crime rate in Trump’s final year remained slightly lower than in the last year of President Barack Obama’s administration. In 2016, the rate was 386.8 per 100,000 people.

Following the release of the FBI’s annual crime report last month, U.S. Rep. Dan Bishop, a Republican running for attorney general in North Carolina, shared and later deleted a retweet on X that falsely claimed the FBI’s data showed zero homicides in Los Angeles and New Orleans last year. In fact, FBI data showed that the Los Angeles Police Department reported 325 homicides, while New Orleans police reported 198 in 2023.

Voters worry

Crime has emerged as a top issue on voters’ minds.

A Gallup poll conducted in March found that nearly 80% of Americans worry about crime and violence “a great deal” or “a fair amount,” ranking it above concerns such as the economy and illegal immigration. In another Gallup poll conducted late last year, 63% of respondents described crime in the U.S. as either extremely or very serious — the highest percentage since Gallup began asking the question in 2000.

Crime data usually lags by at least a year, depending on the agency or organization gathering and analyzing the statistics. But the lack of accurate, real-time crime data from official sources, such as federal or state agencies, may leave some voters vulnerable to political manipulation, according to some crime and voter behavior experts.

There are at least three trackers collecting and analyzing national and local crime data that aim to close the gap in real-time reporting. Developed by the Council on Criminal Justice, data consulting firm AH Datalytics and NORC at the University of Chicago, these trackers all show a similar trend of declining crime rates.

“We live in a world of sound bites, and people aren’t taking the time to digest information and fact check,” Alex Piquero, a criminology professor at the University of Miami and former director of the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics, said in an interview with Stateline. “The onus is on the voter.”

Crime trends and limitations

In 2020, when shutdowns in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic kept people at home, homicides surged by nearly 30% — the largest single-year increase since the FBI began tracking crime.

In 2022, violent crime had fallen back to near pre-pandemic levels, and the FBI data showed a continued decline last year. The rate of violent crime dropped from about 377 incidents per 100,000 people in 2022, to around 364 per 100,000 in 2023, slightly below the 2019 rate.

The largest cities, those with populations of at least 1 million, saw the biggest drop in violent crime — nearly 7% — while cities with populations between 250,000 and 500,000 saw a slight 0.3% increase.

Rape incidents decreased by more than 9% and aggravated assault by nearly 3%. Burglary and larceny-theft decreased by 8% and 4%, respectively.

Motor vehicle theft, however, rose by 12% in 2023 compared with 2022, the highest rate of car theft since 2007, with 319 thefts per 100,000 people.

Although national data suggests an overall major decrease in crime across the country, some crime-data experts caution that that isn’t necessarily the case in individual cities and neighborhoods.

“It can be sort of simplistic to look at national trends. You have to allow the space for nuance and context about what’s happening at the local level too,” said Grawert, of the Brennan Center.

Some crime experts and politicians have criticized the FBI’s latest report, pointing out that not all law enforcement agencies have submitted their crime statistics.

The FBI is transitioning participating agencies to a new reporting system called the National Incident-Based Reporting System or NIBRS. The FBI mandated that the transition, which began in the late 1980s, be completed by 2021. This requirement resulted in a significant drop in agency participation for that year’s report because some law enforcement agencies couldn’t meet the deadline.

In 2022, the FBI relaxed the requirement, allowing agencies to use both the new and older reporting systems. Since the 2021 mandate, more law enforcement agencies have transitioned to the new reporting system.

Reporting crime data to the FBI is voluntary, and some departments may submit only a few months’ worth of data.

Although the FBI’s latest report covers 94% of the U.S. population, only 73% of all law enforcement agencies participated, using either reporting system, according to Stateline’s analysis of the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting program participation data. This means that 5,926 agencies, or 27%, did not report any data to the FBI.

The majority of the missing agencies are likely smaller rural departments that don’t participate due to limited resources and staff, according to some crime data experts.

But participation in the FBI’s crime reporting program has steadily increased over time, particularly after the drop in 2021. Many of the law enforcement agencies in the country’s largest cities submitted data for 2023, and every city agency serving a population of 1 million or more provided a full year of data, according to the FBI’s report.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org. Follow Stateline on Facebook and X.

Amendment 6 would open the door to charging criminal defendants fees to fund some law enforcement pensions (Mary Sanchez /The Beacon).

Missouri voters will decide Nov. 5 if retirement funds for sheriffs and prosecutors should be supported with fees collected on court cases.

A fee used to fund sheriffs’ pensions was put in place by state law in 1983.

The Missouri General Assembly placed Amendment 6 on the ballot to reverse a 2021 Missouri Supreme Court ruling that found the fees unconstitutional.

The state’s high court found that court fees for pensions were “not reasonably related to expense of the administration of justice” and thus violated a constitutional ban against using court fees to enhance the compensation of executive department officials, which would include retired county sheriffs.

If approved by a simple majority of voters, the Missouri Constitution will be changed, allowing the legislature to fund benefits for the state’s 114 elected county sheriffs or their surviving spouses through the collection of a $3 fee per case where a guilty verdict or plea is reached. Retirement benefits for prosecutors are also included, through a $4 fee.

The exact ballot language is below:

Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to provide that the administration of justice shall include the levying of costs and fees to support salaries and benefits for certain current and former law enforcement personnel?

State and local governmental entities estimate an unknown fiscal impact.

Fair Ballot Language:

A “yes” vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to levy costs and fees to support salaries and benefits for current and former sheriffs, prosecuting attorneys, and circuit attorneys to ensure all Missourians have access to the courts of justice.

A “no” vote will not amend the Missouri Constitution to levy costs and fees related to current or former sheriffs, prosecuting attorneys and circuit attorneys.

If passed, this measure will have no impact on taxes.

What happens if Amendment 6 fails?

If it fails, the Missouri Sheriffs’ Retirement System predicts that its fund will be insolvent within nine years, said Melissa Lorts, executive director.

“We feel like the $3 fee is really a user fee of the court system,” Lorts said.

Sheriffs are responsible for bringing defendants to the courthouse from the jail, and they administer warrants and manage other aspects of a criminal case, she said.

“So we have a heavy hand in what happens in the court system,” Lorts said.

More than 200 former sheriffs or their surviving spouses currently receive benefits, Lorts said.

The amendment traces back to two speeding tickets in Kansas City and the state supreme court ruling that followed.

Two men admitted to the traffic violations in 2017, ultimately paying a total of $223.50 in fines and fees to the city’s municipal court.

But the men later argued that they didn’t realize that $3 from each case would go toward the sheriffs’ retirement benefits.

The two men led a class action filed with Jackson County Circuit Court, arguing that the extra charge was “unjust enrichment,” a violation of the state constitution.

The case continued to wind through the courts until the Missouri Supreme Court ruled for the plaintiffs in 2021, Lorts said.

The court’s decision cited a 1986 ruling, noting that it laid down “a bright-line rule” barring court fees that benefit executive officials that are not “reasonably related to the expense of the administration of justice.”

The ruling in the traffic case cost the retirement system about $9 million in court costs and settlements and ended its ability to collect the money, Lorts said.

In December 2023, the fund had $38.4 million in assets, a drop of $800,000 from the end of the previous calendar year, according to the Missouri Sheriffs’ Retirement System annual report.

Beginning in January 2024, active sheriffs began contributing 5% of their salaries to the retirement fund, a change instituted by the legislature.

The legislature also approved $2.5 million to help stabilize the fund, an amount that has been requested again in the coming fiscal year, Lorts said.

What are the arguments against Amendment 6? 

Critics of the fees that Amendment 6 would allow say each county should pay for pensions and other costs related to law enforcement and the courts.

The Washington, D.C.-based Fines and Fees Justice Center told lawmakers that the salaries and benefits for prosecutors and sheriffs should be adequately funded, but that court fees are an “ineffective and counterproductive” approach.

“When fines and fees go unpaid, judges may issue arrest warrants for failing to pay, leading to law enforcement arresting people for not paying financial obligations — most often because they are too poor to pay,” testified Priya Sarathy Jones, deputy executive director at the Fines and Fees Justice Center.

“The time spent on these debt collection and enforcement efforts diverts law enforcement and courts from their core responsibilities … In fact, the collection of fines and fees by law enforcement has been found to be associated with lower clearance rates for more serious crimes.”

Some studies have shown that the cost to municipalities to collect fines and fees can exceed the revenue generated.

The Missouri NAACP argued that the fees “create a negative incentive to give more tickets and charge unnecessary crimes.”

Leonard Charles Gilroy, a vice president of the Reason Foundation in Los Angeles, wrote that changing the state constitution to allow the fees would violate “basics of public finance and fiscal stewardship.”

Public pensions are constitutionally protected benefits, which are obligated to be paid in full regardless of market conditions or revenue generated.

“Law enforcement and courts are core functions of government that should be funded through legislative appropriations, not fees,” Gilroy’s statement said.

“It would be imprudent to revive a policy to fund pension contributions with dedicated fine/fee revenues because those revenues can fluctuate over time, while pension liabilities are always locked in.”

Meanwhile, Amendment 6 came under fire for ballot summary language that the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District ruled was insufficient and unfair.

The court clarified that passage of the measure by voters in the general election would enshrine a broader meaning of the administration of justice in the state constitution.

That court reworded the ballot language voters will see to read: “Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to provide that the administration of justice shall include the levying of costs and fees to support salaries and benefits for certain current and former law enforcement personnel?”

This article first appeared on Beacon: Missouri and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

State Rep. Lane Roberts, a Republican from Joplin, is chairman of the House Special Interim Committee on Illegal Immigrant Crime. He is shown during a Jan. 18 public hearing on a bill he introduced (Tim Bommel/Missouri House Communications).

A Columbia woman charged with using multiple aliases to accuse restaurant competitors of criminal activity also used fake names for testimony to a Missouri House committee alleging a conspiracy to obtain liquor licenses for undocumented immigrants 

Crystal Umfress of Columbia, owner of Casa Maria’s Mexican Cantina, was already facing trial in a Dunklin County arson-for-hire scheme when she was charged Sept. 18 with five new felonies. The new charges, of forgery and filing a false document, also originate in Dunklin County.

The prosecution alleges she impersonated multiple public officials and others to claim that Mexican-born restaurant owners were bribing local public officials to cover-up their immigration status and obtain liquor licenses.

“I can’t speculate on what it is that set the lady off,” said Ron Huber, an associate commissioner of Dunklin County who was a target of the accusations cited in the forgery case. “I’ve never met her before in my life. I don’t know who she is or why she’s out to try to discredit me or anything.”

Huber is also named several times in testimony submitted to the Missouri House Special Interim Committee on Illegal Immigrant Crimes. The committee was established in July to study whether undocumented immigrants are a source of crime and held public meetings in Springfield, Joplin, Kansas City, St. Joseph, St. Louis, and Cape Girardeau.

The written testimony tied to Umfress was submitted to the committee using multiple names and email addresses. The emails allege Huber is at the center of a widespread conspiracy to obtain liquor licenses for Mexican restaurants that in turn serve as fronts for drug dealing and other crimes.

The conspiracy allegedly extends to Columbia, Warrenton, Springfield and other cities. The email testimony claims that undocumented immigrants who cannot legally obtain a liquor license are hiring people to front for their license applications, with officials turning a blind eye.

The submissions also often include a list of links to news stories involving people with Hispanic names, sometimes as victims of a crime, others as the alleged perpetrator of an offense like drunk driving.

Huber said he’s heard Umfress submitted testimony to the committee with false names.

“I’d like to know where that money went if I am supposed to have gotten it,” he said of the bribery allegation.

The Missouri State Highway Patrol, which investigated the forgery case, cannot comment on its work or confirm any connection between Umfress and the accounts which contacted the legislative committee, Sgt. Brad Germann said. The Dunklin County prosecuting attorney could not be reached for comment.

Russell Oliver, Umfress’ attorney, also declined to comment.

Starting in May, The Independent received a series of emails with similar accusations and many of the same links. Three of the email names and addresses for the witness statements are the same as those received by The Independent.

Huber said he recognized several of the names used in the emails as among those that had worked to spread conspiracy theories about him.

One email to The Independent, using the name Marissa Jenkins, identified the sender as a student reporter seeking help, with the signature line “Investigate Report University of Missouri Journalism.” 

A student named Marissa Jenkins was enrolled on a part-time basis during the summer term at MU, university spokesman Christopher Ave stated in an email. She is not currently enrolled.

The legislative testimony emails signed “Marissa Jenkins” do not identify her as a student or as a reporter.

The committee chairman, Republican state Rep. Lane Roberts of Joplin, said he was not aware that any of the testimony submitted by email was from aliases. 

“I do know that we received a number — two, three or maybe four emails — with regard to something in Dunklin County,” Roberts said.

The committee was not set up to investigate specific charges of criminal activity, Roberts said. 

“Our focus is in trying to quantify what kind of crime and how much crime is associated with undocumented workers,” Roberts said. “It’s been very difficult to come up with any kind of way to quantify that.”

Roberts, a former Joplin police chief and former director of the Department of Public Safety, said his response to specific allegations made in testimony is to ask the person reporting the criminal activity to contact law enforcement.

“When somebody alleges some kind of an activity, there’s always a healthy degree of skepticism, because often it’s personal, it’s emotional, and we have to be very careful about taking it at face value,” Roberts said.

Umfress first made news headlines last year when she was charged with paying $1,485 to someone to set fire to Lupita’s Mexican Restaurant in Kennett. She is set to go to trial in February in Butler County, where the case was moved on a change of venue.

Testimony submitted to the legislative committee under the name Maria Garcia in advance of its July 30 hearing blamed the owner of the building and Huber for the fire.

The owner, the testimony states, paid the intermediary who found the person willing to set the fire “$10,000 to start a kitchen fire to Lupitas Mexican and implement (sic) an American owner of a Mexican restaurant in Columbia, Missouri as she was trying to rat the commissioner out for a twenty year operation aiding illegal immigrants with IDs, liquor licenses, and drugs.”

Umfress has had numerous legal and personal issues coming at her at a rapid rate for more than a year. 

On July 1, 2023, she obtained a marriage license to wed her partner at Casa Maria’s, Jesus Celestino Mendoza-Chavez, nine days before the fire hit the Kennett restaurant, which was owned by Mendoza’s brother, KOMU-TV in Columbia reported. 

She was charged in the arson on Sept. 22, 2023. Mendoza-Chavez died Oct. 1, 2023, after sustaining severe injuries in a Sept. 26, 2023, head-on collision in Columbia. She cited the death of her husband in an unsuccessful bid to have her $65,000 bond reduced.

On May 9, the state Division of Alcohol and Tobacco Control suspended the liquor license at Casa Maria’s for 52 days after finding a forgery on the application for renewal, KMIZ TV in Columbia reported. Umfress is ineligible for a liquor license in her own name because she has a felony theft conviction on her record.

The Independent on May 16 received the first email, from someone who called themselves Melissa White, making allegations involving Huber and the liquor license conspiracy.

The committee received submissions from “Melissa White,” using the same email address, in advance of two hearings. In the first, for the July 11 hearing, she brought a Columbia competitor into her conspiracy allegations. The second, for the July 30 hearing, said her fiance had been assaulted while at a Columbia restaurant and died the next day.

Umfress’ emails began causing Huber problems about six months ago, he said. He was contacted by the state alcohol regulators about emails purporting to withdraw license applications, Huber said, and more recently from accounting clients.

He asked the prosecutor to be aggressive, Huber said.

“I kind of put some pressure on the prosecutor,” He said. “I said, ‘before you know, nobody really knew what she was doing or whatever, but I’ve started to get phone calls from my clients and I’ll start losing clients.’ That’s going to be a big deal.”

(Getty Images)

Until they get in touch with him, organizer TJ James says, many people with a felony conviction have no idea that they have the right to vote.

And it’s not for a lack of interest, said James, an organizer with the Metro Organization for Racial and Economic Equity, or MORE2.

“I’ve had people that I work with where they’ve been told specifically at the polls that they cannot vote,” James said. “They’re being told while in prison, ‘You can never vote again.’ And people, unfortunately, just don’t do the research.”

When a Kansas or Missouri resident is convicted of a felony, the state automatically deletes their voter registration. But once they complete their parole or probation, most people with felony convictions regain the right to vote.

The Sentencing Project noted in October 2023 that nationwide, more than 2 million people with felony convictions have regained the right to vote since 1997.

Can felons vote in Missouri?

Generally speaking, a felony conviction only temporarily suspends a person’s right to vote in Missouri. The only exception is if the felony is related to elections or voting — such as tampering with ballots or threatening voters. Election crimes convictions, both felonies and misdemeanors, cost a person the right to vote in Missouri.

Missouri automatically wipes the voter registration upon conviction of a felony, and the person convicted must reregister once they have completed their sentence, parole or probation.

If a voter has any issues at the polling site — for example, if the poll worker incorrectly tells them that they aren’t allowed to vote because of their felony conviction — James encourages them to call a local election office.

However, if the problem is that the person has not registered, there is no recourse after the voter registration deadline on Oct. 9. Voters must register before that deadline because Missouri does not allow same-day voter registration.

Can felons vote in Kansas?

Like in Missouri, a felony conviction in Kansas results in a temporary loss of the right to vote. Once a person has completed their sentence, parole or probation, they will have to reregister. The Kansas voter registration deadline is Oct. 15.

However, it gets fuzzier when a person owes fines and fees for restitution.

“There are tens of thousands of people in Kansas who are still on probation solely for financial reasons,” said Micah Kubic, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Kansas affiliate.

That is relatively distinct to Kansas, he said.

Legally, probation could be indefinitely extended until those fines are paid. Some judges may choose to end a person’s probation before they’ve fully paid their debt, but it’s ultimately up to the judge’s discretion.

Kubic said that judges in Sedgwick County are less likely to restore voting rights before fines are paid.

Right to vote in jail

Some detainees at county jails in Kansas and Missouri may still be eligible to vote.

In 2022, MORE2 estimated that there may be upward of 400 eligible voters jailed in Jackson County. Kubic estimated that the number of eligible voters in Kansas jails is in the thousands.

“If you are in jail and not been convicted,” James said, “then your voting rights have not been taken away.”

To cast a ballot from jail, voters will need to make sure they are registered to vote and submit an absentee ballot request before the deadline.

In Kansas, the absentee ballot request form must be received by Oct. 29. In Missouri, it must be received by Oct. 23.

Jails may allow voter registration groups to enter, but it varies from county to county.

Kubic said that most counties in Kansas do not have vote-from-jail programs, but the Kansas ACLU is working to make those programs more common.

“(It) can be as simple as allowing the local election commission or county clerk to bring a stack of absentee ballot request forms,” he said. “They don’t have to be complicated to work.”

This article first appeared on Beacon: Kansas City and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Law enforcement personnel continue to investigate the area around Trump International Golf Club after an apparent assassination attempt Sept. 16 on former President Donald Trump in West Palm Beach, Florida. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors said Tuesday that the man who allegedly stalked former President Donald Trump for a month before aiming his rifle through a fence at Trump’s private golf course on Sept. 15 was indicted on the charge of an attempted assassination of a political candidate.

The Justice Department said a federal grand jury in Miami late Tuesday returned an indictment charging Ryan Wesley Routh, 58, of attempting to kill the GOP presidential nominee while at Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, Florida.

“Violence targeting public officials endangers everything our country stands for, and the Department of Justice will use every available tool to hold Ryan Routh accountable for the attempted assassination of former President Trump charged in the indictment,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement.

“The Justice Department will not tolerate violence that strikes at the heart of our democracy, and we will find and hold accountable those who perpetrate it. This must stop,” Garland said.

The maximum sentence for the attempted assassination charge is a life sentence. Routh remains in pretrial detention.

The case is being handled by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who previously dismissed criminal charges against Trump related to illegally allegedly keeping classified documents after he left the presidency. Cannon was appointed by Trump to the federal bench.

Prosecutors on Monday detailed that Routh stalked Trump for a month, noting events Trump would be at, and wrote a note where he offered $150,000 to anyone who could “finish the job,” according to court filings.

This is now officially the second assassination attempt against Trump, after the first one in Butler, Pennsylvania, where Trump sustained an injury to his ear. He was not injured at his Florida golf club.

Acting Secret Service Director Ronald Rowe confirmed that Routh did not fire his weapon and that the gunshots heard were from a Secret Service agent who saw part of Routh’s gun poking out from the chain link fence and immediately fired.

Routh has already been charged with possession of a firearm as a convicted felon and with obliterating the serial number on a firearm, according to court records. With those charges, he faces up to 20 years in prison.

Marcellus Williams, photographed in prison (photo submitted).

Just a few hours after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected his final appeal, Missouri officials executed Marcellus Williams Tuesday at the Eastern Reception, Diagnostic and Correctional Center in Bonne Terre.

Williams, who was backed in his appeals for clemency by St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell, left only a single sentence — “All praise to Allah in every situation” — in his last statement, KMOV TV reported.

Williams was sentenced to death for the 1998 slaying of Felicia Gayle, a reporter for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, who was stabbed more than 40 times.

None of the physical evidence at the crime scene, including fingerprints, bloodied shoe prints and hairs, could be tied to Williams. He was arrested based on the testimony of a jailhouse informant, who said Williams confessed the murder. 

During testimony at his murder trial, Williams’ then-girlfriend also said he confessed to the killing. Williams picked her up the day of Gayle’s slaying wearing a jacket over a bloody shirt and with scratches on his neck. She saw a laptop in his car – later shown to have been stolen from Gayle’s apartment – and a purse in the trunk, with Gayle’s identification card.

In the final effort to free Williams or reduce his sentence, Bell filed a case under a 2021 state law allowing prosecutors to bring new evidence to the courts. It was the first time the law has been used in a death penalty case. 

Bell filed the case in January, arguing there was “clear and convincing evidence” that potential jurors had been excluded based on race and questioning whether DNA evidence on the knife that killed Gayle had been contaminated by careless handling.

The Missouri Supreme Court heard a final appeal of the ruling in that case on Monday, and found the evidence was not convincing.

Bell “failed to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence Williams’ actual innocence or constitutional error at the original criminal trial that undermines the confidence in the judgment of the original criminal trial,” Judge Zel Fischer wrote in the opinion.

The Department of Corrections declared Williams dead at 6:10 p.m. after a lethal injection, the Kansas City Star reported. 

Bell issued a statement that he remained convinced Williams should have been spared.

“Marcellus Williams should be alive today,” Bell said. “There were multiple points in the timeline when decisions could have been made that would have spared him the death penalty. If there is even the shadow of a doubt of innocence, the death penalty should never be an option. This outcome did not serve the interests of justice.”

State Rep. Crystal Quade, the Democratic candidate for governor, issued a statement over social media saying that she disagreed with allowing the execution to proceed.

“I’ve always stood firm in my stance that the state should not execute potentially innocent people. Marcellus Williams is no different,” Quade said.

There was no statement from Lt. Gov. Mike Kehoe, the Republican candidate.

Gov. Mike Parson, in a statement on Monday stating he would not stop the execution, said he was not convinced by any appeals.

“No jury nor court, including at the trial, appellate, and Supreme Court levels, have ever found merit in Mr. Williams’ innocence claims,” Parson said. “At the end of the day, his guilty verdict and sentence of capital punishment were upheld. Nothing from the real facts of this case have led me to believe in Mr. Williams’ innocence, as such, Mr. Williams’ punishment will be carried out as ordered by the Supreme Court.”

Williams is the 100th person executed by Missouri since 1989, when executions resumed after a two-decade lapse.

The Missouri Supreme Court building in Jefferson City on April 4, 2024 (Jason Hancock/Missouri Independent).

The execution of Marcellus Williams will proceed Tuesday, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled in a decision rejecting efforts to show  a potential juror in his murder trial was excluded based on race.

After hearing arguments Monday morning in an expedited appeal, the court unanimously ruled that St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell had not proven Williams’ innocence or that there was a violation of his constitutional right to a fair trial.

Williams is scheduled to be put to death Tuesday for the 1998 murder of Felicia Gayle in St. Louis County. On Sept. 12, Circuit Judge Bruce Hilton rejected claims that DNA evidence had been destroyed and the exclusion of Black jurors raised doubts about the integrity of his 2001 conviction.

The decision written by Judge Zel Fischer noted that Bell was no longer claiming innocence for Williams based on the DNA evidence. His arguments that Black people were stricken from the jury pool for racial reasons have been argued in past appeals, Fischer wrote, and the case argued Monday presents nothing new except mischaracterizations of statements made during the Aug. 28 hearing conducted by Hilton.

Bell “failed to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence Williams’ actual innocence or constitutional error at the original criminal trial that undermines the confidence in the judgment of the original criminal trial,” Fischer wrote.

With its decision, the court rejected the effort by Williams’ attorneys to obtain a stay of execution. Gov. Mike Parson issued a statement that he would not intervene in the case.

“Capital punishment cases are some of the hardest issues we have to address in the Governor’s Office, but when it comes down to it, I follow the law and trust the integrity of our judicial system, Parson said. “Mr. Williams has exhausted due process and every judicial avenue, including over 15 hearings attempting to argue his innocence and overturn his conviction. No jury nor court, including at the trial, appellate, and Supreme Court levels, have ever found merit in Mr. Williams’ innocence claims.”

Bell promised to continue efforts to prevent Tuesday’s execution.

“Even for those who disagree on the death penalty, when there is a shadow of a doubt of any defendant’s guilt, the irreversible punishment of execution should not be an option,” Bell said. “As the St. Louis County prosecutor, our office has questions about Mr. Williams guilt, but also about the integrity of his conviction. For those reasons we will continue to do everything in our power to save his life.”

If Williams is put to death Tuesday, he will be the 100th person executed in Missouri since 1989.

During the hearing Monday morning, attorney Jonathan Potts asked the judges to find that testimony from the trial prosecutor, Keith Larner, proved that race played a role in removing potential jurors. 

“He said the quiet part out loud,” Potts said. “He admitted there was a racial component and that is unconstitutional.”

The court should uphold Hilton’s decision and allow Williams’ execution to proceed, Michael Spillane, an assistant attorney general, argued Monday. Larner’s statement about his reason for excluding a juror — that he looked like he could be a brother of Williams — was not a sufficient reason because he also testified that race played no role in his decisions.

“He did not admit he struck a Black juror simply because he was Black,” Spillane said.

In the opinion, Fischer wrote that the statement wasn’t the clear-cut admission of a constitutional error, as Potts portrayed it.

Instead, Fischer wrote, the argument “cherry-picks the record, ignores the circuit court’s factual findings, and offers no persuasive justifications for reversing this Court’s previous merits determination of this claim.”

Spillane also asked the court to reject the appeal because it lacks jurisdiction. The Sept. 12 decision won’t be appealable for 30 days under procedural rules, he noted.

“This is a judgment that is not yet final,” he said.

Gayle, a reporter for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, was stabbed more than 40 times. Police investigators found an abundance of physical evidence at the crime scene including fingerprints, bloodied shoe prints and hairs. 

None of it, however, was tied to Williams by investigators. He was arrested based on the testimony of a jailhouse informant, who said Williams confessed the murder. 

During testimony at his murder trial, Williams’ then-girlfriend also said he confessed to the killing. Williams picked her up the day of Gayle’s slaying wearing a jacket over a bloody shirt and with scratches on his neck. She saw a laptop in his car – later shown to have been stolen from Gayle’s apartment – and a purse in the trunk, with Gayle’s identification card.

The execution set for Tuesday is the third time the Missouri Supreme Court has set a date for Williams to die.

In 2015, the Court stayed Williams’s execution and appointed a special master to review DNA testing of potentially exculpatory evidence. Two years later, without conducting a hearing, the court rescheduled Williams’ execution. 

Later that year, however, former Gov. Eric Greitens issued the second stay and appointed a board of inquiry to look into the case. Parson lifted the stay and dissolved the board in June 2023, and the state Supreme Court issued the execution warrant last month, setting a Sept. 24 execution date.

The current appeal is the first time a 2021 state law allowing prosecutors to bring new evidence to the courts has been used in a death penalty case. Bell filed the case in January, arguing there was “clear and convincing evidence” that potential jurors had been excluded based on race.

The 2021 law has been used to free Lamar Johnnson, who was in prison for almost 30 years on a murder conviction before he was freed in February 2023, and Christpher Dunn, who was held for 34 years for a murder before he was released in August.

One argument raised by Bell in the January filing was that new DNA analysis of the murder weapon excluded Williams. But Hilton ruled that at the Aug. 28 hearing, testimony showed the DNA found on the knife — of Larner and a detective who handled the knife without gloves after initial tests were done — did not support the conclusion they deliberately destroyed evidence. 

During arguments Monday, Spillane said Larner’s testimony showed he wasn’t aware of the potential risk of contamination before the 2001 trial and didn’t learn that skin cells that remain on a surface could be tested until 2015.

“He wasn’t trying to contaminate anything,” Spillane said.

Under questioning from the judges, Potts said Hilton’s decision should be overturned or the case should be sent back to his court for more fact-finding.

The last-minute nature of the case should not be an impediment to finding the truth, Potts said. The questions raised about racial exclusion of jurors during the Aug. 28 hearing needs to be fully examined, he said.

“Just because we are hearing about it a month before an execution date doesn’t mean it is too late,” he said.

Fischer, in the introduction to the opinion, notes that there has been nearly 25 years of court battles over Williams’ guilt.

“Despite nearly a quarter century of litigation in both state and federal courts,” Fischer wrote, “there is no credible evidence of actual innocence or any showing of a constitutional error undermining confidence in the original judgment.”

(Aristide Economopoulos for New Jersey Monitor).

The deadliest school shooting in Georgia history occurred earlier this month when a 14-year-old gunman, armed with a military-style rifle, killed two students and two teachers and injured nine others at Apalachee High School in Winder, a city about an hour northeast of Atlanta.

And on Sunday, former President Donald Trump was the target of what the FBI described as an apparent assassination attempt at his golf club in West Palm Beach, Florida — just nine weeks after surviving another attempt on his life.

Gun policy has been a topic of debate in America for decades, and its prominence has increased as gun-related deaths and mass shootings have risen nearly every year since 2014, according to the Gun Violence Archive, a nonprofit that tracks gun violence in the United States.

Many Americans despair of ever taming the epidemic, but a new report says certain laws can make a difference.

The report, published in July by Rand, a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization, found that minimum age requirements for purchasing firearms appear to reduce suicides among young people. Additionally, it indicated that laws aimed at reducing children’s access to stored guns may also lower rates of firearm suicides, unintentional shootings and firearm homicides among youth.

This is the fourth time that Rand has released the report, “The Science of Gun Policy,” since 2018. Earlier editions examined the effectiveness of other gun regulations, such as background checks and concealed carry laws, and their impact on outcomes such as crime and suicide.

The “Science of Gun Policy” report examines laws individually. But a separate Rand study published in July, this one in the peer-reviewed journal JAMA Network Open, explores the combined effects of multiple state-level gun laws, including background checks, minimum age requirements, waiting periods, child access restrictions, concealed carry and stand your ground laws.

“We should try to be looking at policies jointly, because individually, each one may have a small effect, but if you start layering these restrictions on each other, they may start to really make a difference,” Terry Schell, the study’s lead author and a senior behavioral scientist at Rand, told Stateline. “That is worth thinking about.”

The study found that states with the most restrictive gun policies had a 20% lower firearm mortality rate compared with states with the most permissive laws, suggesting that comprehensive policy approaches may be more effective than individual policies in curbing gun violence.

“There should be some hope that there is a policy combination that could drive the firearm death rate down,” Schell said.

A deadly year so far

The Georgia school shooting marked the 30th mass killing in the United States this year, defined as an attack in which four or more people, excluding the perpetrator, are killed, according to a database maintained by The Associated Press, USA Today and Northeastern University. At least 131 people have died in these killings so far.

Mass shootings that occur close to election seasons often have a significant impact on the public’s perception of guns, according to gun policy experts. But much of the discussion and debate surrounding firearms has been clouded by partisan rhetoric and money, said Warren Eller, an associate professor of public management at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice.

“[Gun policy is] going to play a larger role, at least in the dialogue around it –– whether or not it’s meaningful dialogue, I think, is something very different,” Eller said in a phone interview with Stateline.

This year, more than a dozen states enacted a variety of new gun laws, including measures related to storage requirements, gun-free zones, bans on firearm purchase tracking and permitless carry.

Following the deadly shooting at Apalachee High School, both Republican and Democratic Georgia state lawmakers have proposed various measures to curb gun violence.

Georgia’s House speaker, Republican Rep. Jon Burns, wrote in a letter to the House Republican Caucus that lawmakers will consider new policies during the 2025 legislative session to promote student mental health, evaluate technologies to detect guns and encourage safe gun storage.

“While House Republicans have already made significant investments to strengthen security in our schools, increase access to mental healthcare, and keep our students safe, I am committed to not only continuing this work but pursuing additional policies to help ensure a tragedy like this never happens in our state again,” Burns wrote in the letter.

Burns’ proposals, however, fall short of Democratic demands for measures such as universal background checks and a red flag law, which would allow police or loved ones to petition a court to prevent an at-risk individual from purchasing or possessing a firearm.

In February, the Georgia House approved a bill to create a state income tax credit of up to $300 for purchasing gun safes, trigger locks, other security devices or instructional courses on safe firearm handling. This bill did not advance past the Senate, but a similar Senate bill that exempts gun safes and other safety devices from state sales tax went into effect in July.

Two other gun-related bills also took effect in July. The first law bans firearm purchase tracking, while the second law established a tax holiday for guns and related items.

A special panel of Georgia state senators also convened several times this year to explore potential laws aimed at safely locking up firearms and keeping them out of the hands of children.

Pushback against gun measures

The National Shooting Sports Foundation, which represents much of the national firearm industry, argues that universal background checks are ineffective and that they don’t keep firearms from reaching criminals. The foundation also contends that universal background checks would require a national registry of gun owners, which they fear could lead to confiscation.

Many of the existing red flag laws, the group argues, lack sufficient due process protections. The group encourages safe firearm storage but opposes laws mandating specific storage requirements, citing a U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the justices ruled that trigger locks, which render firearms nonfunctional, violate the Second Amendment.

Above all, the group advocates for stricter enforcement of existing laws and emphasizes that mental health should be a primary focus in addressing gun violence.

“We can’t have no-bail policies. We can’t have ‘defund the police.’ … We need to hold people accountable for their criminal actions,” Lawrence Keane, the organization’s senior vice president and general counsel, said in an interview with Stateline. “We believe that a lot of these high-profile, tragic incidents are at bottom about mental health.”

Mental health is often cited as a major factor contributing to gun violence. Although it may play a significant role, aligning specific mental health diagnoses with policy solutions is difficult, according to Eller, of the John Jay College of Criminal Justice.

Much of the gun violence in the United States stems from economic crime, Eller said in the interview, but many policy discussions focus narrowly on school shootings and assault weapons. Those issues should be addressed, he said, but they represent a small percentage of gun violence in this country.

Since 1982, there have been at least 24 mass shootings in U.S. schools, defined as incidents in which four or more people are killed, according to a database maintained by Mother Jones, a nonprofit news magazine. These school shootings account for about 16% of the 151 mass shootings that have occurred in the U.S. during this period.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org. Follow Stateline on Facebook and X.

Tammy Reed, center, is suing the Missouri Department of Corrections for wrongful death of her son, Brandon Pace, at Tipton Correctional Center. In January, she was joined by Tina Burger, left, and her daughter, Bethany Pace, at a memorial service for the 382 Missourians who died in department custody in 2021, 2022 and 2023 (Rudi Keller/Missouri Independent).

Missouri corrections officers drenched an inmate with pepper spray and ignored his pleas for help for four hours, responding only when his screaming stopped as he died in the Tipton Correctional Center, a federal lawsuit filed this month alleges.

The events that led to Brandon Pace’s death on April 7, 2023, began when correctional officers intervened in an altercation between Pace and another inmate, according to the lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. 

Both men were taken into administrative segregation in restraints.

When Pace refused to give up what corrections officers believed to be methamphetamine, the lawsuit states, they put him in a holding cell and ordered him to strip for a search. When he refused, the officers called the Correctional Emergency Response Team, a unit used in cases where use of force may be required to deal with an inmate who will not comply with officer instructions.

An officer from the team used a fire extinguisher-sized can of pepper spray, a type usually used for riot situations, to subdue Pace.

The officers “took the MK-46 canister of OC and sprayed Mr. Pace with an excessive dose of the chemical agent at close range while Mr. Pace was in a confined space and, based upon information and belief, Mr. Pace’s hands were restrained behind his back and his legs shackled,” the lawsuit filed on behalf of Pace’s mother, Tammy Reed, states. “Mr. Pace began screaming in pain, gasping for air, and saying ‘I can’t breathe.’ He kept saying, ‘Help me, I can’t breathe,’ over and over.”

The lawsuit names former department Director Anne Precythe, current acting director Trevor Foley, three deputy directors, the department’s general counsel, former Tipton warden Brock Van Loo, medical care contractor Centurion Health, 12 corrections officers and a nurse as defendants.

The 11 counts in the lawsuit seek damages for wrongful death, civil rights violations and Missouri Sunshine Law violations for refusing to turn over any of the records, including video recordings, of the events prior to Pace’s death.

The lawsuit relies on statements from other men, held in nearby cells, for many of the allegations.

“The Department of Corrections is duty-bound to protect those individuals like Brandon Pace, who are in state custody,” said Lynn Ellenberger, one of Reed’s attorneys . “They’re obligated to provide for his well being and for his care, and in this case, that was not done.”

The department does not comment on pending litigation, Foley said last week.

Other death cases

The lawsuit is the latest in a string of cases filed this year related to inmate deaths. Despite a one-third reduction in the number of men and women being held by the department over the past decade, inmate deaths are at record levels.

In June, four former correctional officers were charged with assault and murder and a fifth was charged with involuntary manslaughter for the December death of Othel Moore while he was incarcerated at the Jefferson City Correctional Center.

Moore, 38, was pepper-sprayed in the face multiple times, had his face improperly covered by a hood that blocked his nose and mouth and was left unattended in a cell for more than 30 minutes, according to documents filed in the criminal case.

The charges against one of the corrections officers have been dropped and the remaining defendants were charged with assault and second-degree murder in September by the Cole County Grand Jury. An arraignment is scheduled for Oct. 16.

Missouri corrections officers charged with murder in death of inmate in restraints

The criminal charges came after four officers were fired in March and the warden at the Jefferson City prison was fired in June.

“We take seriously our responsibility for creating the safest environment possible and will not tolerate behaviors or conditions that endanger the wellbeing of Missourians working or living in our facilities,” the corrections department said in a statement issued after the charges were filed. “The department has begun implementing body-worn cameras in restrictive-housing units at maximum-security facilities, starting with Jefferson City Correctional Center, to bolster both security and accountability.”

The family of Othel Moore began publicly agitating for release of records, including video showing the actions of the officers, in the weeks following his Dec. 8 death. The case was investigated by the Cole County Sheriff’s office.

No outside agency has investigated Pace’s death, said Tom Porto, an attorney working with Pace’s family. 

“That’s not going to be done until the facts are brought to light,” Porto said. “There’s not going to be an investigation from the police, from the prosecutor’s office, from the Attorney General’s Office, until you smack them with the facts right in their face.”

Tony Wheatley, Moniteau County sheriff, said in an interview Wednesday that he has not received a complaint from the family about Pace’s death and he has not been asked to investigate by the department. His office has the necessary resources and no conflicts that would prevent him from investigating.

“What really upsets me is, and this happens all the time, is everybody wants to blame the local sheriff’s office because they didn’t do anything,” Wheatley said.

The only way he can act is if he gets a call, Wheatley said.

“I have not once heard from the family, I have not once heard from the state, I have not heard from anybody on this,” Wheatley said.

If Reed or her attorneys send him the complaint, Wheatley said, he will read it and evaluate whether it warrants further action.

The mother of another man who died in custody, Willa Hynes, won a $60,000 judgment against the department for withholding records in the death of her son Jahi, who died April 4, 2021, at the Southeast Missouri Correctional Center in Charleston.

Jahi Hynes, who was 27, was serving a 13-year sentence for first degree robbery when he hanged himself with a bedsheet while in solitary confinement.

On April 1, Willa Hynes filed a wrongful death lawsuit accusing the department, Centurion Health and 11 corrections employees of negligence in allowing her son to possess the bedsheet and failing to conduct required checks on inmates in administrative segregation.

A hearing is set for Monday in Charleston on a motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

‘The car that hit him’

Pace’s death was one of 134 among people being held by the Department of Corrections in 2023. This year, with 96 deaths through Aug. 31, could exceed the record 136 deaths in 2022.

Only eight of the inmate deaths over the three years were executions of men sentenced for capital crimes. 

“My main concern being an organizer and an advocate is to make sure this information is publicized,” said Michelle Smith, director of the Missouri Justice Coalition, who compiles data on inmate deaths.

Smith, who in January led a memorial service for the deceased inmates at the Missouri Capitol Building, said most elected officials have yet to take the problem seriously.

Memorial service seeks answers on rapid increase in Missouri inmate deaths

“They think that I and other people are just being hyperbolic and exaggerating the issues at the Department of Corrections,” she said. “We need legislation, we need transparency, we need accountability at DOC.”

In his opinion in the Hynes case alleging Sunshine Law violations, Western District Court of Appeals Judge Edward Ardini wrote that the department deliberately withheld public records, including video recordings and a death investigation report, to hinder her wrongful death lawsuit.

The department argued unsuccessfully that the material was inmate medical records protected from disclosure even to the family of an inmate. 

The same violations are occurring in the case of Pace, his mother’s lawsuit alleges. Reed, who is a former corrections officer, asked for all the video from that day that shows officers with her son. The video recordings being withheld include one recorded by a member of the emergency response team of the pepper spray being used on Pace.

Pace was autopsied two weeks after his death by the Boone/Callaway Medical Examiner’s Office and the toxicology tests showed methamphetamine and Narcan, used by officers as they tried to revive him. The report says Van Loo told the medical examiner’s office he investigated Pace’s death personally and that video showed Pace swallowing the methamphetamine.

“Plaintiff has been denied all video evidence of the events that occurred that day – including the video defendant Van Loo says exists – despite lawful requests for such evidence,” the lawsuit states.

The autopsy report lists the cause of death as accidental due to methamphetamine intoxication, the court filing states.

The lawsuit accuses Van Loo of lying to the medical examiner’s office by stating Pace was taken to a medical unit after he was seen ingesting the unknown substance, and that there was an emergency response in an attempt to revive him when he stopped breathing while in the unit.

Based on statements of other inmates in nearby cells, the lawsuit alleges “other inmates at Tipton were charged with spurious infractions because they said things such as ‘Rest in Pace’ or otherwise referred to Mr. Pace’s death,” the lawsuit states. “The correctional officer defendants did this to instill fear in the inmates to stop them from speaking about the brutality and callousness that led to Mr. Pace’s death.”

In the recitation of events after Pace was doused with pepper spray, the lawsuit alleges the corrections officers joked about his agony. When corrections officer Billie Webb told another officer, Randy Witt, that Pace was “saying he can’t breathe,” Witt allegedly responded, “I don’t give a f**k.”

A nurse “talked and laughed” with another corrections officer stationed outside the cell where Pace was held but never entered the cell to check on Pace. She only did so at the urging of inmates after Pace had stopped crying out for help.

“Defendant (Terry) Payne said to other correctional officers present words to the effect of, ‘make sure you get the restraints off of him before the ambulance arrives,’ in an attempt to cover-up that Mr. Pace was restrained when he suffered and died,” the lawsuit states.

The degrading comments about Pace by corrections officers did not stop when he died, the lawsuit alleges.

“An inmate in administrative segregation said to Defendant (Earl) Roach, ‘they killed that guy,” referring to Brandon Pace,” the filing states. “Defendant Roach responded, ‘we didn’t kill him. He was kinda like a dog that ran out on the street, and we were just the car that hit him.”

Fulton Reception and Diagnostic Center is one of a handful of Missouri prisons that is not fully air conditioned. Funding was approved to install air conditioning in 2023, but it will take years for the project to be completed (Meg Cunningham/The Beacon).

Missouri lawmakers took a step toward improving conditions in some Missouri prisons last year by setting aside millions to install air conditioning in one of the state’s 17 prisons. That cooler air is still a year and a half away.

That decision came as global temperatures broke summertime heat records. Prisoner rights advocates celebrated the state’s decision to install air conditioning at the Fulton Reception and Diagnostic Center, one of Missouri’s intake correctional facilities.

The Department of Corrections estimates that they’ll be responsible for housing over 20,000 men and women throughout the course of 2024. Of those, up to 9,200 could live in prisons where there is partial or no access to air conditioning in housing units. And as Missouri closes out its third-hottest summer on record, the calls to fully air condition Missouri prisons grow louder.

Those living in the prisons contend the hotter summers make conditions inhumane.

It’s a trend that worries prison reform advocates in Missouri.

“We are extremely concerned about DOC’s ability to cope with what continue to be record-breaking temperatures of extreme heat in Missouri this summer,” said Shubra Ohri, senior counsel at the MacArthur Justice Center.

Of the 17 Missouri prisons, 10 are fully air conditioned. Four have partial access to air conditioning in some administrative areas and some housing units.

The remaining three facilities do not have air conditioning in housing units, mostly because there are no air ducts, the department says.

Missouri lawmakers have taken note. In the state’s 2024 budget, they allocated $14.3 million to install air conditioning at Fulton. The building opened in 1987 and has a capacity for 1,255 men.

It’s commonplace for U.S. prisons to have only partial air conditioning. Many prisons across the country only air condition areas like medical units, visitors’ areas or staff cafeterias.

Last summer, the Department of Corrections responded to complaints of heat inside the Fulton facility with the promise of air conditioning. But the project, which department spokesperson Karen Pojmann called extensive and complicated, won’t be complete until January 2026.

The installation of air conditioning is still in the pre-design phase, budget documents show.

The DOC has alternate ways to cool down prisoners in places without air conditioning. They distribute ice three times a day and offer water and cool showers. Inmates also can purchase fans from the commissary for about $20.

But inmates say those measures fall short. Ice can melt quickly and distribution can be contingent on the amount of staff available, said one inmate at Ozark Correctional Center, which does not have air conditioning.

Fans are available to purchase from the commissary if inmates can afford them outright. Or, inmates can get on a “fan plan” where they pay a few dollars a month to pay off the purchase.

It’s one of the few interventions available. But research shows that at temperatures above 99 degrees, fans can cause more harm than good.

Blowing air that is hotter than the average body temperature can increase sweat evaporation and make it easier for people to fall into a heat-related medical incident, like heat exhaustion or heatstroke, the Environmental Protection Agency found. The agency discourages fans from being used in those instances.

The same problem comes with using misters. In hot and humid conditions, misters can subtract from the body’s ability to use sweat to cool itself.

The difficulty of keeping cool in Missouri prisons

Prisons are particularly difficult to cool, according to Cascade Tuholske, a researcher at Montana State University who co-authored a study about temperatures in U.S. prisons.

They are often built where land prices are low and weather conditions aren’t ideal, Tuholske said. They often lack air flow and are built out of materials, like concrete, that tend to absorb heat, making it more difficult to cool the inside.

From 1982 to 2020, his research found that jails and prisons were exposed to an average of 5.5 more days per year where the wet bulb globe temperature — which accounts for temperature, humidity, wind speed and other factors — exceeds 82.4 degrees Fahrenheit.

It is difficult to track what medical incidences are related to heat in prisons, said Julie Skarha, a epidemiologist at Brown University who has studied heat-related medical events in Texas prisons. Other health conditions make it difficult to attribute a death or medical event to just one cause, but her research found that deaths rise in prisons without air conditioning.

“It’s never a perfect measurement, but I still see an increased risk of deaths in prisons without air conditioning,” Skarha said. “Even if I am using an estimate of what the temperature someone was actually exposed to. And so I think it’s probably an underestimate in a lot of ways.”

High temperatures can present a risk for people with underlying health conditions or those who are elderly, research shows. And those groups tend to be overrepresented in the nation’s prison population.

DOC statistics show that just over 24% of the state’s inmate population was over 50. The percentage of people over 50 in Missouri prisons has increased 6% from 2014 to 2023.

Age is a data point that stands out in Skarha’s research.

“The risk of dying on a very hot day increases with age,” Skarha said. “And then I also find a delayed effect with suicide. After a really an extreme heat day, suicides increase about two days later, and they increase by 20%.”

Taking psychotropic medications can impact the body’s ability to regulate temperatures in extreme weather. It’s a trend in especially hot states for inmates to occasionally quit taking their medications during periods of extreme heat, which can lead to an increase in suicide attempts.

The head of the union that represents correctional officers in Texas noted in a 2018 report that suicide attempts rose in the summer months as prisoners tried to avoid heat-related illness by pausing their medications.

Last summer, Texas prisons reported 35 employees who had heat-related incidents, but only 14 among prisoners. The Texas Department of Criminal Justice has paid out over $500,000 in workers’ compensation claims to employees for heat-related illnesses since 2006.

This article first appeared on Beacon: Missouri and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

The U.S. Department of Justice filed the lawsuit challenging the Second Amendment Preservation Act, arguing it has undermined federal drug and weapons investigations (Getty Images).

A Missouri law declaring some federal gun regulations “invalid” is unconstitutional because it violates the U.S. Constitution’s supremacy clause, a federal appeals court in St. Louis unanimously ruled on Monday. 

A three-judge panel of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a district court ruling from last year that blocked Missouri from enforcing the Second Amendment Preservation Act, a law passed in 2021 that penalizes police for enforcing certain federal gun laws.

Among the law’s provisions is a $50,000 fine for law enforcement agencies that“infringe” on Missourians’ Second Amendment rights.

Some of the gun regulations deemed invalid by the law include imposing certain taxes on firearms, requiring gun owners to register their weapons and laws prohibiting “law-abiding” residents from possessing or transferring their guns.

“Because the (Second Amendment Preservation) Act purports to invalidate federal law in violation of the Supremacy Clause, we affirm the (district court’s) judgment,” Chief Judge Steven Colloton, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote in the unanimous opinion. 

The U.S. Department of Justice filed the lawsuit challenging the law arguing it has undermined federal drug and weapons investigations. Late last year, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a request by Attorney General Andrew Bailey to allow Missouri to enforce the Second Amendment Preservation Act while its appeal is ongoing.

In a statement through his spokeswoman, Bailey said he is reviewing the decision. He added: “I will always fight for Missourians’ Second Amendment rights.”

Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas released a statement Monday afternoon praising the court’s decision. 

“Two years ago, Missouri enacted an unconstitutional law, claiming to invalidate federal gun laws,” Lucas wrote. “The law was rejected in federal appeals court today… I am saddened that our state expended the time and energy of many in our legal system in service of this clearly unconstitutional effort.”

Missouri's Department of Mental Health building in Jefferson City (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).

The number of people languishing in Missouri jails in need of court-ordered mental health treatment currently stands at 344 — and the wait time for a hospital bed averages one year. 

That’s up from 254 people this time last year, according to Missouri Department of Mental Health data provided to The Independent. A spokeswoman for the department said that because the agency’s inpatient beds are at capacity, the number of people waiting in jails for treatment will continue to rise.

Debra Walker, the department’s spokeswoman, said February was the first month the number of individuals waiting ever exceeded 300.

None of the people on the waitlist have been convicted of a crime. They were arrested, found incompetent to stand trial and ordered by the court into mental health treatment, designed to allow them to stand trial, a process called competency restoration that generally includes therapy and medication. 

“We do want to increase the number of individuals who are getting competency restoration,” said Jeanette Simmons, deputy division director of the Missouri Department of Mental Health’s Division of Behavioral Health, during a mental health commission meeting earlier this month. “We have a growing number of individuals who are waiting for those services.”

Missouri has faced a years-long struggle with this issue, due to increasing numbers of court referrals for competency restoration, staffing issues and limited psychiatric hospital capacity. It’s worsened over the last year.

The legislature appropriated $300 million this year for Department of Mental Health to open a new hospital in Kansas City, but it could be around five years before construction is complete.

State officials are also working to implement the “jail-based competency restoration” program approved by the legislature this year in response to the issue. This year’s budget set aside $2.5 million for the jail-based competency programs to be established in jails in St. Louis, St. Louis County, Jackson County, Clay County and Greene County.

Services in jail-based competency restoration will include room and board, along with medical care for 10 slots at each jail, contracted staff from a local behavioral health organization, and psychiatric care from “mobile team practitioners.”

The department is currently training two agencies in Kansas City that will be going into county jails to provide jail-based treatment. Clay County has a “tentative go live date” for September, Simmons said.

“So we're really looking forward to that and getting that launched, because we do believe that it's going to take a multifaceted approach to target those numbers,” she said.

Simmons said the agency has mobile teams of doctors going into county jails prescribing medications “to try and get folks started on those medications that they need to stabilize their mental illness.” The department is working with community behavioral health liaisons as well as jail mental health or medical staff, she said, to get people services.

The Department of Mental Health is also working on trying to get information to the courts about outpatient restoration, for those who can be safely treated in the community and don't require hospital-level care. A law passed this year gives the agency the authority to treat certain arrested people on an outpatient basis.

“Sometimes I think the courts don’t really consider that as an option,” Simmons said of outpatient treatment. “It’s something very new.”

In other states, including some bordering Missouri, lawsuits have been filed over similar wait times, alleging they violate individuals’ rights to due process and the Americans with Disabilities Act.

A federal lawsuit filed last year in Oklahoma alleged jails are holding patients for three months to one year. A proposed settlement set a benchmark of a 60 day maximum wait and ultimately a goal of 21 days, but it has faced opposition from the governor.

A lawsuit filed in Kansas in 2022 alleged that individuals are detained for longer waiting for a psychiatric bed than they would be if they had been convicted. Many of the charges are for low-level crimes, national investigations have found.

County sheriffs and jail administrators in Missouri have raised the alarm about challenges caring for individuals who are being detained pretrial. And state officials have acknowledged the long waits contribute to mental deterioration.

The Missouri Sheriffs’ Association recently published an issue of their ‘Missouri Jails’ magazine focused on managing mental health challenges in county jails, which shared several examples of local issues, including that one county spent $30,000 to provide around-the-clock guarding over a suspect for two months, because the secure medical centers didn’t have any openings.

Some county sheriffs are looking to build or expand jails to combat the issue, according to the magazine, including by increasing the number of solitary cells to keep those with mental health diagnoses out of the general population. Others have contracted with private health provider Turn Key Health Clinics to provide increased mental health care while people are awaiting transfer. 

“As mental health professionals and legislators struggle to find solutions to the crisis,” magazine contributor Michael Feeback wrote, “sheriffs and other agencies are looking for answers on their own.” 

Ten of 24 people injured by bullets at the Kansas City Chiefs Super Bowl parade were under 18 years old. Countless more children experienced the trauma firsthand. Gabriella Magers-Darger (left) was burned by sparks from a ricocheted bullet. Samuel Arellano was shot in the side (Christopher Smith for KFF Health News).

Six months after Gabriella Magers-Darger’s legs were burned by sparks from a ricocheted bullet at the Kansas City Chiefs Super Bowl parade in February, the 14-year-old is ready to leave the past behind.

She is dreading the pitfalls of being a high school freshman, even as she looks forward to being back with friends and at color guard, dance, and volleyball. She might even join the wrestling team to get some respect at school.

But the past remains ever present.

At a July Fourth gathering, a family friend brought noise-canceling headphones in case the fireworks became too much. Earlier in the summer Gabriella had a hard time viewing a relative’s gun collection, the handguns in particular. And she hyperventilated when she saw a family friend’s finger after it was sliced by accident — the sight of blood reminds her of seeing a fatally wounded Lisa Lopez-Galvan minutes after she was shot outside Union Station, the only person killed that day.

Her mom, Bridget Barton, said Gabriella has had a chip on her shoulder since the parade.

“She’s lost some softness to her, some gentleness to her,” Barton said.

Children are particularly vulnerable to the stresses of gun violence, and 10 of 24 people injured by bullets at the Feb. 14 parade were under 18 years old. Countless more children like Gabriella experienced the trauma firsthand. They’ve endured fear, anger, sleep problems, and hypersensitivity to crowds and noises.

A 15-year-old girl who was shot through the jaw and shoulder effectively dropped out of school for a time and daily panic attacks kept her from summer school, too. An 11-year-old boy shot in the side described feeling angry at school for reasons he couldn’t explain. A 5-year-old girl who was on her father’s shoulders when he was hit by gunfire panics each time her dad feels sick, fearing he has been shot again.

“She’s not the same kid. I mean, she’s definitely not,” said Erika Nelson, mother of the 15-year-old, Mireya, who has scars on her jaw and face. “You never know when she’s going to snap. You never know. You might say something or someone might bring up something that reminds her of that day.”

Guns overtook motor vehicle accidents as the leading cause of death for children in 2020, but a far higher number of kids are hit by gunfire and survive. Research suggests that kids sustain nonfatal firearm injuries anywhere from two to four times more often than they are killed by guns.

Scientists say the long-term effects of gun violence on kids are little researched and poorly understood. But the harm is pervasive. Harvard and Massachusetts General Hospital researchers found that during the first year after a firearm injury, child survivors experienced a 117% increase in pain disorders, a 68% increase in psychiatric disorders, and a 144% increase in substance use disorders. The mental health effects spill over — to mothers, fathers, siblings.

For many affected by the shooting in Kansas City, Missouri, the triggers began right away.

‘I get mad easily’

Just 10 days after Samuel Arellano was shot at the parade, he attended another big sporting event.

Samuel was invited to attend a University of Kansas men’s basketball game at Allen Fieldhouse in Lawrence. During a break in the game, with a video camera pointed at Samuel and his parents, former KU star Jalen Wilson appeared on the scoreboard and addressed him directly.

“I heard about your story,” Wilson, who now plays in the NBA, said on the big screen. “I’m so very thankful that you are here today and it is a blessing that we can have you to give you the love and support you truly deserve.”

Wilson asked the 16,000 fans in attendance to stand and give Samuel a round of applause. As the crowd clapped and an announcer bellowed about him being a “brave young man,” Samuel looked at his parents, then down at his feet, smiling shyly.

But minutes later when the game resumed, Samuel started to cry and had to leave the auditorium with his mom, Abigail.

“When it got pretty loud, that’s when he started breaking up again,” his dad, Antonio, said. “So she had to step out with him for a minute. So any loud places, if it’s too loud, it’s affecting him.”

Samuel, who turned 11 in March, was shot in the ribs on his right side. The scar on his back is barely noticeable now, but lingering effects from the parade shooting are obvious. He is seeing a therapist — as is his father, though Abigail has had a tough time finding a Spanish-speaking one and still hasn’t had an appointment.

Samuel had trouble sleeping in the first weeks after the shooting and often crawled in bed with his mom and dad. He used to get good grades, but that became more difficult, Abigail said. His personality has changed, which sometimes has shown up at school.

“I get mad easily,” Samuel said. “I [have] never been like this before but like, if they tell me to sit down, I get mad. I don’t know why.”

Traumatized children often have difficulty expressing emotions and may be given to outbursts of anger, according to Michelle Johnson-Motoyama, a professor of social work at Ohio State University.

“I’m sure for that child there is a sense of tremendous injustice about what happened,” Johnson-Motoyama said.

Especially right after the shooting, Samuel had panic attacks, Antonio said, and he’d break out in a sweat. Therapists told them that was normal. But the parents also kept him off his phone for a while, as there was so much about the shooting on the news and online.

Abigail, who works at a car dealership with Antonio, is anxious about seeing her son change, his suffering and sadness. She is also concerned for her three daughters, a 16-year-old and 13-year-old twins. Her father, Victor Salas, who was with Samuel at the parade, was also reeling in its aftermath.

“I’m crying and crying and crying about what happened,” Salas said in Spanish four days after the parade. “Because it was chaos. It doesn’t mean that families don’t love their family, but everyone took off to save their own lives. I saved my grandchildren’s lives, but what happens to the rest of the people? We’re not prepared.”

On the good side, Samuel felt very supported by the community in Kansas City, Kansas. Many people from his school stopped by in the first few days to visit, including friends and even a former bus driver, who was in tears. He has a “room full of candy,” Abigail said, mostly Skittles, his favorite.

An autographed football from Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes arrived on his birthday. It made him cry, his father said, which happens pretty often.

“There are good and bad days, days that are more normal and easier, and then there are days where the family has to be a little bit more aware and supportive,” Abigail said in Spanish. “He’s always been outgoing and talkative like his mom, but that has changed since the parade.”

Fourth of July a weeklong trigger

The Fourth of July was particularly harrowing for many of the young survivors and their families. Should they buy fireworks? Will they want to celebrate? And why do all the firecrackers going off in the neighborhood sound like gunshots?

Fourteen-year-old Gabriella needed help from her stepfather, Jason Barton, to light her fireworks this year, something she is ordinarily enthusiastic about doing herself. At the parade, like many people, the Barton family initially mistook the sound of gunfire for fireworks.

And Erika Nelson, a single mom in Belton, Missouri, feared even bringing up the holiday with Mireya, who has always loved Independence Day. Eventually Mireya said she didn’t want any big fireworks this year and wanted only her mom to set theirs off.

“Just any little trigger — I mean, it could be a light crackle — and she just clenched,” Erika Nelson said.

Patty Davis, a program manager for trauma-informed care at Children’s Mercy hospital in Kansas City, said even her clients who were at the parade but were not injured still flinch at the sounds of sirens or other loud noises. It’s a powerful response to gun violence, she said.

“So not just an accidental trauma,” she said, “but a trauma that was perpetrated for violent purposes, which can cause an increased level of anxiety for persons around that to wonder if it’s going to happen again. And how safe are they?”

Reliving getting shot

Random sounds, bright lights, and crowds can catch the kids and their parents off guard. In June, Mireya Nelson was waiting for her older sister after a dance recital, hoping to see a boy she knew give a flower to a girl everyone said he had a crush on. Her mom wanted to go, but Mireya shushed her.

“Then all of a sudden, there was a loud boom,” Erika said. “She dropped low to the ground. And then she jumped back up. She goes, ‘Oh my God, I was getting shot again!’”

Mireya said it so loudly people were staring, so it was Erika’s turn to shush her and try to soothe her.

“I was like, ‘Mireya, it’s OK. You’re all right. They dropped a table. They’re just moving stuff out. It was an accident,’” Erika said.

It took a few minutes for the shock to wear off and Mireya later giggled about it, but Erika is always on watch.

Her daughter’s early sadness — she watched movies for hours, crying throughout — has since changed to a cheekiness. Half a year later, Mireya will joke about the shooting, which tears her mother up. But maybe that is part of the healing process, Erika says.

Before the Fourth of July, Mireya went to Worlds of Fun, a large amusement park, and had a good time. She felt OK because there were security guards everywhere. She also enjoyed a visit to the local FBI office with a friend who was with her the day of the shooting. But when someone suggested a trip to the ballet, Mireya squashed it quickly — it’s near Union Station, the site of the shooting. She doesn’t want to go downtown anymore.

Erika said the doctor appointments and financial strains have been a lot to juggle and that her biggest frustration as a parent is that she’s not able to fix things for her daughter.

“They have to go their own way, their own process of healing. I can’t shake her, like, ‘Get back to yourself,’” Erika said. “It could take months, years. Who knows? It could be the rest of her life. But I hope that she can overcome a little bit of it.”

Goose bumps in the sweltering heat

James Lemons noticed a change in his 5-year-old daughter, Kensley, who was on his shoulders when he was shot at the parade. Before the shooting Kensley was outgoing and engaged, James said, but now she is withdrawn, like she has closed off her bubble and disconnected from people.

Large crowds and police officers remind Kensley of the parade. Both were present at a high school graduation the family attended this summer, prompting Kensley to ask repeatedly to leave. James took her to an empty football field, where, he said, she broke out in goose bumps and complained of being cold despite the sweltering heat.

Bedtime is a particular problem for the Lemons family. Kensley has been sleeping with her parents. Another child, 10-year-old Jaxson, has had bad dreams. One night, he dreamt that the shooter was coming near his dad and he tripped him, said Brandie Lemons, Jaxson’s stepmom.

Younger children like Kensley exposed to gun violence are more likely to develop post-traumatic stress disorder than older children, according to Ohio State’s Johnson-Motoyama.

Davis, of Children’s Mercy in Kansas City, said children whose brains are not fully developed can have a hard time sleeping and understanding that they are safe in their homes at night.

James got the family a new puppy — an American bulldog that already weighs 32 pounds — to help them feel protected.

“I looked up the pedigree,” he said, “They’re real protective. They’re real loving.”

Searching for an outlet to let off steam

Gabriella took up boxing after the shooting. Her mother, Bridget, said it restored some of her confidence and control that dimmed after the parade.

“I like beating people up — not in a mean way, I swear,” Gabriella said in April as she molded a mouthguard to her teeth before leaving for training.

She has since stopped boxing, however, so the money can instead go toward a trip to Puerto Rico with her Spanish class. They’re paying $153 a month for 21 months to cover the trip. Boxing classes were $60 a month.

Bridget thought boxing was a good outlet for leftover anger, but by the end of July Gabriella wasn’t sure if she still had the drive to fight back that way.

“The past is the past but we’re still gonna all, like, go through stuff. Does that make sense?” Gabriella asked.

“You’re mostly OK but you still have triggers. Is that what you mean?” her mother asked.

“Yeah,” she replied.

After the shooting, Mireya Nelson tried online classes, which didn’t work well. The first few days of summer school, Mireya had a panic attack every day in the car and her mother took her home.

Mireya wants to return to high school this fall, and Erika is wary.

“You know, if I do go back to school, there’s a chance at school of being shot, because most schools nowadays get shot up,” Erika recalled her daughter saying. “And I’m like, ‘Well, we can’t think like that. You never know what’s gonna happen.’”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump attends a pre-trial hearing at Manhattan Criminal Court on Feb. 15, 2024, in New York City. Trump was charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records last year, which prosecutors say was an effort to hide a potential sex scandal, both before and after the 2016 presidential election (Brendan McDermid-Pool/Getty Images).

WASHINGTON — Special counsel Jack Smith was granted more time on Friday before having to give an outline on the next steps his office is taking in the 2020 election interference case against former President Donald Trump, the GOP presidential nominee.

The delay pushes the case proceedings further into the thick of the presidential race, as Trump vies for the Oval Office against Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee.

The D.C. case is one of several legal hurdles facing the former president, who became a convicted felon in May.

Last week, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan ordered both parties to submit a joint status report that proposes “a schedule for pretrial proceedings moving forward” by Aug. 9 and set a pretrial meeting for Aug. 16 to determine how the case should proceed.

But on Thursday, prosecutors asked to have until Aug. 30 to file another joint status report and to delay the status conference hearing until next month.

Chutkan granted that request on Friday and pushed back the pretrial meeting to Sept. 5.

Prosecutors asked for this delay to further examine the U.S. Supreme Court ruling last month, which found that presidents are granted full immunity from criminal charges for any official “core constitutional” acts, though they have no immunity for any unofficial acts.

In the report, prosecutors wrote that “the Government continues to assess the new precedent set forth last month in the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. United States, including through consultation with other Department of Justice components.”

“Although those consultations are well underway, the Government has not finalized its position on the most appropriate schedule for the parties to brief issues related to the decision,” Smith’s office wrote.

“The Government therefore respectfully requests additional time to provide the Court with an informed proposal regarding the schedule for pretrial proceedings moving forward,” they added.

Lawyers for Trump did not object to the prosecutors’ Thursday extension request.

Rejection of immunity claim

The election subversion case was on pause for months while the former president’s immunity claim played out in the courts. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unanimously rejected Trump’s immunity claim back in February, prompting the former president to take the presidential immunity fight to the nation’s highest court.

But the July 1 Supreme Court ruling forced prosecutors to reexamine how they want the election subversion case to go forward.

Chutkan is now tasked with determining whether Trump’s alleged conduct regarding the 2020 election results constitutes “official” presidential acts.

Trump was indicted in August 2023 on four counts relating to his alleged role in trying to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

He was charged with conspiracy to defraud the U.S.; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; obstruction of, and attempt to obstruct, an official proceeding; and conspiracy against rights.

The former president has pleaded not guilty to all the charges and has denied wrongdoing.

Meanwhile, the former president was found guilty in a New York court in May on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. His sentencing was originally scheduled for mid-July, but has been delayed until at least September following the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling.

Marion County Record editor and publisher Eric Meyer answers questions during a July 25, 2024, interview in his newsroom office. He says he doesn’t know of any other newspaper that has been raided like his, but “crap like this happens” (Grace Hills/Kansas Reflector).

This story is part of a series by Kansas Reflector and The Handbasket to examine the one-year anniversary of the raid on the Marion County Record. Support independent journalism by subscribing to The Handbasket or donating to Kansas Reflector.

MARION, Kan. — Marion County Record editor and publisher Eric Meyer began speaking out about the police raid of his home and office before the officers could even retreat to their celebratory pizza party.

He said it never entered his mind to keep quiet.

“Crap like this happens more often than we hear about,” Meyer said. “I don’t know of anybody else that’s been raided quite the way we were. But there are other similar things that have gone on, other acts of intimidation of one sort or another, that have gone on around the country. And you don’t hear about them because nobody said anything.”

Meyer can afford to take risks. Unlike virtually all other news media, he doesn’t have to worry about his finances — this is a retirement project for him. Other outlets face a different reality. But he sees it as more than work. And there’s a reason he continues to go through the grueling exercise of producing a newspaper.

“It’s still a calling,” he said.

The attack on constitutional freedoms in Marion placed a spotlight on the inherent tension between journalists and the powerful people they hold accountable. And while the sight of American police seizing computers from a newsroom sent shockwaves around the world, and threats to reporting efforts by local officials continue, the Marion County Record and others like it remain resolute in their mission.

Every Friday afternoon at the offices of Harvey County Now, a half-hour southwest of Marion, locals gather around an actual bar in the back — a remnant of a previous business — to shoot the breeze. Though they’re in the news business, Joey and Lindsey Young provide beers and sips to those who come by, and who often bring libations of their own.

“It’s a great way to talk about community issues without people feeling intimidated, because it’s like, none of us are writing it down — which is a shame,” Young joked recently from behind his desk in the storefront office. “But we get good stories, and we talk to people, and people are always more willing to just hang out and talk if they feel relaxed.”

This collegiality is important in contrast to continued skepticism of the media, both locally and nationally. It also creates a personal relationship between the town and the paper, and helps the community see it as an essential part of a functioning society.

In Marion, according to a local pastor, despite the widespread outcry, the raid didn’t change anybody’s opinion of the newspaper.

“I think there’s some people who will tell you what is printed at the Marion County Record is 100% truth, and it’s gospel, and it’s accurate every time,” said Jeremiah Lange, pastor of the Marion Presbyterian Church. “I think there’s other people that would disagree with that.”

In the aftermath of the raid, journalists from across the state began calling Emily Bradbury, executive director of the Kansas Press Association. She said they would ask things like: “I’m looking at my city manager. Are they going to come in and do this?”

Bradbury said nothing surprises her after what happened in Marion. But her main reaction to the raids has been to inform the public about the role journalists play in a healthy democracy, and educating judges on federal and state laws that are supposed to shield journalists from police raids, and making sure outlets are able to put out a paper, even if law enforcement has seized their reporting tools and technology.

The KPA provided news outlets with posters that outline protections for journalists, as well as a legal warning letter that journalists can hand to police if they try to search a newsroom. The idea, according to Bradbury, is to be “optimistic it won’t happen again, but prepared if it does.”

“We’re going to be a lot more prepared moving forward on how we react to those kinds of situations,” Bradbury said. “It’s one of the few bright sides that came out of it.”

But local officials still have other avenues for punishing news outlets.

Kansas law requires cities to publish public notices in a “paper of record,” but some cities have declared the city website to be the paper of record, stripping the local newspaper of advertising revenue from charging for print space. If every city in the state took that action, Bradbury said, half the newspapers in Kansas would disappear overnight. That gives local officials extraordinary leverage over reporters.

Earlier this year, the Wichita City Council pulled its public notices from the Wichita Eagle. Officially, the move was about saving taxpayer money. But Bradbury pointed out the city, while facing a $12 million deficit, saved a mere $150,000. She said the decision was really about “sticking it to the paper.”

Max Kautsch, a First Amendment attorney who operates a hotline for journalists through the KPA, said local officials also punish reporters by refusing to hand over public records or by charging outrageous fees for a records request. The officials know that newspapers in Kansas rarely have the resources to pay for a court battle over the records.

“Taking advantage of the Kansas Open Records Act is a time-honored practice,” Kautsch said.

And few Kansas leaders have been willing to stand up for journalists, even after the state became known as a hub of hostility toward a free press. In the state Legislature, the House speaker this year blocked a resolution that would have declared support for a free press in Kansas — even as the chamber readily passed resolutions supporting Israel, Taiwan and St. Patrick’s Day.

Rep. Mari-Lynn Poskin, a Leawood Democrat, recalled watching the “crazy” story unfold in the days after the raid on the Marion County Record. But she wondered at the time: “Where are the defenders of the free press?”

She drafted a resolution declaring support for the freedom of the press, as guaranteed by the U.S. and Kansas constitutions, and gathered 45 co-sponsors — including 10 Republicans with wide-ranging ideology. She thought it would be “a unifying thing” to start the legislative session this past January. But she was “awestruck” by the response from House Speaker Dan Hawkins, a Wichita Republican.

“He was livid. He said, ‘This is anti-law enforcement.’ And I said, ‘Wow. I am really sorry you feel that way,’ ” Poskin said.

Hawkins’ spokeswoman didn’t respond to a request to comment for this story.

Former Marion County Record reporter Deb Gruver maintains that local and state governments ultimately were unsuccessful in their attempts to silence their critics in the media.

“They didn’t get what they wanted. They thought they were going to get away with it, and they learned very quickly, no, you don’t get away with this,” Gruver said. “And it’s reopened the conversation about the fourth estate and our role.”

The Marion County Record and Harvey County Now continue to churn out a weekly paper, and Young and the KPA have rolled out an online course called “Earn Your Press Pass.” The idea is to give people living in rural areas access to basic knowledge for getting started as a local news reporter, and to create desirable job candidates for outlets in the area.

Over the course of nine months, Lindsey Young, the co-owner of Harvey County Now and a former high school journalism teacher, built the course.

As Joey Young explained, it was made so that the owner of a local outlet could approach someone in town and “be like, ‘Hey, you’ve got kids in school. You live here. Those are all assets to the newspaper that we never thought about previously.’ It’s like, ‘Oh, you’ve got a ton of institutional knowledge. We’ll teach you the journalism stuff.’ ”

At the Marion County Record,  readership has grown from 2,000 to 6,000 subscribers in the year since the police raid of the newspaper office.

Special prosecutors determined no law enforcement officer broke the law by carrying out the chilling raid, but Meyer filed a federal lawsuit seeking damages in excess of $5 million. He said he would prefer to get a verdict rather than settle the case, even if it costs him money, because he wants to set a precedent.

“The whole point of doing this is not to get money,” Meyer said. “The whole point of doing this is to say ‘you can’t do this crap.’ ”

And he still sees a place for his paper: “If we’ve got truth on our side, there are enough people who still believe in truth.”

Gruver put a finer point on it.

“I think that journalists are public servants, except that we don’t get regular raises and sweet, sweet benefits,” she said. “So I feel like there are a lot of winners in this, actually. And I feel like the next generation of journalists will be winners because of this.”

This story was originally published by the Kansas Reflector, a States Newsroom affiliate. 

U.S. attorney Kate Brubacher announces the indictment and reward for Rim Jong Hyok during a July 25, 2024, news conference at the federal courthouse in Kansas City, Kansas. On the right is George Brown, a Department of Justice attorney (Sherman Smith/Kansas Reflector).

KANSAS CITY, Kan. — Federal authorities on Thursday announced the indictment of a North Korea man accused of launching ransomware attacks on hospitals in Kansas and other states, then using the bounty to finance cyber attacks on military bases and defense contractors.

Rim Jong Hyok, a member of North Korea’s military intelligence agency, faces federal charges of conspiracy to hack computers and conspiracy to launder money. Federal authorities are offering up to a $10 million reward for information about Hyok and the cybersecurity attacks.

The FBI’s Kansas City field office led the investigation, which began with a May 2021 ransomware attack against an unnamed Kansas hospital. Hyok’s group, known in the private sector as Andariel, also attacked health care providers in Arkansas, Florida and Colorado, and a health care advocacy group in Connecticut.

The group used the ransom payments to lease virtual private servers that were used to launch attacks on NASA, Randolph Air Force Base in Texas, Robbins Air Force Base in Georgia, and defense companies in California, Michigan, Oregon, Massachusetts, China, Taiwan and South Korea.

In total, the FBI identified 17 victims between May 2021 and March 2023.

“Cybersecurity is critical to the systems and structures that uphold our way of life,” said U.S. attorney Kate Brubacher. “This indictment demonstrates our resolve to use every tool to protect the integrity of American organizations from foreign intrusion.”

Brubacher announced the indictment of Hyok during a news conference at the federal courthouse in Kansas City, Kansas, alongside Stephen Cyrus, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Kansas City field office, and attorneys involved in the case.

Hyok was a member of North Korea’s Reconnaissance General Bureau, a military intelligence agency, and was last known to be living in North Korea.

The group used a previously unseen malware tool called Maui to seize control of the Kansas hospital’s servers and left behind a ransom note that threatened to post “all your files” on the Internet unless a cryptocurrency payment was made.

“Please do not waste your time! You have 48 hours only!” the note said. “After that the Main server will double your price. Let us know if you have any questions.”

The hospital quickly agreed to make the payment, and also contacted the FBI, which began its investigation.

Cyrus said the North Korea group laundered the ransom money it received from hospitals and used the funds to launch attacks on “some of our most sophisticated military weapons systems.”

“Our cyber adversaries use ransomware operations for financial gain, to steal proprietary information from our most advanced tech companies, and disrupt our critical infrastructure,” Cyrus said.

The FBI was able to identify a cryptocurrency account linked to the scheme and recover funds that are in the process of being returned to the victims.

A federal grand jury this week indicted Hyok on the conspiracy charges. The hacking charge would carry a sentence of up to five years, and the money laundering charge would carry a sentence of up to 20 years, according to court records.

The U.S. State Department’s Rewards for Justice program is offering up to $10 million for information leading to the identification of any person, including Hyok, who is acting under the control of a foreign government and engages in malicious cyber activities. Officials said the money is not meant to be a bounty.

“We use every tool in our efforts to fight malware and ransomware attackers, and this is one tool,” said Brubacher, the federal prosecutor. “We are working closely with international partners. And certainly there could be regime change in North Korea. This is one step in pursuing justice against Rim, and borders will not stop us.”

This story was originally published by Kansas Reflector, a States Newsroom affiliate. 

Christopher Dunn was convicted for a 1990 deadly shooting of a teen in St. Louis. Others involved in the case later admitted they lied about Dunn’s involvement. No DNA ever tied Dunn to the murder. A judge also admitted that the lack of evidence is enough to prove Dunn is innocent (photo submitted).

The Missouri Supreme Court on Wednesday blocked the release of Christopher Dunn, days after a St. Louis judge ruled he has been wrongfully incarcerated for 33 years.

Christopher Dunn was convicted for a 1990 deadly shooting of a teen in St. Louis. Others involved in the case later admitted they lied about Dunn’s involvement. No DNA ever tied Dunn to the murder. A judge also admitted that the lack of evidence is enough to prove Dunn is innocent (photo submitted).

Christopher Dunn was wrongfully convicted of murder and assault in 1991, and after 33 years in a Missouri state prison, should be released immediately, St. Louis Circuit Judge Jason Sengheiser ruled Monday afternoon.  

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s office plans to appeal, which would likely block Dunn’s release.

St. Louis Circuit Attorney Gabe Gore asked the court in February to vacate Dunn’s murder conviction in the 1990 fatal shooting of 15-year-old Ricco Rogers.  Gore said the evidence shows Dunn, a 54-year-old St. Louis native serving a life sentence without parole, was innocent of the murder for which he was convicted.

Bailey opposed Gore’s motion, but Sengheiser ruled the St. Louis prosecutor, “made a clear and convincing showing of actual innocence that undermines the basis for Dunn’s convictions, because in light of the new evidence, no juror, acting reasonably, would have voted to find Dunn guilty of these crimes beyond a reasonable doubt.” 

The State of Missouri, Senghauser wrote, “shall immediately discharge Christopher Dunn from its custody.”

Dunn was convicted largely on the testimony of two boys, aged 12 and 14, who later recanted, saying they were coerced by police and prosecutors.

Tricia Rojo Bushnell, executive director of Midwest Innocence Project, which represented Dunn, said no evidence remains to support Dunn’s conviction, “which has kept him wrongly behind bars, away from his loved ones, for more than half of his life.”

“Chris’ case is yet another example of how difficult it is to overturn a wrongful conviction in Missouri, even when the prosecutor supports it,” she said.

At the evidentiary hearing, the attorney general’s office presented “nothing that challenged the body of evidence showing Chris is innocent,” Bushnell said. “The attorney general’s opposition to Chris’ release and to other innocence cases must be addressed and corrected. The office wasted valuable resources and taxpayer money in its effort to keep Chris behind bars.”

A spokeswoman for Bailey declined comment.

This story was updated at 7 p.m. to reflect the attorney general’s appeal. 

Advocates with the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests speak in front of the Missouri Supreme Court Building Wednesday afternoon before delivering a letter to Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).

Survivors of abuse are asking Missouri’s attorney general to proceed with the trial of the co-owner of Circle of Hope Girls Ranch, a now-shuttered boarding school for troubled girls in Cedar County.

Stephanie Householder, who ran the school with her husband Boyd Householder, faces 21 charges of child abuse and neglect alleged by former Circle of Hope students. Her husband had nearly 80 charges, including allegations of sexual abuse. 

But he died of a “cardiac incident,” according to his attorney’s statement published by KCUR.

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey offered Householder a plea deal in 2023 if she would testify against her husband. She rejected the offer.

David Clohessy, Missouri volunteer director for the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, told reporters on Wednesday that he “suspects and fears the attorney general will offer her another plea deal.”

The attorney general’s office told The Independent it has “no pending offers of a plea deal.”

“For me, (a plea deal) is a huge slap in the face,” said Maggie Drew, who lived at Circle of Hope from 2007 to 2013. “That woman never showed mercy to any of us, and I don’t think it should be shown to her now.”

Drew said she broke bones while at Circle of Hope and was told to “walk it off” by Householder.

“I never thought I’d make it,” Drew said.

Survivors delivered a letter to Bailey Wednesday asking him not to extend additional deals. Householder is scheduled for a jury trial in October.

“While the trial will be emotionally very hard for many of us in the short term, in the long run, we are convinced that it will be a powerful deterrent to others who might commit or conceal crimes against children,” Householder’s daughter Amanda wrote in a letter on behalf of a group of survivors.

Clohessy said a trial is important for survivors to “speak their truth” and inform the public beyond what has already been reported.

Adria Keim, who worked at Circle of Hope at the age of 19, said the environment was “manipulative.” Within a month of working at the boarding school, she was left overnight with almost 20 teenage girls to manage, she alleged.

She said the school’s Christian affiliation did not align with the leaders’ actions.

“I know that God absolutely hates what was done at Circle of Hope in his name,” Keim said.

Clohessy wants Bailey to investigate other Christian boarding schools for troubled teens after such schools in Missouri have been forcibly shut down.

He asked Bailey in April to begin proactive investigations, saying the schools lack oversight.

Clohessy wasn’t sure what other state attorneys general have done about reports of abuse at boarding schools and camps, for the problem extends beyond Missouri. But he expects that some states are taking a better look.

“It would be hard to do worse than to do absolutely nothing,” he said.

Before delivering the letter to Bailey, the group packed letters to send to county sheriffs asking for local investigations as well.

“Our goal,” Clohessy said, “is to beg sheriffs and prosecutors to be proactive and investigate the facilities in their counties.”

In a statement, the attorney general’s office explained Bailey only steps into criminal cases when appointed by the governor or local authorities.

“As a former prosecutor, Attorney General Bailey takes crime very seriously,” a spokesperson said. “We have seen a 133% increase in requests from local law enforcement and prosecutors to prosecute cases since Bailey took office.”

This story has been updated to include comment from the office of Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey.

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson in June 2022 holds up a copy of a bill he had just signed to increase the Kansas City Police Department's budget during a ceremony at the department headquarters. (Photo courtesy of the Missouri Governor's Office).

Kansas City officials have another chance next month to fend off an attempt by Missouri lawmakers to force the city to spend more of its revenue on policing. 

But despite opposition from Kansas City leaders and activists, there’s no formal campaign against the ballot initiative, which was previously passed by Missouri voters but later tossed by the Missouri Supreme Court over deceptive ballot language.

Instead, opponents of the proposal will try to get the word out without “gigantic checks,” said Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas.

“But I don’t pretend to think that will necessarily win the day,” Lucas said.

At issue is a question that will appear on Missouri voters’ August 6 primary ballot as “Amendment 4.” It asks whether the Missouri Constitution should be amended to require Kansas City to spend at least one-quarter of its general revenue on policing, an increase of close to $39 million.

Missouri voters previously approved the spending hike with 63% of the vote in 2022. But the measure was unpopular with Kansas Citians. In the Jackson County portion of Kansas City, more than 61% of voters rejected the amendment. It passed in Platte and Clay counties, which include suburban parts of Kansas City.

Lucas sued the state’s auditor and secretary of state, saying a summary printed on voters’ ballots “materially misstated” the cost of the proposal. He prevailed, and the Missouri Supreme Court ordered the election results be tossed out and a new vote be held.

The police funding amendment is one of two questions on Missouri voters’ August primary ballots. The other, passed last year by the Missouri General Assembly and appearing on the ballot as Amendment 1, would exempt child care facilities from paying property taxes in an attempt to “make child care more available” to “support the well-being of children, families, the workforce, and society as a whole.”

“We obviously have a child care facility shortage in our state,” state Sen. Travis Fitzwater said during a hearing on the property tax amendment last year. “We need to provide opportunities for folks that get child care.”

A “yes” vote on Amendment 1 supports amending the Missouri Constitution to allow child care facilities to be exempted from paying property tax. 

On Amendment 4, a “yes” vote supports amending the Missouri Constitution to increase the minimum amount Kansas City must spend on policing from 20% to 25%. A “no” vote would leave Kansas City’s spending obligations at 20%, though city officials could voluntarily spend more.

Police funding campaign

The police funding dispute stems from the Kansas City City Council’s attempt in 2021 to impose some control over the Kansas City Police Department’s Budget.

For more than 80 years, the Kansas City Police Department has been controlled not by the City Council but by a board of commissioners appointed by Missouri’s governor. The only city in the state and one of few in the nation that doesn’t control its police, Kansas City simply provides the funds for the department.

While the city was obligated between 1958 and 2022 to provide the funding requested by the board — up to 20% of the city’s general revenue — it has little control over how it is spent. 

The city has often exceeded its 20% obligation.

But following racial justice protests that took place in Kansas City — and across the nation — in 2020, City Council members attempted to set aside $42 million in police funding above its obligatory spending for “community engagement, outreach, prevention, intervention and other public services.”

The move was criticized by Republicans in the Missouri General Assembly who voted to increase Kansas City’s obligation to 25% of its revenue. 

“Kansas City’s short-sighted move to defund the KCPD, if attempted again, will have lasting and dangerous consequences for our metro area,” state Sen. Tony Luetkemeyer said in a committee hearing in 2022, when the amendment was approved by lawmakers.

Luetkemeyer, who lives in the suburbs of Kansas City, carried the legislation in 2022 to increase the city’s police spending obligations. He did not return a request for comment.

The 2022 legislation passed the Missouri General Assembly on a largely party-line vote with Republicans supporting the increased police spending and Democrats opposing it. 

Lucas said voting no was the “only common sense solution.”

Residents of Kansas City, he said, should be the ones to determine the policy direction of the city by electing local representatives. He said one year the council may need to increase police salaries and the next it may need to spend money on other needs, like firefighting. 

“Who should tell you that, ‘No, you can’t actually take care of your firefighters; you can’t take care of the nurses in your public hospital because you have to live by whatever Jefferson City is doing just for pure political pandering?’” Lucas said. 

Lora McDonald, executive director of the Metro Organization for Racial and Economic Equity, or MORE2, called the attempt by state lawmakers to force Kansas City to spend 25% of its revenue on policing “a political ploy.”

“Why do you care what our police department has or doesn’t have?” McDonald said. “It’s not your business. It’s not your money.”

Lucas said there was “no organized campaign” to persuade voters to reject the amendment.

Last month, the Missouri Supreme Court allowed the issue to go on the August ballot rather than the November one, giving supporters and opponents just over two months to mobilize voters.

According to Missouri Ethics Commission records, no spending committees have been organized to advocate for or against Amendment 4, and no independent groups have spent money in the race.

Child care tax credit

Along with the Kansas City police question, Missouri voters in August will get to decide whether to amend the state constitution to offer a property tax exemption for child care facilities. 

The proposal, championed during the 2023 legislative session by Fitzwater, is one of several attempts by lawmakers in the last few years to ease the shortage of child care facilities in Missouri. 

This spring, Parson and lawmakers attempted to pass a package of child care tax credits, but the legislation stalled in the Senate because of ultra-conservative opposition to “welfare” or the attempt to “give away free child care.”

An investigation by The Independent and MuckRock found nearly one in five Missouri children lives in a “child care desert,” where there are more than three children under the age of 6 for every licensed child care slot — or no licensed slots at all.

“This is just one incentive to try to make that easier for the facilities,” Fitzwater said during a committee hearing on the property tax exemption last year. Fitzwater did not return a request for comment.

Fitzwater’s proposal was supported by an array of child care and economic development organizations and anti-abortion groups. 

Samuel Lee, a lobbyist for Campaign Life Missouri, said during discussion on the bill last year that the anti-abortion group supported the “pro-life, pro-family, pro-workforce development” legislation.

“The pro-life movement has generally not been involved in areas of childcare,” he said, “although for our maternity homes and pregnancy resource centers, the lack of available childcare, the lack of transportation, the lack of housing have always been the three major issues for their clients.” 

The Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry also supported the measure last year. Its lobbyist Heidi Geisbuhler Sutherland said business owners told the chamber that the lack of child care makes it difficult to find workers. 

“It’s going to take an all-of-the-above approach to tackling the child care crisis,” she said, “but I think this measure is a great way to start.”

A classified documents case against former U.S. President Donald Trump was dismissed on Monday. In this photo, Trump speaks to the media as he arrives for his hush money trial at Manhattan Criminal Court on May 30 in New York City. (Steven Hirsch-Pool/Getty Images)

MILWAUKEE —The federal classified documents case against former President Donald Trump was dismissed Monday by a Florida judge on the grounds that the Department of Justice unlawfully appointed special counsel Jack Smith.

The order, while likely to be appealed, makes the possibility even more remote that Trump will be tried before the election on any of the federal charges pending against him. The order came on the first day of the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, during which Trump will be officially nominated as the 2024 GOP presidential candidate.

Trump, who on Saturday was injured at a Pennsylvania rally in what is being investigated as an attempted assassination, has also been federally charged in Washington, D.C., for his alleged attempts to subvert the 2020 presidential election results. The case is pending as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision.

In May, Trump was convicted of 34 felonies in New York state court for falsifying business records related to a hush money payment ahead of the 2016 presidential election. Trump’s sentencing has been delayed until September while the court reviews the federal immunity decision.

Trump has also been indicted in Georgia on racketeering charges — though the case is bogged down in personnel matters — and has been ordered to pay hundreds of millions in penalties following multiple civil suits.

Trump reaction: Dismiss all ‘witch hunts’

Trump, who arrived in Milwaukee Sunday, wrote on his social media platform Monday that all cases against him should be dropped following the attempt on his life by the 20-year-old gunman identified by law enforcement as the shooter. The gunman was killed at the scene.

“As we move forward in Uniting our Nation after the horrific events on Saturday, this dismissal of the Lawless Indictment in Florida should be just the first step, followed quickly by the dismissal of ALL the Witch Hunts — The January 6th Hoax in Washington, D.C., the Manhattan D.A.’s Zombie Case, the New York A.G. Scam, Fake Claims about a woman I never met (a decades old photo in a line with her then husband does not count), and the Georgia ‘Perfect’ Phone Call charges,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

House Speaker Mike Johnson declared the ruling “good news for America and for the rule of law” and a “critically important step” in unifying the country after Saturday’s shooting in Western Pennsylvania.

In a statement issued from Milwaukee, the Louisiana Republican said “House Republicans repeatedly argued that Special Counsel Jack Smith abused his office’s authority in pursuit of President Trump, and now a federal judge has ruled Smith never possessed the authority in the first place.”

“As we work to unify this country following the failed assassination attempt of President Trump, we must also work to end the lawfare and political witch hunts that have unfairly targeted President Trump and destroyed the American people’s faith in our system of justice,” Johnson continued.

Republican lawmakers largely echoed Johnson.

House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik of New York said in a statement that she applauds District Judge Aileen Cannon’s “courage and wisdom” to dismiss the case brought by the “corrupt” special counsel.

“Case Dismissed! Big win for the rule of law,” South Carolina Congressman Ralph Norman wrote on X.

The GOP’s Rep. Clay Higgins of Louisiana also posted on the platform: “Winning. More to come. MAGA.”

The dismissal order

In Monday’s 93-page order, Cannon wrote Smith’s appointment violates two clauses of the U.S. Constitution that govern how presidential administrations and Congress appoint and approve “Officers of the United States” and how taxpayer money can be used to pay their salaries and other expenses.

“Upon careful study of the foundational challenges raised in the Motion, the Court is convinced that Special Counsel’s Smith’s prosecution of this action breaches two structural cornerstones of our constitutional scheme—the role of Congress in the appointment of constitutional officers, and the role of Congress in authorizing expenditures by law,” wrote Cannon, who sits on the bench in the Southern District of Florida.

Attorneys general have appointed special counsels to investigate politically sensitive matters several times in recent decades, including in the case that led to a federal prosecution against Hunter Biden, the president’ son.

Cannon was nominated by Trump in 2020 and confirmed by the U.S. Senate later that year.

In February, Trump’s team filed the motion to dismiss the case, accusing Smith of being unlawfully appointed and paid.

The classified documents case against Trump presented a historic first for the United States — a former sitting president had never been charged with federal crimes.

A federal grand jury handed up a 37-count indictment in June 2023 charging the former president and his aide Walt Nauta with felonies related to mishandling classified documents after his term in office, including storing them at his Florida Mar-a-Lago estate.

A little over a month later a new indictment was handed up, adding new charges against the former president and also adding Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira as a co-defendant.

Cannon’s order dismisses the July 2023 superseding indictment.

The court will now close the case and cancel any scheduled hearings. Any pending motions are considered moot, according to Cannon’s order.

The Department of Justice did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Democrats slam ‘misguided ruling’

Cannon’s dismissal of the case was met with shock from Democrats, who view Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents as a serious, prosecutable offense.

The indictment against Trump detailed how U.S. government documents marked “secret” and “confidential” were stored at Mar-a-Lago, an active social club in Palm Beach, in a ballroom, bathroom and shower, bedroom, office space and storage area.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement Monday that the “breathtakingly misguided ruling flies in the face of long-accepted practice and repetitive judicial precedence.”

“It is wrong on the law and must be appealed immediately. This is further evidence that Judge Cannon cannot handle this case impartially and must be reassigned,” the New York Democrat said.

Conor Lamb, a former congressman from Pennsylvania, wrote on X that Saturday’s failed assassination on Trump does not exonerate him from taking and keeping classified records as he left the Oval Office.

“In the same way that the Secret Service’s failure to protect Trump was unacceptable, it was unacceptable for Trump to fail to protect our country’s secrets.  Trump is a victim of the 1st but that doesn’t change that he is the perpetrator of the 2nd.  Accountability for both,” Lamb wrote.

Not Above the Law, a coalition of 150 organizations, issued a statement calling the ruling “flatly wrong.”

“The special counsel statute is clear. Its constitutionality has been upheld by multiple courts in the past, and Judge Cannon has no grounds to reject such a well-settled principle,” read the statement signed by the organization’s four co-chairs.

“Accountability, protecting the rule of law, and justice cannot be further delayed. We expect Judge Cannon’s ruling not only to be swiftly appealed, but also promptly reversed,” continued the statement from Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen; Praveen Fernandes, vice president of the Constitutional Accountability Center; David Sievers, interim organizing director at MoveOn; and Brett Edkins, managing director for policy and political affairs at Stand Up America.

Law enforcement agents stand near the stage of a campaign rally for Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump on July 13 in Butler, Pennsylvania (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images).

The FBI said early Sunday it had identified the man who shot former President Donald Trump at a campaign rally in Butler on Saturday as Thomas Matthew Crooks, 20, of Bethel Park.

The U.S. Secret Service said Saturday night that the shooter “fired multiple shots toward the stage from an elevated position outside of the rally venue,” adding Secret Service personnel “neutralized the shooter, who is now deceased.”

Trump was pronounced safe shortly after the incident. A spectator at the rally were killed and two others were injured in the shooting. The victims’ identities have not yet been released by law enforcement.

“Tonight we had what we’re calling an assassination attempt on our former president, Donald Trump,” Special Agent in Charge Kevin Rojek of the FBI Pittsburgh field office said at a press conference late Saturday. “We do not currently have an identified motive.”

The site of the shooting at the Butler Farm Show Inc. about 40 minutes north of Pittsburgh, remained an active crime scene, although authorities said they did not believe there was any ongoing threat.

Anyone who attended the rally or has information is asked to call 1-800-call-fbi, or go to fbi.gov/butler.

Trump ‘safe’ after shooting at rally in Pennsylvania; one spectator and suspected gunman killed

The shooting began shortly after Trump took the stage at about 6 p.m. Saturday. Several loud pops could be heard and a bloodied Trump was whisked from the stage, but not before pumping his fist toward the crowd.

Trump confirmed he was shot in a post to Truth Social a few hours after the shooting.” I was shot with a bullet that pierced the upper part of my right ear,” he wrote.

How the shooter was able to get so close to the former president was not clear. Rojek said it was “surprising,” and added “the Secret Service really needs to answer that question, they conduct the initial site survey, they do the initial security assessments and determine where the different security locations should be, and they’re the ones who are in charge of securing the scene.”

President Joe Biden condemned the shooting in a brief statement from Delaware Saturday night “There’s no place in America for this kind of violence,” Biden said.

Congressional Republicans, meanwhile, have initiated an investigation into the incident. U.S. Rep. James Comer (R-Kentucky), chairman of the House Oversight Committee, sent an email to Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle requesting her to appear at a committee hearing July 22.

The Trump campaign said Saturday the former president, who was out of the hospital and at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, would attend the Republican National Committee in Milwaukee this week as planned. He will receive the GOP’s formal nomination as its 2023 presidential candidate on Thursday.

This story was originally published by the Pennsylvania Capital-Star, a States Newsroom affiliate. 

Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump is rushed offstage during a rally on July 13, 2024 in Butler, Pennsylvania (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images).

BUTLER, Penn. — Former President Donald Trump is recovering Saturday after a shooting at a campaign rally in Butler that left a rally-goer and the gunman dead, authorities said. Two people were critically injured in the incident, according to the U.S. Secret Service.

Shortly after Trump took the stage at about 6 p.m., several loud pops could be heard, and Secret Service agents whisked him off the stage, blood visible on his face. Trump briefly pumped his fist at the crowd before he left the stage. Video from the incident appeared to show Trump reacting to something hitting his ear.

Saturday’s event was to be Trump’s final campaign rally before he formally accepts the Republican Party’s 2024 presidential nomination at next week’s Republican National Convention.

Trump posted to his verified account on the Truth Social platform at 8:42 p.m. and appeared to confirm he was shot.

“I want to thank The United States Secret Service, and all of Law Enforcement, for their rapid response on the shooting that just took place in Butler, Pennsylvania. Most importantly, I want to extend my condolences to the family of the person at the Rally who was killed, and also to the family of another person that was badly injured,” Trump wrote. “It is incredible that such an act can take place in our Country. Nothing is known at this time about the shooter, who is now dead. I was shot with a bullet that pierced the upper part of my right ear. I knew immediately that something was wrong in that I heard a whizzing sound, shots, and immediately felt the bullet ripping through the skin. Much bleeding took place, so I realized then what was happening. GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Anthony Guglielmi, Chief of Communications for the U.S. Secret Service released a statement to reporters shortly before 9 p.m. Saturday:

“During Former President Trump’s campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on the evening of July 13 at approximately 6:15 p.m., a suspected shooter fired multiple shots toward the stage from an elevated position outside of the rally venue. U.S. Secret Service personnel neutralized the shooter, who is now deceased. U.S. Secret Service quickly responded with protective measures and Former President Trump is safe. One spectator was killed, and two spectators were critically injured. This incident is currently under investigation. and the Secret Service has notified the FBI.”

Butler County District Attorney Richard Goldinger said on CNN that he shooter was “outside of the grounds, so to speak. Quite frankly I don’t know how he would have gotten to the location he was … we’re gonna have to figure out how he got there.”

Authorities are investigating the incident as an assassination attempt, according to the Associated Press.

President Joe Biden condemned the shooting in a brief statement from Delaware. “There’s no place in America for this kind of violence,” Biden said.

“It’s sick, it’s one of the reasons we have to unite this country,” he added. “We cannot allow for this to be happening. We cannot be like this, we cannot condone this.” Biden said he had tried to contact Trump, and said that the former president was with his doctors and appeared to be doing well.

“FBI personnel are on the scene in Butler County, Pennsylvania and the FBI will continue to work jointly with the U.S. Secret Service as the investigation moves forward,” FBI Pittsburgh Public Affairs Officer Bradford Arick told the Capital-Star in an email.

Pennsylvania State Police Trooper Bertha Cazy told the Capital-Star in an email “The Pennsylvania State Police has Troopers on scene assisting the Secret Service in various capacities. All other questions should be directed to the U.S. Secret Service, the agency handling the investigation.”

Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung told reporters Saturday “President Trump thanks law enforcement and first responders for their quick action during this heinous act. He is fine and is being checked out at a local medical facility. More details will follow.”

Gov. Josh Shapiro said on social media he had been briefed on the situation and that Pennsylvania State Police were on the scene working with federal and local partners. “Violence targeted at any political party or political leaders is absolutely unacceptable,” Shapiro wrote. “It has no place in Pennsylvania or the United States.”

GOP U.S. Senate candidate David McCormick, who spoke at the rally before Trump, told Fox News there were a number of shots, and Secret Service agents attended to Trump. He said it was hard to tell where the shots came from, but that he heard seven or eight shots.

“And then, sadly, someone behind me, up in the bleachers was definitely wounded, and there was a lot of blood. And, you know, the police came in and helped carry that person out of the stands so they could get the care they needed. I’m not sure if others were injured or not, if at all, ” he said, describing the scene as “very chaotic.”

McCormick said he was sitting in the front row to Trump’s right as he was facing the crowd. “I couldn’t tell whether it was one gun or two, but there were seven or eight shots, just one right, one right after another.”

U.S. Sen. Bob Casey said he was monitoring the situation at the rally and had reached out to State Police to offer support. “Political violence is never acceptable and I am hoping former President Trump and all attendees are safe. Everyone in Butler should listen to law enforcement,” Casey posted to social media.

U.S. Rep. Mike Kelly, who also spoke at the rally, called the shooting an “attack from the left,” in a Facebook post, adding that he and his family were safe “and we are praying for Mr. Trump and everyone involved.”

Speakers at the event ahead of Trump included representatives from the oil and gas industries, the mayor of Slippery Rock, and Sean Parnell, a former GOP candidate for U.S. Senate who received Trump’s endorsement, but suspended his campaign in 2021 after his then-wife testified he had abused her and their children.

U.S. Rep. Dan Meuser who took the stage to AC-DC’s “Thunderstruck” told the audience Trump “will deliver on his promises. Our border will be secure. He will end the gas backwards energy policy of the Biden administration and in Pennsylvania, natural gas will flow again. We will make manufacturing great again by being the most competitive place in the world to build things.”

U.S. Rep. Mike Kelly (R-16th District), whose district includes Butler, pointed to Biden’s debate performance as evidence that “the media has been lying to us” about the president’s health.

“Have you ever heard the term ‘playing through the whistle?’ Playing it through the whistle means you keep on playing, you keep on doing what you have to do to win,” Kelly said. “You keep on going to make sure you don’t lose. But I want to give you a different version: We’d better play it through the echo of the whistle. Playing through the whistle isn’t enough, not with this crew that we’re fighting against right now.”

GOP U.S. Senate candidate David McCormick, who is challenging three-term incumbent Bob Casey, reiterated his claims that Casey votes with Biden 98% of the time.  “I like to say Punxsutawney, because it reminds me of Punxsutawney, Bob, Bob Casey, that is who only comes out of his hole once every six years,” McCormick said.

“The lack of leadership, lack of moral clarity, an economy where 60% of Pennsylvanians are living paycheck to paycheck, and prices are up by more than 20% and is the result of the terrible, flawed policies of Joe Biden, the spending Bob Casey supported it every step of the way,” he added.

McCormick repeated another familiar highlight of his campaign stump speech, pointing to the fentanyl crisis. “For those of you who are Vietnam vets, we lost 53,000 veterans in eight years of war. We had two Vietnams last year in the United States from fentanyl,” he said. “This is a war against us.”

McCormick also referenced Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, who was detained in Russia in 2023, and Oakmont resident Marc Fogel, a teacher detained in Russia in 2021. Fogel’s mother said earlier in the week she was going to seek Trump’s help in securing her son’s release.

“We need leadership that’s going to stand up and bring Pennsylvanian Mark Fogel home to Pennsylvania, home to America. That’s what leaders do. That’s what a commander in chief does,” McCormick said.

The Democratic National Committee rolled out a billboard in Butler to greet Trump on Saturday that jabs at the former president’s economic record. The billboard, with the words “Donald Trump was a disaster for Pennsylvania,” will be located at the end of the Pullman Viaduct, about 10 minutes away from the Butler Farm Show.

“Pennsylvania voters remember Trump’s failures and know exactly how much is at stake in November,” DNC spokesperson Addy Toevs said in a statement. “That’s why they’ll reject Trump and his Project 2025 agenda, and once again send President Biden to the White House.”

As Trump rallied in western Pennsylvania on Saturday, first lady Jill Biden was also in the region to attend an Italian Sons and Daughters of America dinner in Pittsburgh.

And in the eastern half of the commonwealth, Vice President Kamala Harris was in Philadelphia to deliver the keynote address at the Asian Pacific Islander American Vote Presidential Town Hall on Saturday.

Saturday’s appearance in the Keystone State is Trump’s fifth visit to Pennsylvania this year, but his first in the western half of the commonwealth. Trump has made two 2024 appearances in Philadelphia, once for a rally on Temple University’s campus, and to deliver brief remarks at Sneaker Con in February. He also held a rally in the Lehigh Valley in April, and delivered a keynote address to a National Rifle Association gathering in Harrisburg in February.

“Donald Trump can take his twice-impeached, 34-time convicted, vowed-to-be-dictator-on-day-one, consumed by revenge, serial liar, Project 2025 self out of Pennsylvania and go back to his Mar-a-Lago golf course,” Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. Austin Davis said in a statement Saturday. “After he destroyed our economy, screwed over workers, and called for the ‘termination’ of the Constitution written in our state, Pennsylvania voters will send him packing in November. Again.”

Butler is a reliably red county where Trump won by double digits in the 2016 and 2020 general elections. Trump’s rally in Butler a few days before the 2020 presidential election was well-attended, although there were transportation issues for those attempting to exit the rally.

President Joe Biden has also been no stranger to Pennsylvania, making ten appearances the state so far, mostly in the southeast. Biden campaigned through the state last Sunday, appearing at a traditionally Black church in Northwest Philadelphia, and speaking to supporters in Philadelphia and Harrisburg.

As of Saturday morning, 18 Democrats serving in the U.S. House and one serving in the U.S. Senate have called on Biden to not seek the Democratic Party nomination, following his poor debate performance in late June, amid questions about whether he can beat Trump in November.

Biden has repeatedly said he does not plan to drop out of the race, reiterating his position at a rally in Michigan on Friday, where he was greeted with chants of “don’t you quit” and “we got your back,” from a crowd at Renaissance High School in Detroit.

“You made me the nominee, no one else — not the press, not the pundits, not the insiders, not donors,” Biden told the audience. “You, the voters. You decided. No one else. And I’m not going anywhere.”

Support for the president

Pennsylvania Democrats have largely remained behind the Scranton native. Gov. Josh Shapiro, who has been mentioned as a potential candidate for president or vice president should Biden step aside, has remained committed to Biden’s 2024 bid. U.S. Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) has also emerged as a key campaign surrogate for Biden.

U.S. Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.), who is seeking a fourth term in office, has also stood by Biden’s side, while other Democrats in battleground states have distanced themselves from him. On Friday, speaking to reporters after an event in Darlington Township, Beaver County, Casey reiterated his support for Biden, saying it had not changed.

“I think we’re going to have a unified party between now and November,” Casey said. “This is a difficult period, but we’ll get there. But you know where I stand.”

McCormick has blasted the three-term senator for continuing to support Biden. His campaign put up billboards in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Scranton this week reading “Same old tired ideas,” with photos of the two Democrats.

In response to a question about whether he was worried about Biden being a potential drag on his Senate race and other down ballot races on Friday, Casey answered with a firm “no.”

Pennsylvania U.S. Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-17th District) who also spoke at the event in Darlington with Casey, urged people to “Google Project 2025, and what Donald Trump expects to do if he becomes president, again. It is dangerous,” he said. “It is threatening to our freedom and the fundamentals of our rule of law in this country. “

Deluzio added that he thinks Democrats will unite to “make sure Trump is never the president of this country again.”

However, U.S. Rep. Susan Wild (D-7th District) has expressed concern about Biden’s “electability” and U.S. Rep. Summer Lee (D-12th District) has said Biden needs to show “that he’s up for the task” of staying in the race.

Lee, who was scheduled to attend a Pittsburgh rally for Biden with Allegheny County Democrats on Friday but did not appear due to a schedule conflict, did not answer questions about Biden at an event in Pittsburgh with U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra. Lee said she would not answer a political question while at an event where she was appearing in her capacity as a member of Congress, TribLive reported.

Pennsylvania GOP unites behind Trump

Trump, who was convicted of 34 felony counts in a New York courtroom in May, largely has united the Pennsylvania Republican Party behind his candidacy. With the exception of U.S. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-1st District), every GOP member of the state’s congressional delegation has endorsed Trump;  Fitzpatrick has not announced who he will be voting for in November. The only Republican in Pennsylvania’s congressional delegation to represent a district Biden won in 2020, Fitzpatrick said he wrote in Mike Pence for president in 2016, but voted for Trump in 2020.

Pennsylvania’s 19 electoral votes are critical to the candidates’ chances of winning in November. Biden campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon sent a memo to supporters listing Pennsylvania as one of the three “blue wall” states that provide the campaign the “clearest pathway” to reelection.

Recent polling indicates that Biden and Trump are engaged in a close race for Pennsylvania, although Trump holds a narrow edge. The Cook Political Report ranks Pennsylvania in the toss-up category. It has the largest number of electoral votes of any battleground state.

This story was originally published by the Pennsylvania Capital-Star, a States Newsroom affiliate. 

The General Assembly has provided more funding to reimburse Missouri counties for housing those who are awaiting transport to state prisons, but some counties argue it isn’t enough (Vaughn Wheat/The Beacon).

The cost of holding someone in a Missouri county jail for those days and months before and after a conviction ultimately falls to the state.

In 2024, the state spent about $50 million to reimburse counties for the cost. But it’s had trouble keeping up with that tab.

That’s left counties stuck with most of the cost, even as the General Assembly has scraped together money to reimburse the expense of holding people in those counties — at a rate that doesn’t really make local governments whole.

It costs one county in southwest Missouri $750,000 a year to hold people on state charges. The reimbursement from the state, $225,000, doesn’t stretch too far.

“There’s over a half a million dollars that the county’s on the hook for,” said state Rep. Donnie Brown, a New Madrid Republican who sponsored a bill to make the state pay counties more for holding its prisoners.

Lawmakers bump county paychecks from state prison system

The state pays counties $22.58 for every day a person who should be in a state prison is in a county jail. Brown said that in his area, it actually costs about $45 a day. In more expensive areas, like Jackson County, that cost can be as high as $120 a day.

The state rate has hovered anywhere from $20 to $22 a day since 1998, depending on how much the legislature chooses to spend. Within state prisons, it costs around $90 per person a day.

“Our law enforcement is trying to put public safety first,” Brown said, “but they’re also having to live on a budget that is, a lot of times, insufficient.”

He sponsored a bill during the 2024 legislative session to get the attention of the budget committees in the House and Senate. With support from counties and the Missouri Sheriffs’ Association, Brown wanted to raise the reimbursement figure to $40.

While his bill didn’t pass, it drew the attention of the budget committees. They increased the pot of money dedicated to paying counties back by $5 million, upping the reimbursement rate to $24.96 a day.

Meanwhile, sheriffs have to navigate an antiquated payment system to get paid by the state for boarding its inmates. For starters, a sheriff must confirm that the county has been holding a person who is technically in state custody. Then the circuit court clerk has to sign off on it. Only then is the reimbursement request sent to the Department of Corrections to pay out.

“The time lag could be significant, but that’s not the Department of Corrections’ fault,” Steve Hobbs, the executive director of the Missouri Association of Counties, said at the bill’s hearing earlier this year. “That’s our fault at the county level, and we’re trying to do things working with Corrections to streamline that process.”

Missouri’s unique standing

A recent report from the Prison Policy Initiative, a criminal justice reform group, found that Missouri incarcerates its residents at a higher rate than the national average. For every 100,000 people in the state, 713 of them are incarcerated. In the United States, the number is 608 per capita.

But it is also the only state that reimburses counties for the fees associated with housing a prisoner before and after that person is convicted of state-level crimes.

In most states, counties only get reimbursed after a state conviction — not for the time someone is locked up waiting for trial.

In 2019, the Department of Corrections surveyed the 49 other states to see if county jails were reimbursed for time spent in jail before a person’s trial. Of the 30 states that responded to the DOC’s survey, none provided county reimbursement for pretrial days.

In 2020, the state auditor’s office took a look at the county reimbursement program. The office found that, of the 61% of sheriffs who responded, 73% of their jail populations were awaiting trial for a felony offense.

That number is higher than the national average. The Prison Policy Initiative also found that 69% of the jail population nationwide were those awaiting a trial.

In 2017, then-Gov. Eric Greitens established the Missouri State Justice Reinvestment Task Force. It concluded that the number of people in pretrial detention and a lack of public defenders drove the rising jail population.

“There are places around the country that have chosen to invest more in their public defense systems, because that’s just another way of coming at this problem,” said Wanda Bertram, a communications specialist at the Prison Policy Initiative.

Some Democratic lawmakers have filed bills in the past to eliminate pretrial reimbursement and raise the rate the state pays after someone is convicted. They’ve had little traction.

Brown expects to file his reimbursement bill again next year to try and raise the prison reimbursement rate closer to $40 a day.

“It’s not like we’re asking the state to totally make the county 100% whole,” Brown said. “We’ve got to help them find another revenue source to make things right.”

This article first appeared on Beacon: Missouri and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Marcellus Williams, photographed in prison (photo submitted).

A Missouri man scheduled to be executed in September will get a chance to present a court with DNA evidence he believes will exonerate him.

Marcellus Williams will get a hearing on Aug. 21, at the request of St. Louis County Prosecutor Wesley Bell. The prosecutor’s office has filed a motion to vacate the conviction after reviewing the case and discovering “clear and convincing evidence” that Williams is innocent.

Williams was convicted in the 1998 murder of Felicia Gayle.

In his motion to vacate the conviction, Bell noted that Williams was not the source of DNA found on the weapon used to kill Gayle. Other forensic evidence also excluded Williams as the killer, Bell argues. 

Opposing Bell’s motion is Attorney General Andrew Bailey, whose office has argued that Williams was found guilty by a jury of his peers.  The Attorney General’s Office has opposed every innocence case for the last 30 years, including every attempt made by a local prosecutor to overturn a conviction on the basis of innocence.

“The attorney general should not be trying to block the court’s review, and the Missouri Supreme Court should stay Mr. Williams’s execution,” said Tricia Bushnell, Williams’ attorney.

In 2015, the Missouri Supreme Court stayed Williams’s execution and appointed a special master to review DNA testing of potentially exculpatory evidence. Two years later, without conducting a hearing, the court rescheduled Williams’ execution. 

Later that year, however, former Gov. Eric Greitens issued the second stay and appointed a board of inquiry to look into the case. 

Gov. Mike Parson lifted the stay and dissolved the board in June 2023, and the state Supreme Court issued the execution warrant last month, setting a Sept. 24 execution date.

(Scott Olson/Getty Images).

Violent crime in the United States dropped significantly in the first quarter of 2024 compared with the same period last year, according to the FBI’s Quarterly Uniform Crime Report released earlier this month.

The FBI’s data, collected from nearly 12,000 law enforcement agencies representing about 77% of the country’s population, suggests violent crime dropped by 15% compared with the first quarter of 2023.

The data, which covers reported crimes from January to March, shows a 26.4% decrease in murders, a 25.7% decrease in rapes, a 17.8% decrease in robberies, and a 12.5% decrease in aggravated assaults. Reported property crime also fell by 15.1%.

Nevertheless, the widespread public perception that crime is rising — a perception reinforced by presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and many other GOP candidates — could figure prominently in November’s election. And state legislative and gubernatorial candidates from both parties likely also will cite crime statistics on the stump.

In a Gallup poll conducted late last year, 63% of respondents described the crime problem in the U.S. as either extremely or very serious. This is the highest percentage since Gallup began asking the question in 2000.

In May, Trump wrongly called FBI data showing a decline in crime “fake numbers.” This month, he erroneously claimed that the FBI’s crime statistics exclude 30% of cities, including the “biggest and most violent.”

He could have been referring to the fact some departments couldn’t report data in 2021 because the FBI switched data reporting systems, but experts say the overall numbers remain valid.

President Joe Biden has also used crime statistics for political gain. In a May campaign email, Biden said that Trump “oversaw the largest increase in murder in U.S. history.” While this is not entirely inaccurate — the country did see the largest one-year increase in murders in 2020 — it omits context regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and the social upheaval following George Floyd’s murder by a Minneapolis police officer.

The latest FBI crime statistics align with other early data from 2024. In May, the Major Cities Chiefs Association released first-quarter data from a survey of 68 major metropolitan police departments showing a 17% drop in murders compared with the same period last year.

The FBI’s latest data is preliminary and unaudited, which means it will change as more law enforcement agencies refine their numbers throughout the year. National crime data is incomplete, as it only includes crimes reported to police, and not every law enforcement agency participates in the FBI’s crime reporting program.

Despite the data’s limitations, some criminologists and crime data experts say the data is reliable. Some say the FBI’s data likely overstates the decreases, suggesting the drop in violent crime is likely less dramatic but still trending downward.

“There’s a lot of uncertainty as to the accuracy of the data, so it matches but probably overstates what the trends are,” Jeff Asher, co-founder of AH Datalytics, a data consulting firm that specializes in crime data, told Stateline in an interview. “In theory, everything will get more accurate as the year goes on.”

Although national data suggests an overall major decrease in crime across the country, some criminologists caution that that isn’t necessarily the case in individual cities and neighborhoods.

“It looks good for the nation as a whole, but even with these great reductions, there are cities in the United States that have likely experienced increases that bucked the trend,” Charis Kubrin, a criminology, law and society professor at the University of California, Irvine, told Stateline.

The average American’s understanding of crime and crime statistics is heavily skewed by media coverage that focuses largely on when crimes are committed and by misleading political rhetoric, according to criminologists and crime data experts.

Instead of relying on statistics, which can feel impersonal, people tend to cling to anecdotes that resonate more emotionally. Politicians take advantage of this, Dan Gardner, author of the book “Risk: The Science and Politics of Fear,” told Stateline.

“If you are a political operative, capitalizing on fear of crime is incredibly easy to do,” Gardner said.

Telling a tragic story and framing it in a way so that voters feel they or their families could become victims of similar crimes unless they vote for a specific politician is a common, highly effective tactic, he added.

This use of fear as a motivator can drive people to the polls, Gardner said, but it also distorts public perception of crime.

“It’s a lousy way to understand the reality of personal safety and society, but it’s a very compelling form of marketing,” Gardner said.

The Council on Criminal Justice, a nonpartisan think tank, released a report this month urging police and the federal government to provide more timely crime data. The report emphasizes that crime data, especially national data, often lags up to a year, which hampers public understanding of crime trends and limits officials’ ability to make informed policy decisions to proactively address public safety issues.

“We need to accelerate improvements in our [crime] data,” John Roman, a senior fellow and the director of the Center on Public Safety and Justice at NORC at the University of Chicago, told Stateline. Roman also is the chair of the Council on Criminal Justice’s Crime Trends Working Group. “The democratization of this data is really critical to more effective policy and programming.”

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org. Follow Stateline on Facebook and X.

Othel Moore died at the Jefferson City Correctional Center in December while restrained and in isolation (Caspar Benson/Getty Images).

Four former Missouri correctional officers face murder charges and a fifth is charged with involuntary manslaughter for the December death of a man incarcerated at the Jefferson City Correctional Center.

Othel Moore, 38, was pepper-sprayed in the face multiple times, had his face improperly covered by a hood that blocked his nose and mouth and left unattended in a cell for more than 30 minutes, documents filed Friday in Cole County Circuit Court state.

Moore, who suffered from asthma, screamed at officers that he could not breathe as he was being transported to the cell, the documents state. He died on the morning of Dec. 8.

Cole County Prosecuting Attorney Locke Thompson charged Justin Leggins, 34, of Cadet, Jacob Case, 31, of Desloge, and Aaron Brown, 24, and Gregory Varner, 34, both of Park Hills, with second degree assault and second degree murder.

Warden of Missouri prison replaced after investigation of inmate death

Thompson charged Bryanne Bradshaw, 25, of Jefferson City with involuntary manslaughter in the second degree.

Leggins was hired by the department in 2022, according to information on the Missouri Accountability Portal. Case worked for the department in 2014 and 2015 and returned in 2020. Brown was hired in 2021. Varner worked for the department from 2014 to 2016 and returned in 2019. Bradshaw started in 2018.

All five had been arrested or surrendered to authorities by Friday afternoon, Thompson said.

No information was available indicating whether the officers have hired attorneys.

Four corrections officers were fired in March during the investigation of Moore’s death. The warden of the Jefferson City Correctional Center was terminated as an employee of the department earlier this month. 

The autopsy of Moore ruled his death was due to “positional asphyxiation” and the death was determined to be a homicide, documents filed with the case state.

“The sheriff’s department did a very thorough investigation and when we set down and reviewed all the evidence available, that is what led us to those charges,” Thompson said in an interview with The Independent.

The charges, highly unusual in an inmate death case, were first reported by the Associated Press. Thompson said he has some cases of inmate-on-inmate violence pending, but no other cases involving correctional officers assaulting inmates.

“Right now we have two offender-on-offender homicides, and we have had those in the past as well,” Thompson said.

In a press release, Thompson said Moore’s death was linked to a Corrections Emergency Response Team operation to sweep one of the housing units for contraband. Moore was pepper sprayed twice during the operation before being placed in a spit hood, leg wrap and restraint chair and transferred to a separate housing unit, where he was left in the hood, wrap, and restraint chair for approximately 30 minutes. 

The probable cause statements for each of the five describe their role in Moore’s death.

Leggins was present outside Moore’s cell during the operation. Moore spoke to another inmate and Leggins told him to remain silent. 

“The victim looked back over his shoulder without moving any other part of his body and asked the suspect why he had to be quiet,” Sgt. Greg Henson of the Cole County Sheriff’s Department wrote in the probable cause statement on Leggin’s charges. “lt was at this point Leggins raised a ‘fogger’ canister of pepper spray and deployed it from a very close distance into the face of the victim.”

The spraying violated department policies that the inmate had to be a danger to the officer or other inmates, Henson wrote. 

“This unwarranted reckless behavior inflicted undue suffering and pain on the victim,” Henson wrote.

Case pepper sprayed Moore in the face as he lay on the ground.

“During the initial interview Case stated he pepper sprayed the victim in the face while he was on the ground at the top of the staircase for not following directives to stop resisting,” Det. Aaron Roberts of the sheriff’s office wrote in the court documents.

Brown placed the mask on Moore’s face, Deputy Merideth Freeeman wrote in his probable cause statement. He claimed Moore was spitting at corrections officers, which other officers denied.

“Brown placed the spit mask on the victim’s head without allowing him the opportunity to decontaminate from the pepper spray even though the victim was fully restrained and cooperative at the time,” Freeman wrote, noting that he placed it improperly, blocking Moore’s nose and mouth.

Varner supervised the placement of Moore into a restraint device while masked.

“During my interview with Varner, he confirms that by the time the victim reached the bottom level after being sprayed multiple times, he was yelling that he couldn’t breathe, and that the victim was saying he had asthma,” Henson wrote in a probable cause statement.

Bradshaw was the highest ranking officer in the unit where Moore was taken in restraint. When he arrived at about 7:50 a.m. that morning, he was in distress.
“Sgt. Bradshaw stated that when Moore arrived he was yelling and screaming and although she said she couldn’t understand what he was saying, she said he could have been saying he couldn’t breathe or was in distress,” Henson wrote. “Additionally, Bradshaw said she knew Moore from previous encounters, and didn’t think he would be making up medical issues if that’s what he was trying to relay when yelling.”

Moore was placed in a locked room, restrained and masked. He was not checked on until he was unresponsive about 8:20 a.m. that day.

Prison reform activist Michelle Smith had not heard about the charges when contacted Friday.

“The fact that they’ve absolutely been charged, yes, that’s amazing,” Smith said. “I appreciate it. I think that it is necessary, and you know, it will serve to get the information out to the public.”

Smith organized a vigil in January to highlight the growing number of deaths among inmates. Moore’s death was one of 135 in Missouri’s state prisons in 2023, according to Missouri Prison Reform . The number of deaths have been rising even as prison populations fall.

From 2012 to 2014, department data shows, there was an average of 31,442 incarcerated people in state prisons. Deaths averaged 89 per year. Over the period 2020 through 2022, with an average of 23,409 incarcerated people in state prisons, deaths averaged 122 per year.

Many of the deaths are natural, but they also include increasing numbers of overdose deaths.

The Moore investigation should not end with the criminal charges, Smith said. The way prisoners who told his family about his death were treated needs to be addressed as well, she said.

“The person who called the sister and told her he was killed, they put him in the hole,” Smith said. “They retaliated against several men and put them in the hole who were talking about it.”

More than two dozen states have laws that prevent someone subject to an order in a domestic violence case from buying or possessing a gun and ammunition (Ethan Miller/Getty Images).

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court Friday upheld a federal law that bars people subject to domestic violence restraining orders from owning a firearm.

In an 8-1 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the opinion that “our Nation’s firearm laws have included provisions preventing individuals who threaten physical harm to others from misusing firearms.”

“When an individual has been found by a court to pose a credible

threat to the physical safety of another, that individual may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment,” Roberts wrote.

Justice Clarence Thomas, a staunch advocate of the Second Amendment, was the lone dissent.

Thomas argued that the question before the court was not if someone can have their firearms taken away under the Second Amendment, but instead whether the “Government can strip the Second Amendment right of anyone subject to a protective order — even if he has never been accused or convicted of a crime. It cannot.”

This was the first major test of the 2022 Supreme Court decision – New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen – that struck down a New York law limiting carrying firearms in the open in a decision from the high court that greatly expanded gun rights. Thomas wrote that decision.

Because of the Bruen decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit vacated Zackey Rahimi’s conviction on the grounds that the federal law violated his Second Amendment rights.

In 2019, Rahimi assaulted his girlfriend in Arlington, Texas, and threatened to shoot her if she told anyone, according to the Department of Justice. That led to a restraining order that suspended his handgun license and prohibited him from possessing firearms.

But Rahimi did not adhere to that order and then threatened another woman with a gun, and two months later opened fire in public five times.

During oral arguments in November before the court, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, representing the Biden administration, argued that the 5th Circuit misinterpreted the Bruen decision.

She said there is historical precedent in the ability of Congress to “disarm those who are not law-abiding, responsible citizens.”

Under a 1994 federal law, anyone who has been convicted in any court of a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence,” and, or, is subject to domestic violence protective orders, is prohibited from purchasing and having possession of firearms and ammunition.

During those oral arguments, the justices – both liberal and conservative – seemed to side with Prelogar’s argument that the federal law is in line with the longstanding practice of disarming dangerous people and does not violate an individual’s Second Amendment rights.

More than half of female homicide victims are killed by current or former male intimate partners. Firearms are used in more than 50% of those homicides.

More than two dozen states have laws that prevent someone subject to an order in a domestic violence case from buying or possessing a gun and ammunition.

Missouri is not one of them. Some of the states with a prohibition in law include Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin.

This is a developing story that will be updated.

Unable to work after being shot at the Kansas City Chiefs Super Bowl parade in February, Jacob Gooch Sr. initially received short-term disability payments. But that assistance abruptly stopped in May when he started seeing a new doctor who was in network with his health insurance. The issue was resolved in June and he was expecting back pay soon (Christopher Smith/KFF News).

Abigail Arellano keeps her son Samuel’s medical bills in a blue folder in a cabinet above the microwave. Even now, four months after the 11-year-old was shot at the Kansas City Chiefs Super Bowl parade, the bills keep coming.

There’s one for $1,040 for the ambulance ride to the hospital that February afternoon. Another for $2,841.17 from an emergency room visit they made three days after the shooting because his bullet wound looked infected. More follow-ups and counseling in March added another $1,500.

“I think I’m missing some,” Arellano said as she leafed through the pages.

The Arellanos are uninsured and counting on assistance from the fund that raised nearly $2 million in the aftermath of the shooting that left one dead and at least 24 other people with bullet wounds. She keeps that application in the blue folder as well.

The medical costs incurred by the survivors of the shooting are hitting hard, and they won’t end soon. The average medical spending for someone who is shot increases by nearly $30,000 in the first year, according to a Harvard Medical School study. Another study found that number goes up to $35,000 for children. Ten kids were shot at the parade.

Then there are life’s ordinary bills — rent, utilities, car repairs — that don’t stop just because someone survived a mass shooting, even if their injuries prevent them from working or sending kids to school.

The financial burden that comes with surviving is so common it has a name, according to Aswad Thomas of the nonprofit Alliance for Safety and Justice: victimization debt. Some pay it out-of-pocket. Some open a new credit card. Some find help from generous strangers. Others can’t make ends meet.

“We’re really broke right now,” said Jacob Gooch Sr., another survivor, who was shot through the foot and has not yet been able to return to work.

“We’re, like, exhausting our third credit card.”

As is common after mass shootings, a mosaic of new and established resources emerged in this Missouri city promising help. Those include the #KCStrong fund established by the United Way of Greater Kansas City, which is expected to begin paying victims at the end of June.

Survivors must navigate each opportunity to request help as best they can — and hope money comes through.

GoFundMe, generous strangers and a new line of credit

Mostly, it’s the moms who keep the bills organized. Tucked above the microwave. Zipped inside a purse. Screenshots stored on a phone. And then there’s a maze of paperwork: The Missouri state victims’ compensation form is five pages, including instructions. It’s another six pages for help from the United Way.

Emily Tavis keeps stacks of paperwork with color-coded binder clips in her basement: Black for her partner, Gooch Sr.; blue for her stepson, Jacob Gooch Jr.; pink for herself. All three were shot at the parade.

Tavis was able to walk after a bullet ripped through her leg, and she considered declining the ambulance ride because she was worried about the cost — she lacked insurance at the time.

Gooch Sr. was unable to walk because he’d been shot in the foot. So they shared an ambulance to the hospital with two of their kids.

“I’m not paying for this s—. I didn’t ask for this life,” Tavis, laughing, recalled thinking at the time. They soon realized 14-year-old Gooch Jr. had a bullet in his foot as well.

Tavis and Gooch Sr. received separate $1,145 bills for the ambulance. Gooch Jr. did not, possibly because he has health coverage through Medicaid, Tavis said.

She sends the medical bills to victims’ compensation, a program to help with the economic losses from a crime, such as medical expenses and lost wages. Even though Tavis and Gooch live in Leavenworth, Kansas, their compensation comes from the program in Missouri, where the shooting occurred.

The program pays only for economic losses not covered by other sources like health insurance, donations, and crowdsourced fundraisers. Gooch Sr. and Jr. both had health insurance at the time of the parade, so the family has been sending only the uncovered portion to victims’ compensation.

The family initially received a lot of support. Friends and relatives made sure they had food to eat. The founder of an online group of Kansas City Chiefs fans sent $1,000 and gifts for the family. A GoFundMe page raised $9,500. And their tax refund helped.

They knew money might get tight with Gooch Sr. unable to work, so they paid three months’ rent in advance. They also paid to have his Ford Escape fixed so he could eventually return to work and bought Tavis a used Honda Accord so she could drive to the job she started 12 days after the parade.

And because the donations were intended for the whole family, they decided to buy summer passes to the Worlds of Fun amusement park for the kids.

But recently, they’ve felt stretched. Gooch Sr.’s short-term disability payments abruptly stopped in May when his health insurance prompted him to see an in-network doctor. He said the short-term disability plan initially didn’t approve the paperwork from his new doctor and started an investigation. The issue was resolved in June and he was expecting back pay soon. In the interim, though, the couple opened a new credit card to cover their bills.

In the interim, the couple opened a new credit card to cover their bills.

“We’ve definitely been robbing Peter to pay Paul,” Tavis said.

Ideally, the money that eventually comes from the United Way, victims’ compensation, and, they hope, back pay from short-term disability will be enough to pay off their debts.

But, Tavis said, “You gotta do what you gotta do. We’re not going to go without lights.”

United Way payout expected at end of June

With every mass shooting, donations for survivors inevitably flow in, “just like peanut butter goes with jelly, because people want to help,” said Jeff Dion, executive director of the Mass Violence Survivors Fund, a nonprofit that has helped many communities manage such funds.

Typically, he said, it takes about five months to disburse the money from these large community funds. Victims can potentially get money sooner if their community has a plan in place for these types of funds before a mass shooting. Funds may also advance money to people with urgent financial needs who are certain to qualify.

The United Way hung banners in the Chiefs colors on Kansas City’s Union Station with its #KCStrong campaign within days of the shootings. Driven by large donations from the team, the NFL, quarterback Patrick Mahomes, other individuals, and local companies, it ultimately raised more than $1.8 million.

The promise of a large payout has kept the injured hopeful, even as many felt confused by the process. Some people interviewed for this story did not wish to say anything negative, fearing it would hurt their allocation.

United Way officials announced in April that donations would be closed at the end of that month. On May 1, the organization posted a notice saying it would issue “claimant forms” and that the Jackson County Prosecutor’s Office was helping verify shooting victims. The United Way affiliate’s board of trustees plans to meet June 26 to determine allocations, with payments arriving as early as June 27.

Kera Mashek, a spokesperson for United Way of Greater Kansas City, said payouts will be made to 20 of the 24 shooting survivors. The other four either couldn’t be verified as victims or turned down the funds, she said. Claimants do not include the 67 people prosecutors say were trampled in the melee, she said.

Pending board approval, money will also be disbursed to 14 community groups that support nonviolence initiatives, mental health concerns, and first responders, Mashek said.

To criticism that the United Way didn’t communicate well with the victims, Mashek said it tried to respond in a timely manner.

“We’ve tried to keep that line of communication open as fast as possible and most people have been very patient,” she said. “I think that they will be very grateful and very, I believe, pleasantly surprised with the amount of funding that they receive.”

Other resources available

Abigail Arellano hadn’t heard of victims’ compensation, which is common. A 2022 survey from the Alliance for Safety and Justice found that 96% of victims did not receive that support and many didn’t know it existed.

Arellano and her husband, Antonio, didn’t attend the parade but they’ve had medical expenses as well. Antonio has been going to therapy at a local health center to help with the stressful task of guiding his son through the trauma. It’s been helpful. But he’s been paying around $125 out-of-pocket for each session, he said, and the bills are mounting.

One of Samuel’s sisters set up a GoFundMe that raised $12,500, and Abigail said it helped that the family shared their story publicly and that Abigail reached out to help others in the Latino community affected by the shooting.

It was Abigail, for instance, who connected 71-year-old Sarai Holguin with the Mexican Consulate in Kansas City. The consulate, in turn, helped Holguin register as an official victim of the shooting, which will enable her to receive assistance from the United Way. Holguin’s bills now include a fourth surgery, to remove the bullet lodged near her knee that she had previously made peace with living with forever — until it began protruding through her skin.

‘Generous and quick’ relief to victims

Several survivors were relieved and grateful to receive funds from a less high-profile, nondenominational group called “The Church Loves Kansas City.”

The day after the shooting, Gary Kendall, who ran a Christian nonprofit called “Love KC,” started a text chain at 6 a.m. with city leaders and faith-based groups, and eventually received pledges of $184,500. (Love KC has now merged with another nonprofit, “Unite KC,” which is disbursing its funds.)

The first payout went to the family of Lisa Lopez-Galvan, the 43-year-old mother of two and popular DJ who was the sole fatality during the parade shootings. Unite KC spent $15,000 on her burial expenses.

Unite KC spent $2,800 so James and Brandie Lemons could get their health insurance restored because James couldn’t work. Unite KC also paid $2,200 for the out-of-pocket surgical costs when James decided to get the bullet removed from his leg.

“I appreciate it,” an emotional James Lemons said. “They don’t have to do that, to open their hearts for no reason.”

Erika Nelson was struggling to pay for household expenses and had to take time off from her home health care job to take her injured daughter, 15-year-old Mireya, to doctor appointments. Mireya was shot in the chin and shoulder and is recovering.

A GoFundMe page set up by Nelson’s best friend raised about $11,000, but it was frozen after Nelson tried to get into the account and GoFundMe thought it was being hacked. She feared the lights would be shut off in their apartment, because of unpaid electric bills, and was feeling desperate.

“I’m struggling with, like, you know, groceries,” Nelson said. “People were like, ‘Oh, go to food pantries.’ Well, the food pantries are not open the times I can get off. I can’t just take off work to go to a food pantry.”

After meeting with Gary Kendall, Nelson received three months of rent and utility payments, about $3,500.

“A weight off my shoulder. I mean, yeah. In a big way,” she whispered. “’Cause you never know. You never know what can happen in two days, five days, two weeks, two months.”

Samuel Arellano’s family recently connected with Unite KC, which will pay for his ambulance bill, one of the hospital bills, and some therapy, worth about $6,000. The bill for the initial emergency room trip was about $20,000, his parents said, but the hospital had been reluctant to send it and ultimately covered the cost.

And Unite KC also intends to pay off a $1,300 credit card bill for Emily Tavis and Jacob Gooch Sr.

Unite KC has disbursed $40,000 so far and hopes to connect with more of the injured families, hoping to be as “generous and quick as we can,” Kendall said. United Way will be like a “lightning bolt” for victims’ relief, Kendall said, but his group is aiming for something different, more like a campfire that burns for the next year.

“We agree this is a horrific thing that happened. It’s a sad state of humanity but it’s a real part,” he said. “So we want to remind them that God has not forgotten you. And that although he allowed this, he has not abandoned them. We believe we can be like an extension of his love to these people.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

States that receive federal funding are required to report prison and jail deaths to the U.S. Department of Justice (Darrin Klimek/Getty Images).

The warden of Jefferson City Correctional Center, where four corrections officers were fired earlier this year following the investigation of a December death of an inmate, has been replaced.

An acting warden has taken over for Doris Falkenrath, Karen Pojmann, spokesperson for the Missouri Department of Corrections, said in an email to The Independent. Falkenrath is no longer with the department, Pojmann wrote.

“I’m not able to comment on the nature of or reasons for Warden Falkenrath’s separation from the department,” she wrote. 

Falkenrath worked for the department since 1999 and previously held the position of warden at the Fulton Reception and Diagnostic Center. Her last day was Thursday, Pojmann wrote. 

Othel Moore was 38 and being held in the Jefferson City Correctional Center when he died on the morning of Dec. 8. Prison activists at the time described a painful death where his pleas for help were ignored after he was placed in administrative confinement.

The department launched an internal investigation, with a parallel inquiry conducted by the Cole County Sheriff’s Department. The four correctional officers were fired in March because of their conduct at the time of Moore’s death but the department did not release any details about the terminations.

Those investigations have been completed, said Andrew M. Stroth of Action Injury Law Group, one of the attorneys representing Moore’s family. He has not received all the reports, he said.

“Under (Falkenrath’s) command, Othel Moore was unjustifiably killed,” Stroth said. “We also believe that the officers that were terminated are responsible for the tragic and unjustified death of Otto Moore.”

According to accounts provided by Stroth and others, Moore was pepper sprayed, his head was covered with a hood and he was placed in restraints. He could be heard screaming that he could not breathe and inmates described seeing blood coming from his mouth and ears as he was removed from the cell.

The family has not received the surveillance video it has demanded from the department nor has it received a full autopsy report on his death, Stroth said.

“The family is grateful that the warden has been terminated, that the officers involved have been terminated and we look forward to advancing their case in the courts,” Stroth said.

Activists tracking deaths in Missouri prisons have been increasingly trying to raise the alarm as deaths increase at the same time prison populations have declined.

From 2012 to 2014, department data shows, there was an average of 31,442 incarcerated people in state prisons. Deaths averaged 89 per year. Over the period 2020 through 2022, with an average of 23,409 incarcerated people in state prisons, deaths averaged 122 per year.

The numbers continue to increase, said Lori Curry of Missouri Prison Reform. She said Monday that her figures show 135 deaths in custody during 2023, up from 125 in 2022.

Deaths attributed to accidental causes – including drug overdoses – have been a major factor driving the increase. 

So far this year, she said, there have been 66 deaths reported in Missouri prisons through May 31, a rate that would result in more than 150 deaths by the end of the year.

“I’m glad there has been some accountability in this situation,” Curry said. “You know, there were some other employees that were fired that were more directly involved in the situation. However, there are still employees that I believe were involved or should have some accountability.”

Getting information about individual deaths in custody has been extremely difficult, even for family members of the deceased. Willa Hynes of St. Louis won a case in April where the Western District Court of Appeals found the department violated the Sunshine Law when it asserted that records of the death of her son, Jahi Hynes, in 2021 were inmate medical records protected from disclosure.

Jahi Hynes was 27 when he hanged himself with a bedsheet in an isolation cell.

“We find there was substantial evidence from which the trial court could have found the DOC acted with the intent to achieve some purpose by violating the Sunshine Law, namely, to hinder Hynes from pursuing a potential civil claim against the DOC relating to her son’s death,” Judge Edward Ardini wrote.

Willa Hynes has a wrongful death lawsuit against the department pending in Mississippi County, the location of the Southeast Missouri Correctional Center.

Moore, who had been in prison for almost 19 years at the time of his death, was serving a 30-year sentence for second-degree domestic assault, possession of a controlled substance, first-degree robbery and armed criminal action.

Moore’s family hasn’t filed a lawsuit yet but it is coming, Stroth said.

“It’s three law firms and a whole team of lawyers that are representing the Moore family, to pursue justice for this family,” he said.

The courts can’t be the only way to implement changes in the department, Curry said. The corrections agency needs to take further actions to show it is serious about putting an end to unnatural deaths among people in custody, she said.

“I don’t see accountability across the board in this situation,” Curry said.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump appears in court for his trial for allegedly covering up hush money payments on April 23, 2024, at Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City. Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first of his criminal cases to go to trial (Brendan McDermid-Pool/Getty Images).

Twenty-four Republican state attorneys general, including Missouri’s, have interceded in the classified-documents prosecution of Donald Trump, opposing special counsel Jack Smith’s request that the trial judge bar Trump from making hostile statements against federal law enforcement.

In a 27-page amicus brief filed by Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody, the states complain that Smith’s motion to amend the former president’s bail conditions amounts to interference in the presidential election.

“The free-speech right is at its strongest when it protects political speech,” the brief says.

“Yet special prosecutor Jack Smith, on behalf of the United States, asks this court to curtail that right by ordering a prior restraint on President Trump’s constitutionally protected speech. Such an order is presumptively unconstitutional,” the document continues.

Republican AGs in Iowa, West Virginia, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming have joined Moody’s brief.

“If granted, this request would prevent the presumptive Republican nominee for president of the United States from speaking out against the prosecution and the criminal trial process that seek to take away his liberty,” the brief reads.

“That prosecution, of course, is led by a department that President Trump’s political opponent controls,” it adds, referring to Joe Biden and the U.S. Department of Justice.

“Once again, we are witnessing a prosecutor seek to keep the presumptive Republican nominee for president from speaking in the midst of an election. The First Amendment, at its core, is designed to protect political speech, and I along with my colleagues will not stand idly by and watch the Biden administration trample the free speech of a Florida citizen,” Moody said in a written statement.

Trump stands accused of willfully retaining national defense information, conspiring to obstruct justice, and destroying evidence in the case before U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon in Fort Pierce, a Trump appointee.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court is considering Trump’s claim for presidential immunity from federal criminal charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 presidential election. A trial on racketeering and conspiracy charges arising from his alleged attempt to interfere with the election is on hold in Georgia state court.

On May 30, Trump was found guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to cover up hush money payments to a porn star to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.

‘Significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger’

On May 24, Smith filed a motion to alter Trump’s conditions of release “to make clear that he may not make statements that pose a significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger to law enforcement agents participating in the investigation and prosecution of this case.”

Trump and his supporters made “several intentionally false and inflammatory statements,” Smith argued, “that distort the circumstances under which the Federal Bureau of Investigation planned and executed the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago,” during which federal agents seized the classified documents at issue.

Trump and others cited a wording in the search warrant reiterating the FBI’s “standard and unobjectionable language setting out the Department of Justice’s use-of-force policy, which prohibits the use of deadly force except ‘when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person,’” Smith’s motion says.

It notes that agents coordinated with Trump’s Secret Service detail and entered when Trump was away from his home.

“Trump, however, has distorted the standard inclusion of the policy limiting the use of deadly force by mischaracterizing it as a claim that the FBI ‘WAS AUTHORIZED TO SHOOT ME,’ was ‘just itching to do the unthinkable,’ and was ‘locked & loaded ready to take me out & put my family in danger,’” the document continues.

“Those statements create a grossly misleading impression about the intentions and conduct of federal law enforcement agents — falsely suggesting that they were complicit in a plot to assassinate him — and expose those agents, some of whom will be witnesses at trial, to the risk of threats, violence, and harassment.

“The court has an independent obligation to protect the integrity of this judicial proceeding and should take steps immediately to halt this dangerous campaign to smear law enforcement.”

Campaign ‘in full swing’

Attorneys for Trump, in a brief filed Friday, cited Smith’s “most recent shocking display of overreach and disregard for the Constitution.”

It accuses Smith of seeking “to restrict President Trump’s campaign speech as the first presidential debate approaches at the end of this month. Smith’s motion goes one step further in his efforts to interfere in the 2024 presidential election and assist President Biden, by seeking improper restrictions on President Trump’s core protected speech that would continue through the Republican National Convention in July, and thereafter, until this case is dismissed for one or more of the myriad reasons we have identified.”

Moody’s brief argues that restricting Trump’s speech would require showing of a “clear and present danger to the administration of justice.” She’s a Republican who has been an ardent supporter of the former president, filing numerous legal proceedings supporting him and attacking President Biden.

“The special prosecutor cannot make that showing because he has not demonstrated that President Trump’s comments have threatened law enforcement or that his comments have resulted in threats to law enforcement,” her latest brief says.

“[T]he presidential campaign is in full swing. As Americans turn their attention to the upcoming presidential election, courts should take special care to ensure voters can judge the candidates on their own merits. A prior restraint that might limit a candidate’s ability to campaign must meet exacting standards. The proposed order here would not meet those standards,” the brief adds.

This story originally appeared in the Florida Phoenix, a States Newsroom affiliate. 

Donnita Stunson stands for a portrait in her home last January in Madison, Alabama (Christian Monterrosa/Special to The Marshall Project).

In March 2018, a heartbroken mother named Donnita Stunson mailed a letter to the mayor of St. Louis asking for help. “I was born and raised in the city of St. Louis,” she wrote. “I was once proud of my city, until Dec. 22, 2017.”

On that date, around 3 a.m., an unknown number of people with guns broke into the apartment that Stunson’s daughter Dominique Lewis had recently moved into. Lewis and two of her friends ran outside — still in the clothes they wore to bed — frantically looking for somewhere to hide and jumped into the back seat of one of their cars.

The shooters found them and repeatedly fired into the vehicle, killing all three women. Police found their bodies huddled together in the car. “Looked like they were laying on top of each other,” one officer observed at the time.

Three months after the killings, Stunson decided to write her letter to then-Mayor Lyda Krewson. She was desperate for updates on the investigation, but detectives weren’t returning her calls. “As a mother, I am crushed, but I am disappointed too. I feel that there is no urgency in catching the murderers of these three young ladies,” Stunson wrote. “I am contacting you because I don’t know what else to do.”

The triple homicide was a shocking crime, even in one of the most violent cities in America. Lewis and her friends, Reeba Moore and Chanice White, were in their mid-20s. They worked, went to school and loved to socialize in the community. Police said they appeared to have been targeted for unknown reasons. None of the women had a criminal record. When Stunson walked through the apartment the morning after the shootings, she noticed that nothing seemed to have been stolen.

But for all the ways the killings of these young women stood out, the lack of progress on the case in the months and years that followed was, by contrast, quite typical. Of the roughly 1,900 homicides committed in the city of St. Louis from 2014 through 2023, more than 1,000 remain unsolved, according to an analysis of homicide data obtained by APM Reports and St. Louis Public Radio.

During those years, murders in St. Louis surged, making the city one of the nation’s deadliest. For most of the decade, police struggled to bring perpetrators to justice. A review of 20 years of data and records reveals some of the reasons police failed to solve so many homicides, including shoddy detective work, lack of resources and an erosion of community trust.

In 2022 and 2023, St. Louis homicide detectives solved substantially more cases. Homicides went down, and the department solved 56% of the murders committed those years, their highest rate since 2013, according to the analysis.

Yet with each unsolved murder, grief ripples across the city, leaving families and friends yearning for closure and justice. It’s a pain that the Black community in St. Louis endures disproportionately. Black people, who are about 44% of the city’s population, made up around 90% of those killed between 2014 and 2023. Police solved fewer than half of the killings involving Black victims. By contrast, police cleared nearly two-thirds of cases involving white victims.

The city’s homicides, especially those that remain unsolved, tend to happen in geographic clusters, the data shows. In the Fairground neighborhood on the city’s north side, where Lewis, Moore and White were slain, the concentration of deadly shootings is staggering. There were at least 37 homicides in the area in the past decade, and nearly 60% remain unsolved. In high-crime neighborhoods like this one, talking to police can be dangerous.

After the triple homicide, police appealed to the public for tips. The families went public, holding vigils and begging for someone to come forward with information. Over the years, the nonprofit CrimeStoppers repeatedly offered reward money, but police never arrested any suspects.

Stunson said the mayor’s office never responded to her letter, though not long after she sent it, she received a rare phone call from a detective about her daughter’s murder. He had little progress to report.

St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department officials declined to be interviewed about the case, but a spokesperson wrote in an email that detectives are still actively investigating it. Police have said in the past that a lack of information from the public is their main obstacle. “Staffing and funding isn’t the problem in this case, clues are the problem,” Lt. John Blaskiewicz said in a 2022 interview with television station KMOV.

Some experts contend that failing to solve homicides can lead to more violence. “If you’re not closing cases, then people are afraid,” said Dan Isom, a former St. Louis police commissioner who served as the city’s public safety director from 2021 to 2023. “There is a lot of correlation, if not causation, between confidence in the police and community violence,” Isom said. Without an arrest, some people might seek justice on their own.

Lewis was close to her brother and sisters, so Stunson asked them to choose everything for the funeral. They picked a casket that was purple, her favorite color, and covered her vault in sparkles. They brought a scarf to the wake to cover the bullet wounds on her neck.

On Feb. 10, 2018, friends and family of the victims gathered for a candlelight vigil to pray and ask the public to come forward with information.

The night Lewis was killed, her younger sister, Danyelle Lewis, was supposed to have slept over at her apartment. Danyelle was gripped with anger about the killings and losing hope that police would catch the people who committed them. Stunson said Danyelle believed that some people attending the vigil knew something they weren’t telling police.

After the vigil, Danyelle got in her car and followed the group of people as their car merged onto a highway, according to police records. She had a gun. Danyelle pulled up beside the car and opened fire.

‘I’m not going to stop’

Lewis, Moore and White were among the final victims in 2017. It was one of the deadliest years in St. Louis, with a total of 207 people killed, according to the data.

As the number of cases surged, the percentage that police managed to clear, or resolve, was dropping. In 2019, data shows, police solved the lowest percentage of murders in at least 20 years, with nearly 70% unsolved. Nationwide, police clear about half of all homicides, according to The Washington Post.

Police cleared a higher percentage of cases in 2022 and 2023. And last year, the number of homicides dropped in St. Louis, as it has in cities across the country. Fewer killings means more resources can be devoted to each case. The department is under new leadership — Robert Tracy was named chief in late 2022 — and police officials have said the improvement can be attributed, at least in part, to better surveillance coverage throughout St. Louis and stronger communication within the department.

Tensions between police and the community are longstanding in St. Louis. Those tensions worsened after a Ferguson officer killed 18-year-old Michael Brown Jr. in 2014, said Jay Schroeder, president of the St. Louis Police Officers Association. “I think a lot of the mistrust of the police started to grow.”

The department’s detectives were under enormous pressure, Schroeder said, especially in 2020, when the number of murders in St. Louis hit 263, nearly a record.

Embed code:

While the number of killings was rising, St. Louis officials reduced the homicide unit’s budget and supplemented it with increased spending on overtime. The city spent about $18,000 for each homicide investigation in fiscal 2012. By fiscal 2020, the amount was less than $12,000. It has since rebounded to about $15,000 per investigation in 2022.

The city has failed to invest in crime-fighting tools and still has a DNA-evidence backlog of hundreds of samples from homicides. That forces detectives to wait for key evidence in their cases.

Still, some detectives have failed to do basic investigative work.

The officer assigned to the killings of Lewis, Moore and White was Detective Craig Robertson. At a vigil held shortly after the killings, Robertson told the crowd about his commitment to the case. “This one’s bothered me the most,” he said. “I’m not going to stop. We’ll figure it out.”

But the victims’ families say his public statements didn’t align with his actions. His supervisor, Sgt. Heather Taylor, wrote in 2019 that Robertson “failed to complete basic investigative follow-ups” in his cases, including, in one instance, not checking suspects’ phone location data and vehicle registration, according to memos obtained by St. Louis Public Radio and APM Reports. Taylor also wrote that Robertson did not stay in contact with murder victims’ families. Many families interviewed for this series said their calls to other St. Louis homicide detectives were never returned.

Taylor wrote in her memo that she intended to continue supervising Robertson’s investigation into the killings of Lewis, Moore and White. She noted that he cleared 14% of the cases assigned to him in 2018, the lowest rate, by far, of any detective under her supervision. Robertson declined to comment.

The 2017 triple homicide was still assigned to Robertson in early 2024, a spokesperson said. But in May, he decided to retire from the department. Stunson said she hasn’t talked to him in years. She has spent so long unsuccessfully calling him for updates, she can’t bear to try anymore.

‘It’s still your job to police’

Dominique Lewis was the type of person who took care of the people around her, Stunson said. She would clean her grandma’s house and take her grandpa to his doctor’s appointments. She’d had the same group of girlfriends since elementary school. She loved reading and always had a book with her. She also had a ditzy side, Stunson said, which made everyone in the family laugh. Her dream was to one day be a school guidance counselor.

Lewis’ sister Danyelle was the one in the family who always tried to protect her other siblings, though she was the youngest of the bunch, Stunson said. The family called her “the enforcer.”

The bullets Danyelle fired at the people in the car did not hit anyone. She was soon arrested, pleaded not guilty and was put in jail to await trial. After months of not hearing from homicide detectives about Dominique’s murder, Stunson said, she got a call from a police officer trying to build a case against Danyelle.

Stunson said she changed the subject to her murdered daughter. “How about looking into that?” she remembers telling the detective. She never heard from him again.

People who commit violent crimes have often suffered violence or trauma themselves, said Jessica Meyers, director of the St. Louis Area Violence Prevention Commission. “They may decide to take justice into their own hands,” she said. “The victim pool and the perpetrator pool kind of overlap, and the cycle just continues to perpetuate.”

Lisa LaGrone has worked in violence prevention in St. Louis for decades and says that one of the reasons so many homicides go unsolved is apathetic police officers who blame victims’ lifestyles for their deaths. She started her mission to reduce murders in the community after her father and little brother were shot and killed eight months apart in the early 1990s. Both homicides remain unsolved.

In the past few years, two of LaGrone’s grandsons were killed, including Demetrion Simmons, who was fatally shot after witnessing the killing of his friend, 19-year-old Isis Mahr. Simmons identified the shooters to police and was the only witness willing to testify. LaGrone believes he was killed in retribution. After Simmons was killed, prosecutors dropped the charges against the two teenagers accused of killing Mahr.

LaGrone said police often point to a lack of community cooperation but then overlook the reasons residents hold back. “If your community knows they’re not going to be protected, they’re not going to step up,” LaGrone said. “But it’s still your job to police and be the detectives.”

Stunson says she still doesn’t know what happened the night her daughter was killed. A police minister privately informed her that someone in the apartment called 911 to report a burglary in progress, she said, but she has never heard those recordings. Police declined to make the 911 audio public because the investigation is still open. The department did release a dispatch log that shows someone called police around 3 a.m.

Moore’s boyfriend also was in the apartment but escaped, according to police records.

In 2019, Danyelle Lewis pleaded guilty to several charges, including assault. The judge sentenced her to six years in prison, and she was released in 2023. She declined an interview request for this story.

Stunson says that while Danyelle’s struggles with grief and anger led her to prison, many in her family have turned to alcohol to cope with Dominique’s murder. Stunson prays that whoever knows something will “get a conscience” and give information to the police so that everyone can find the closure they are so desperately seeking.

“When something like this happens, people don’t realize, it’s not just the person that they murdered,” Stunson said. “It impacts the whole family.”

Iron County Circuit Clerk Sammye White balances on a stepladder as she searches for an old marijuana case in the office storage room in Ironton (Rebecca Rivas/Missouri Independent).

IRONTON — Sammye White balanced carefully on a stepladder as she pulled a hefty box marked “1993” off the top shelf.

White, the elected circuit clerk for Iron County in southeast Missouri, was searching for an old marijuana case. 

The small storage room near her office is packed with faded ledgers indexing criminal cases by year, along with the cardboard boxes containing the case files. 

When White learned in November 2022 that her team had one year to review every marijuana case in the county — going back to at least the 1970s — to determine it needed to be expunged under a new state cannabis law, she slightly panicked. 

Aside from the work, her only two clerks were both about to retire. 

“I thought, ‘How in the world are we going to accomplish this?’” White remembers.

Thankfully one of the clerks, Denise Anderson, agreed “out of the goodness of her heart,” White said, to continue on part-time to help get through the list of potential eligible cases. 

Money isn’t enough to speed up Missouri’s marijuana expungements

It’s a tedious process, she said, that took Anderson more than a year to review about 500 cases, leading to about 100 expungements.

Circuit clerks across the state are going through the same balancing act and hurricane of work as White. 

Under the 2022 constitution amendment that legalized marijuana, courts were required to complete misdemeanors by last June and felonies by last December. Those deadlines came and went, and many counties are still months or more away from completing the task. 

While clerks were given lists from the Office of State Administrator and Highway Patrol for digital records that might qualify, it was just a starting point. 

The real tedious work is still ahead for many of them — going through the paper records. For these records, court clerks have to read summaries for every single criminal record. There’s no way to run a report to search certain criminal codes.

Paper files largely end in the early 2000s, and the first marijuana-related drug statutes are from 1971, according to information the state administrator provided to court clerks. 

In Iron County, White is on the 1993 files. 

As courts statewide rushed to meet the constitutional deadlines, establishing a systematic method to track their work fell by the wayside for many of them. 

Now it’s hard to say how many cases have been reviewed — and impossible to say how many more are left to go, court officials said.

The Independent requested data for every county on how many cases they reviewed and how many were expunged. According to numbers compiled by the Missouri Supreme Court, about 123,000 marijuana cases have been expunged as of mid-May. 

That number is the easiest to count because expungement orders are approved by a judge and processed the same way statewide. 

The mystery is how many cases clerks have looked through. The Supreme Court estimates that about 273,000 cases have been reviewed, which would mean courts are expunging 45% of the cases they reviewed. 

But this estimate does not include the paper records. 

Aside from this, spokeswoman Beth Riggert for the Missouri Supreme Court said the clerks’ daily work continues with more than 1.38 million new case filings. 

“As the chief justice has said consistently, the front-line workers are the heroes of our courts,” Riggert said. “They deserve our ongoing gratitude for everything they do to serve their local communities.”

Counting the paper records

Like White, Nodaway County Circuit Clerk Elaine Wilson had no idea how her team of three clerks was going to complete all the marijuana expungements in general — but particularly in a rush. 

Wilson said she was fortunate that one of her clerks, Melissa Kohlleppel, volunteered to take on the project.  

“She just dived right in it,” Wilson said. “I didn’t have to ask. She just took it all on herself and just did it.”

For Wilson, each step of the process is important, she said, and she’d only trust an experienced clerk to do it. 

Kohlleppel said she’s gone through the three different lists of potential digital files, and now she’s looking through all the paper records. She hopes to be done by the end of the year.

“It’s been awful,” she said. “I just don’t think they realized what was going into this whenever they passed it,” referring to the tight deadline.

According to the state numbers, Nodaway County has expunged 100% of the 535 cases reviewed. 

But that’s not accurate, Kohlleppel said. She didn’t realize there’s a special code for the cases she reviewed but didn’t expunge.

After the constitutional amendment was approved by voters in November 2022, a state court committee quickly came up with a code for “reviewed but deemed ineligible” for clerks to input in the system. 

Problem is, some circuit courts didn’t know the code existed — and still don’t. The only way the Supreme Court can track how many cases have been reviewed is by running a report on this code. 

The code was a small piece in a mountain of information clerks had to quickly digest in webinars and onlines resources that court officials rushed to get out in December 2022. 

White kept a binder of all that information, and it’s at least 200 pages.

“It was an incredible undertaking for court staff to implement in a short amount of time,” Riggert said, “all while ensuring the ordinary business of the courts continued.”

And even with the code, that report won’t include the number of paper records courts have reviewed. Clerks must create a digital “shell case” to mark that a paper case is expunged, but state officials are not requiring this for cases that are reviewed but not expunged. 

Riggert said state officials appreciate how hard the courts are working on the expungements and did not want to give clerks additional “unnecessary duties.”

 “The number of cases expunged is likely to be only a fraction of the total cases reviewed,” Riggert said. “…we have no centralized mechanism for tracking the thousands of non-electronic cases our local courts are reviewing.”

The state clerk told lawmakers in January that she estimated about 10% of the cases the clerks review are eligible for expungement. 

Yet according to the data, the average is about 45%. 

In 26 out or 115 counties, nearly every record — 80% or more — that clerks reviewed resulted in an expungement, according to the state’s numbers. Only five counties were 15% or less.

'Many unknowns'

In St. Louis city, archived cases are stored in the old Globe Democrat building on Tucker Boulevard several blocks north of the court. 

“For the ones at the Globe, our staffers have been retrieving them by van, bringing them back to the courthouse where clerks go through them by hand,” said Joel Currier, spokesman for the 22nd Circuit Court. 

The court has relied on state “special assistance funding” to hire part-time clerks, many of them former retired court clerks with experience, to work on these expungements, he said. 

These funds come from the revenues of recreational marijuana sales. 

To expunge a case, court clerks write an order for a judge. After approval, clerks email all law enforcement agencies to instruct them to clear the case from their records. Then, they mail the person whose case was expunged. 

The most challenging ones are where it’s not the only charge in the case — clerks have to redact only the marijuana charge information from the records.

Christian County Circuit Clerk Barb Stillings has a leg up compared to other courts who are going through paper records. About 12 years ago, Stillings applied for special assistance funding from the state to digitize their paper files. 

On the plus side, it means her team doesn’t have to move around heavy boxes. Sadly, Stillings didn’t have enough money to make the records searchable by criminal charge. So her team still has to go through every single record to check for marijuana offenses. 

Her team printed the case indexes on 25,000 cases going back to the 1970s, and like St. Louis, she has a team of part-time workers looking through those summaries the special funds are paying for. 

When the funds became available in the fall of 2023, Christian County asked for one of the higher amounts, about $380,000, to pay for overtime and part time employees to work on the expungements. Stillings ended up only using $23,000 of that.

“Just because I’ve asked for all this money, do I have enough people to work on it?” Stillings told The Independent in February. “It’s so many unknowns.”

She understands why some other counties used very little of the funds or didn’t ask for any at all.

“Some counties didn’t have anybody who could come work part time, or staff that wanted to work overtime,” she said. 

Iron County requested $22,500 but spent less than $4,000. That number will definitely increase in the coming months, White said.

When Iron County made it through all the digital records this spring, White had a short-lived moment of relief. Recently, White found another substantial report of digital cases she didn’t know was available to her. 

“I almost feel like we’re starting over again,” she said. “But it is what it is, and we will work on it as hard as we can.”

Former President Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for president, speaks Friday during a press conference at Trump Tower in New York City. Trump was found guilty on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first of his criminal cases to go to trial. (David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Former President Donald Trump, now a convicted felon, vowed to launch an appeal based “on many things” he considered unfair during his New York trial, he said Friday in the lobby of Trump Tower in Midtown Manhattan.

Meanwhile Friday, legal and political analysts predicted he will spend little if any time in jail depending on the outcome of that appeal, fundraising among supportive Republicans appeared to surge and eight GOP members of the U.S. Senate pledged they will not support any Democratic priorities or nominations.

The reactions came as Americans continued to digest the news that on Thursday, a jury in Lower Manhattan found the Republican Party’s presumed 2024 presidential nominee guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, a felony in New York.

The roughly seven-week proceeding marked the first-ever criminal trial of a former U.S. president.

“We’re going to be appealing this scam,” Trump said at his late-morning press conference, referring to New York Justice Juan Merchan as a “tyrant.”

Over about 30 minutes of often misleading or false comments delivered in his familiar stream-of-consciousness style that jumped from topic to topic, Trump complained about aspects of the trial, said the case shouldn’t have been prosecuted at all and made campaign-style appeals on immigration and crime.

Trump has centered his public relations defense on the idea that the prosecution was politically motivated, often blaming the Biden administration, and he repeated the theme throughout his Friday remarks.

“If they can do this to me, they can do this to anyone,” he said.

President Joe Biden said Friday that Trump “was given every opportunity to defend himself.”

“It was a state case, not a federal case. It was heard by a jury of 12 citizens, 12 Americans, 12 people like you, like millions of Americans who’ve served on juries. This jury was chosen the same way every jury in America is chosen. It was a process that Donald Trump’s attorney was part of,” Biden said from the White House before delivering remarks on the Israel-Hamas conflict.

Biden said Trump now has the opportunity “as he should” to appeal, just like anyone else who is tried in the U.S.

“That’s how the American system of justice works,” Biden said. “It’s reckless, it’s dangerous, it’s irresponsible for anyone to say this was rigged just because they don’t like the verdict.”

Jail time?

Trump told the crowd Friday morning he could spend “187 years” in jail for being found guilty of falsifying business records. It was not clear how he arrived at that number.

Most observers of his trial and the New York justice system disagree with that estimate.

Merchan set Trump’s sentencing for July 11 at 10 a.m. Eastern, just four days before the Republican National Convention kicks off in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where the GOP will officially nominate Trump for president in November’s election.

Trump is convicted of class E felonies, the lowest level felony in New York state, and each carries the possibility of probation to up to four years in prison.

Any incarceration sentence up to a year would be served in the city’s Rikers Island jail or another local facility. Incarceration beyond that time frame would be served at a state facility.

“If that jail sentence happens, it probably will be less than a year,” said Norm Eisen, former White House special counsel in the Obama administration, who has been commenting on the indictment and trial for months.

Eisen spoke during a virtual press conference hosted by the Defend Democracy Project.

New York state law experts say Merchan may not be inclined to imprison a former, and possibly future, U.S. president. And, if he sentences Trump to any length of incarceration, it will likely be stayed — a temporary stop to the action —pending appeal.

Trump could remain free on bail conditions set by the court, or no bail conditions, subject to a decision by the appeals court and potentially any other review if an appeals judge sends the case to the state’s highest court.

“When there is a stay pending appeal, generally, the process is expedited more quickly than it would be if the defendant was at liberty and there was no stay. But even so, this is going to go beyond the election,” said retired New York Supreme Court Judge Michael Obus at the press conference with Eisen.

Appeal strategy?

While Trump said Friday morning he plans to appeal the verdict based on “many things,” legal observers speculate his team’s approach may come down to a few options.

In New York, falsifying a business record is illegal in the first degree when the “intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.”

While the jurors had to unanimously agree on an intent to commit another crime, they did not have to agree unanimously on what that underlying crime was, according to Merchan’s instructions to the jury prior to deliberations.

Merchan said jurors could consider three options for the other crime: violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act; falsification of other business records; or, violation of tax laws.

Obus said a “non-frivolous argument” that Trump’s team might use is that one of those underlying crimes was a federal, not a state crime.

“That’s the kind of argument that we might see on appeal — the argument being that New York courts don’t have the authority to prosecute the case with that being the object crime because it’s a federal crime,” Obus said. “I don’t think that’ll be successful.”

In addition to the challenge regarding federal election law, Shane T. Stansbury of Duke Law told States Newsroom in an interview Friday that he expects to see Trump’s legal team challenge evidentiary issues.

“For example, I would expect that the defense would make a claim that the salacious testimony by Stormy Daniels about the details of her sexual encounter with Donald Trump was unfairly prejudicial,” Stansbury said.

Also, Trump’s lawyers might challenge the judge’s decision to strike from defense attorney Todd Blanche’s closing statement a plea he made to the jury, asking them to not send Trump “to prison.”

The charge against Trump could, or could not, result in prison time.

“You can imagine the defense saying that that correction may have prejudiced the jury. Now, I should say that those kinds of evidentiary issues are a much steeper climb for the defense,” Stansbury said.

‘A legal expense’

Trump remains under a gag order imposed by Merchan in March to keep the former president from further attacking court staff and potential witnesses online.

Trump violated the order 10 times, leading Merchan to fine him $9,000 on April 30, and again $1,000 on May 6.

During his comments Friday morning, Trump complained of having to pay “thousands of dollars” because of his “nasty gag order.”

Still, Trump spent several minutes during his remarks talking about one of the prosecution’s star witnesses, his former personal lawyer Michael Cohen.

According to testimony and document evidence presented during trial, Cohen wired $130,000 of his own money to porn star Stormy Daniels days before the 2016 presidential election to silence her about an alleged affair with Trump. Trump then reimbursed Cohen the following year under the guise of “legal expenses.”

Prosecutors never should have brought the case accusing him of falsifying business records, Trump said.

The payments to Cohen were for Cohen to create a nondisclosure agreement with Daniels and secure her signature, which is legal, Trump said Friday. That was a legal service, and the payments were properly recorded that way, he said.

“I paid a lawyer a legal expense,” he said.

“The whole thing is legal expense was marked down as legal expense,” he said. “Think of it: This is the crime that I committed that I’m supposed to go to jail for 187 years for.”

Trump, who wouldn’t say Cohen’s name Friday because of the gag order, said Cohen was not a “fixer” as he is often described, but a lawyer in good standing.

“By the way, this was a highly qualified lawyer,” Trump said. “Now I’m not allowed to use his name because of the gag order. But, you know, he’s a sleazebag. Everybody knows that. Took me a while to find out. But he was effective. He did work. But he wasn’t a fixer. He was a lawyer.”

Trump said he wanted to testify at his trial, but was advised not to by his lawyers.

Attacks on Biden 

Trump pivoted nearly immediately after his remarks began to campaign-style attacks on Biden’s administration and the anti-immigration positions that comprise Trump’s most consistent policy message since his political career began in 2015.

He focused on immigrants from predominantly non-white countries and made false claims that many had been institutionalized in prison and mental hospitals.

“Millions and millions of people are flowing in from all parts of the world, not just South America, from Africa, from Asia and from the Middle East, and they’re coming in from jails and prisons, and they’re coming in from mental institutions and insane asylums,” he said. “And we have a president and a group of fascists that don’t want to do anything about it.”

He also called crime “rampant in New York.” He added that Biden wanted to quadruple taxes and “make it impossible for you to get a car,” neither of which are based on Biden’s actual policy positions.

In a statement, Biden campaign spokesperson Michael Tyler called Trump’s remarks “unhinged.”

“America just witnessed a confused, desperate, and defeated Donald Trump ramble about his own personal grievances and lie about the American justice system, leaving anyone watching with one obvious conclusion: This man cannot be president of the United States,” Tyler wrote. “Unhinged by his 2020 election loss and spiraling from his criminal convictions, Trump is consumed by his own thirst for revenge and retribution.”

GOP convention in less than two months

The Republican National Convention begins July 15. The Republican National Committee, which called Thursday’s verdict “rigged,” did not immediately respond to questions Friday about whether it will adjust plans in the event Trump is placed under any restrictions during his July 11 sentencing.

Trump encouraged supporters to continue backing his campaign as a response to the verdict, calling Nov. 5 – Election Day – “the most important day in the history of our country.”

Throughout his remarks Friday, he touted an online poll conducted by J.L. Partners and published in the conservative British tabloid The Daily Mail on Friday that showed Trump’s approval rating gained points after the verdict.

There were signs that showed Republican support, at least, consolidated even more behind Trump following the verdict.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee, the campaign organization for U.S. Senate Republicans, said it had its highest fundraising day of the cycle Thursday, bringing in $360,000 in donations that the group directly attributed to the verdict in Manhattan.

Other official GOP channels, including the Republican National Committee social media accounts, echoed Trump’s message that the former president was the victim of a political prosecution and predicted the conviction would push voters toward Trump.

Elected Republicans throughout the country continued Friday to almost universally reject the verdict and defend Trump.

A group of eight U.S. Senate Republicans – Mike Lee of Utah, J.D. Vance of Ohio, Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, Eric Schmitt of Missouri, Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, Rick Scott and Marco Rubio of Florida and Roger Marshall of Kansas – signed a letter Friday pledging to increase their resistance to administration priorities in response to the verdict.

“Those who turned our judicial system into a political cudgel must be held accountable,” Lee said in a post to X. “We are no longer cooperating with any Democrat legislative priorities or nominations, and we invite all concerned Senators to join our stand.”

The Biden administration and congressional Democrats played no role in the trial, which was in New York state court.

‘No one is above the law’

The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York, said that Thursday’s verdict shows that “no one is above the law.”

Nadler was joined by Eisen, along with accountability advocates and historians, on a Friday webinar for the press hosted by watchdog group Public Citizen. Eisen participated in multiple press appearances Friday.

Nadler said that Republicans are attempting to sow distrust in the verdict, as the chair of the Judiciary Committee, Jim Jordan of Ohio, has already sent a letter to Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg requesting that he testify in a hearing before the panel’s Weaponization of the Federal Government Subcommittee on June 13.

Nadler said he disagreed with Jordan’s decision to request testimony from the DA who prosecuted Trump.

“It’s a continuing attempt to bully the prosecutors into abandoning prosecutions and to tell the country the false story of persecution of the president (Trump) and to help undermine confidence in the criminal justice system,” Nadler said.

Nadler said the New York trial was important because it’s likely going to be the only trial that finishes before the November elections. Trump faces two federal criminal cases, and another criminal case in Georgia.

“It is very important for the American people to know, before an election, that they’re dealing with a convicted felon,” Nadler said.

Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a history professor at New York University who specializes in authoritarianism, propaganda and democracy protection, said during the virtual press conference that the trial was a demonstration of American democracy being upheld.

“The fact this trial took place at all and was able to unfold in the professional way it did is a testament to the worth and functioning of our democracy,” she said.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump walks to speak to the media Thursday after being found guilty following his hush money trial at Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City. (Seth Wenig-Pool/Getty Images)

Reactions by Missouri politicians to the felony conviction Thursday of former President Donald Trump fell predictably along partisan lines, with Republicans condemning the verdict and Democrats expressing satisfaction or trolling their partisan foes.

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, a candidate for the GOP nomination for governor, blamed President Joe Biden for the state of New York’s prosecution of Trump for hush money payments to a porn star to keep the story of their sexual liaison private.

“Joe Biden has weaponized the justice system to go after one of the greatest Presidents in our history,” Ashcroft wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter. “The democrats are trying to steal another election.”

Ashcrof’s statement echoed Trump’s false claim that he won the 2020 election over Biden.

New York state prosecutors charged 34 felonies against the former president for each of the 11 invoices, 11 checks, and 12 ledger entries tied to reimbursing his former personal lawyer Michael Cohen.

Cohen, often referred to as Trump’s former “fixer,” said during trial testimony that he wired $130,000 to adult film star and director Stormy Daniels days before the 2016 election to silence her about an alleged sexual encounter with Trump.

The two other Republicans running for governor who are registering in primary polls also used social media to proclaim their loyalty to Trump.

“This entire trial was a political stunt and a complete weaponization of our judicial system,” Lt. Gov. Mike Kehoe wrote on his X account. 

State Sen. Bill Eigel posted a video on his X account accompanied by text saying: “RIGGED! This is a disgraceful sham. I stand 100%” with Trump.

Missouri solidly backed Trump in both the 2016 and 2020 elections, giving him almost 57% of the vote in both years. His endorsement was aggressively sought by candidates in the 2022 Republican U.S. Senate primary, but he withheld any preference until the day before the election and then put out a vague statement that did not specify a single candidate.

Trump has all the votes in Missouri’s delegation to the Republican National Convention, set for July in Milwaukee, which is expected to nominate him for a third run for the White House.

On the Democratic side, glee was suppressed by those who were moved to comment.

U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Kansas City Democrat, said in a statement from his office that the conviction was not something to celebrate. It shows the strength of the American justice system, he said.

“Today is a victory for justice and the rule of law,” Cleaver said. “Just as every American is entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, we are equally guaranteed that no individual, including a former president, is above accountability.”

State Rep. Doug Mann of Columbia noted the historic nature of the event – Trump is the first former president to be convicted of a felony after leaving office – and then considered the political impact:

“Will this affect the campaign?,” he wrote on X. “Likely not, but it is good to see the judicial system work and see powerful people held accountable for their misdeeds”

Democratic state Rep. Keri Ingle, a Lee’s Summit Democrat, didn’t directly comment on the verdict, instead relying on snark to express her feelings.

“So, anything interesting happen today?” Ingle wrote on X. 

From Washington, U.S. Sens. Josh Hawley and Eric Schmitt, both Republicans, expressed their support for Trump. 

In one post, Hawley joined Ashcroft in blaming the prosecution on Biden. In a separate post, Hawley attacked the proceedings in New York City.

“This ‘trial’ has been from beginning to end a complete and total sham, a mockery of the criminal justice system, and one of the most dangerous abuses of our political process in American history,” Hawley wrote.

Schmitt compared the trial to the staged proceedings in the Soviet Union used by Communist dictator Josef Stalin to cement his power in the 1930s. 

“The American people will reject this unprecedented lawfare in November,” Schmitt wrote.

State Rep. Sarah Unsicker, a Shrewsbury Democrat, shot back at Schmitt that he was just making things up.

“That’s a conclusion with no supporting evidence,” Unsicker wrote. “Too many Missourians know what a Soviet-style show trial is like, from their own experiences. And you’ve done  nothing to correct that.”

Other Republicans weighing in reflected the comments of the party leaders.

State Sen. Holly Rehder, a candidate for lieutenant governor, said in a statement that the case was brought in a “biased system manipulated by those who fear the power and influence of the MAGA movement.”

Attorney General Andrew Bailey called the outcome an “illegal conviction” and predicted “Americans will overwhelmingly reelect President Trump in November.

Annelise Hanshaw contributed to this report. This article has been updated since it was initially published.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump appears in court Thursday for his hush money trial at Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City. (Steven Hirsch-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Jurors in New York state court on Thursday found Donald Trump guilty on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to cover up hush money payments to a porn star ultimately to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.

The first-ever criminal trial of a former U.S. president wrapped up in Manhattan, marking an extraordinary moment in American history not only for a former leader, but for one who is seeking to again hold the Oval Office. Trump, the Republican Party’s presumed 2024 presidential nominee, is now a convicted felon.

The jury deliberated for more than 11 hours, beginning Wednesday just before 11:30 a.m. Eastern and delivering the verdict to Justice Juan Merchan just after 5 p.m. Thursday, according to reporters at the courthouse.

New York does not allow recording in the courtroom but provides public transcripts of the proceedings. States Newsroom covered the trial in person on May 20.

Trump now faces penalties ranging from probation to up to four years in prison for each charge of falsifying business records in the first degree.

Merchan set a sentencing date for July 11 at 10 a.m. That’s just days before the Republican National Convention, where Trump is expected to be officially nominated as the party’s presidential candidate.

New York state prosecutors charged 34 felonies against the former president for each of the 11 invoices, 11 checks, and 12 ledger entries tied to reimbursing his former personal lawyer Michael Cohen.

Cohen, often referred to as Trump’s former “fixer,” said during trial testimony that he wired $130,000 to adult film star and director Stormy Daniels days before the 2016 election to silence her about an alleged sexual encounter with Trump.

Three criminal cases, two federal and one in Georgia, also still hang in the balance for Trump, but the likelihood of another trial happening before November’s election is slim.

Trump speaks after verdict

Trump briefly spoke to news cameras outside the courtroom, criticizing the proceeding as a “rigged, disgraceful trial.”

“The real verdict is going to be Nov. 5 by the people, and they know what happened here and everybody knows what happened here,” Trump said in remarks live-streamed and cataloged on C-SPAN.

As he has repeated almost daily for the cameras, Trump again called Merchan a “conflicted” judge and falsely claimed the case “was done by the Biden administration.”

The charges were brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, whom Trump described during his post-verdict comments as “Soros-funded,” a common mantra from Trump’s party referring to Hungarian-American billionaire philanthropist George Soros.

During his roughly three-minute remarks, Trump also referred to immigration at the U.S. Southern border, a major campaign rallying cry for Republicans.

“We don’t have the same country anymore. We have a divided mess. We’re a nation in decline, serious decline. Millions and millions of people pouring into our country right now,” Trump said before exiting the hallway without answering shouted questions from reporters.

Despite being a convicted felon, Trump will still be able to vote in November in Palm Beach County, Florida, where he is registered, as long as he is not incarcerated.

That’s because Florida law only bars voting for convicts tried in a separate state if that state also restricts them; a 2021 New York law restored voting rights for convicted felons following a release from prison and regardless if they are on parole, according to reporting by PolitiFact.

House speaker sees ‘shameful day in American history’

Republicans in Congress and other top GOP officials gathered with Trump at the courthouse for support during the trial and members of the GOP immediately decried the verdict.

U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican who was among those who made the trek, released a statement saying the verdict marked “a shameful day in American history.”

“Democrats cheered as they convicted the leader of the opposing party on ridiculous charges, predicated on the testimony of a disbarred, convicted felon,” Johnson wrote. “This was a purely political exercise, not a legal one.”

Johnson was referring to the testimony from Cohen, who served time in prison for campaign finance crimes related to hush money payments.

Sen. Joni Ernst, an Iowa Republican, blasted it as the result of an unfair political process.

“This was never about justice. It was always about politics,” she wrote on X. “ Americans see through Democrats’ weaponization of our justice system and this sham trial as a desperate attempt to persecute Trump and block his re-election.”

The Trump campaign almost immediately solicited donations following the verdict, posting a link on his Truth Social platform to his WinRed donation portal.

Trump’s son Eric Trump reacted on X with “May 30th, 2024 might be remembered as the day Donald J. Trump won the 2024 Presidential Election.”

Video posted from reporters outside the courthouse showed a black SUV driving slowly outside the courthouse while members of the news media held cameras and some scattered in the crowd waved Trump flags and shouted “we love you.”

‘The jury has spoken’ 

In a Thursday evening press conference, Bragg thanked the jurors and his team of prosecutors.

While affirming the case’s historical importance, Bragg said his office worked the case as they would any other, countering the GOP narrative that the case was politically motivated.

The case was decided on “the evidence and the law alone,” he said.

“Donald J. Trump is guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree to conceal a scheme to corrupt the 2016 election,” he said.

“While this defendant may be unlike any other in American history, we arrived at this trial – and ultimately today at this verdict – in the same manner as every other case that comes to the courtroom doors: By following the facts and the law, and doing so without fear or favor.”

Bragg praised “the 12 everyday New Yorkers,” who paid careful attention to a complicated documents-based case to reach a unanimous decision. The jurors’ service represented the “cornerstone” of the “phenomenal” U.S. system of justice, he said.

Asked if he wanted to respond to any of the personal attacks Trump launched against him and his prosecution team, Bragg declined.

Another reporter asked Bragg about criticism of his investigation of the case and his decision to bring a prosecution.

“I did my job. Our job is to follow the facts and the law without fear or favor. And that’s exactly what we did here,” he said.

“Many voices out there,” he added. “The only voice that matters is the voice of the jury. And the jury has spoken.”

Trials in limbo in D.C., Georgia, Florida

The verdict brought to a close the historic first criminal proceeding against a former sitting American president, albeit at the state level.

Trump is currently mired in a fight for absolute immunity from federal criminal charges accusing him of scheming to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.

A U.S. Supreme Court decision on his immunity claim is pending. Justices heard arguments in the case on April 25.

Meanwhile in Florida, federal District Judge Aileen Cannon has indefinitely postponed the U.S. case against Trump for mishandling and refusing to return classified documents that he hid at his Mar-a-Lago estate after he left office.

Trump faces another state case in Georgia, along with several co-conspirators, on racketeering and conspiracy charges related to the state’s 2020 presidential election results. The case has been held up due to pretrial disputes over alleged misconduct by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis.

Biden campaign reacts

A spokesman for President Joe Biden’s campaign, Michael Tyler, said in a statement that the verdict showed “no one is above the law” and that Trump remained a threat to democracy whom voters should reject.

“Donald Trump has always mistakenly believed he would never face consequences for breaking the law for his own personal gain,” Tyler wrote. “But today’s verdict does not change the fact that the American people face a simple reality. There is still only one way to keep Donald Trump out of the Oval Office: at the ballot box. Convicted felon or not, Trump will be the Republican nominee for president.”

“The threat Trump poses to our democracy has never been greater,” Tyler continued. “He is running an increasingly unhinged campaign of revenge and retribution, pledging to be a dictator ‘on day one’ and calling for our Constitution to be ‘terminated’ so he can regain and keep power. A second Trump term means chaos, ripping away Americans’ freedoms and fomenting political violence – and the American people will reject it this November.”

The Biden White House had much less to say.

Ian Sams, a spokesperson for the White House Counsel’s Office, said in a one-sentence email: “We respect the rule of law, and have no additional comment.”

Members of Congress speak out

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, a Louisiana Republican, said in a statement the guilty decision from the jurors represented “a devastating defeat for any American who believes in the critical legal tenet that justice is blind.”

“This verdict will not withstand an appeal, and was only brought as an attempt to interfere with the 2024 election,” Scalise wrote. “The radical partisan Democrats behind this abuse of our justice system will not prevail. The voters will settle this on November 5th.”

Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, chair of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee’s federal courts subcommittee, released a statement saying that an “individual who has been convicted of 34 felony counts and shows zero respect for the rule of law is not fit to lead the greatest nation in the world.”

“It’s only in honest courtrooms that the former president has been unable to lie and bully his way out of trouble,” Whitehouse said. “Americans trust juries for good reason.”

North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis posted on social media that he was “shocked by the verdict considering that this case should have never been brought forward.”

“From the beginning, it was clear that a radical, politically-motivated state prosecutor was using the full weight of his office to go after President Trump at the same time he turned a blind eye to violent criminals,” Tillis wrote. “I expect and hope that President Trump will appeal this verdict to address fundamental questions, including whether President Trump received a fair trial and whether the Manhattan D.A. even had jurisdiction on a federal election matter.”

Minnesota Democratic Rep. Betty McCollum said the jury’s decision showed that America’s justice system functioned the way it was supposed to.

“Today our system of justice worked, and former President Trump was found guilty on all 34 counts by a jury of American citizens,” McCollum wrote on social media. “No person is above the law.”

A ‘sham’ or an ‘affirmation’? 

Iowa Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds wrote in a statement the trial was a “sham.”

“For years, Democrats like Alvin Bragg have been trying to put President Trump in jail with complete disregard for our democracy and the will of the American people,” Reynolds wrote. “The only verdict that matters is the one at the ballot box in November where the American people will elect President Trump again.”

Florida Democratic Rep. Jared Moskowitz wrote on social media that the jury’s guilty verdict wasn’t political.

“A former president being convicted is nothing to be celebrated, but it is an affirmation that nobody is above the law,” Moskowitz wrote. “This verdict was reached by a jury of Trump’s peers, by citizens of the American justice system, not by a judge or by a political opponent.”

Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, rejected the verdict, writing on social media it was a “travesty of justice.”

“The Manhattan kangaroo court shows what happens when our justice system is weaponized by partisan prosecutors in front of a biased judge with an unfair process, designed to keep President Trump off the campaign trail and avoid bringing attention to President Biden’s failing radical policies,” Jordan wrote.

Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine posted on social media the “verdict is proof that no one is above the law in this country.”

“It’s also tragic in this way — Americans put the reins of leadership in the hands of a person whose character is so far beneath the office that no rational adult would ever encourage young people to emulate … his behavior,” Kaine wrote.

“Trump’s lack of character has caught up to him,” Kaine added. “And Americans — once again — have received a clear warning about a person who wants to seize leadership once again. I pray that we heed the warning.”

House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer, a Kentucky Republican, said Thursday was a “sad day for all Americans.”

“This verdict in New York is another example of Democrats being relentless in their pursuit to weaponize the courts, abuse America’s judicial system, and target President Joe Biden’s political opposition,” Comer wrote. “One thing is clear: Democrats are afraid to face Donald Trump. Americans will make their voices heard this November.”

Former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, the Republican nominee for the state’s open U.S. Senate seat, urged restraint in a social media post.

“Regardless of the result, I urge all Americans to respect the verdict and the legal process,” Hogan wrote. “At this dangerously divided moment in our history, all leaders — regardless of party — must not pour fuel on the fire with more toxic partisanship. We must reaffirm what has made this nation great: the rule of law.”

Jacob Fischler and Jennifer Shutt contributed to this report.

Former U.S. Capitol Police officers Michael Fanone and Harry Dunn, who were overwhelmed by the mob at the Capitol on Jan. 6, are interviewed Tuesday during former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial in Manhattan Criminal Court. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Closing arguments in the first-ever criminal trial of a former U.S. president concluded Tuesday, leaving the jury to now decide if Donald Trump is guilty of faking reimbursement to his personal lawyer for hush money paid to a porn star just before the 2016 presidential election.

Just outside the Lower Manhattan courthouse during summations, the campaign to reelect President Joe Biden  held a press conference featuring actor Robert DeNiro and two former U.S. Capitol Police officers who were overwhelmed by the angry mob of Trump supporters who stormed the building on Jan. 6, 2021.

DeNiro bickered with a heckler and the Trump campaign then followed with its own press conference.

The trial’s final day of arguments wrapped up after nearly eight hours of closing arguments, during which the defense portrayed Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen as the “M.V.P. of liars” and Trump as a victim of extortion and too busy a leader in 2017 to understand the payments to Cohen.

Meanwhile, the prosecution walked jurors through excruciating details of events and witness testimony to show that Trump’s objective, along with those in his orbit, was to “hoodwink the American voter” leading up to the 2016 election, according to reporters at the courthouse.

New York does not allow recording in the courtroom but provides public transcripts of the proceedings. States Newsroom covered the trial in person on May 20.

Trump, the presumed 2024 Republican presidential nominee, is charged with 34 felonies, one for each of the 11 invoices, 11 checks, and 12 ledger entries that New York state prosecutors allege were cooked-up as routine “legal expenses,” hiding what were really reimbursements to Cohen for paying off adult film actress Stormy Daniels.

Trump denies any wrongdoing

Daniels, also an adult film director, testified in early May to a 2006 sexual encounter at a Lake Tahoe golf tournament with Trump, which he maintains never happened.

Cohen, the prosecution’s key witness, later told the jurors that he wired Daniels $130,000 to secure her signature on a nondisclosure agreement in late October 2016, and that Trump was aware.

Cohen’s payment swiftly followed the release of the “Access Hollywood” tape, in which Trump was recorded telling a TV host that his fame allows him to grab women by the genitals.

The revelation spun Trump’s campaign into a frenzy over possibly losing women voters, additional witnesses testified.

Further, Cohen testified that Trump was present during conversations to hatch a plan with the Trump Organization’s longtime chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg, to repay Cohen under the guise of “legal expenses.” Cohen would eventually receive a grossed-up sum of $420,000 to account for a bonus and taxes.

The hush money trial, which began in mid-April, is likely the only one to occur prior to the November election. Three other criminal cases against the former president, two federal and one in Georgia, remain stalled.

Throughout the six-week trial, jurors heard from nearly two dozen witnesses called by the prosecution to establish Trump’s history of working to suppress negative stories.

David Pecker, former National Enquirer publisher, testified to coordinating with Trump and Cohen earlier in 2016 to pay off former Playboy model Karen McDougal and bury her story of an alleged affair with Trump.

The G.L.O.A.T.

In his closing statements, Trump attorney Todd Blanche addressed the jury for nearly three hours, arguing that Trump made no such effort to influence the 2016 election by “unlawful means.”

Blanche told the jurors to put the idea of a conspiracy aside, emphasizing that the existence of a nondisclosure agreement is “not a crime.” Working with editors to buy sources’ silence and bury stories was routine, Blanche said.

“Every campaign in this country is a conspiracy,” he told the jurors, according to reporters at the courthouse.

While no hard contract existed between Trump and Cohen at the time, Blanche argued that the two had entered into an “oral” retainer agreement, and that Cohen was lying about how much work he was actually doing for Trump.

By the time Trump reached the Oval Office and personally signed nine of the 11 checks for Cohen, the then-president was too busy “running the country” to realize what he was signing, Blanche said.

As for the classification of the payments on the ledger, Blanche argued that the Trump Organization’s software featured limited dropdown menu categories, and that “legal expenses” was one of the options.

Blanche’s closing statements were largely dominated by his effort to persuade jurors that Cohen’s testimony could not be trusted.

“There is no way that you can find that President Trump knew about this payment at the time it was made without believing the words of Michael Cohen — period,” Blanche told the jurors, according to reporters in the courtroom.

Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 for lying to Congress.

Using another sports metaphor, Blanche told jurors that Cohen is the “G.L.O.A.T.”

“He’s literally the greatest liar of all time,” Blanche said.

He closed by urging the jurors to not send Trump “to prison” based on Cohen’s testimony.

Justice Juan Merchan admonished Blanche for mentioning prison, pointing out that a guilty verdict does not necessarily mean prison time. Merchan told the jurors to disregard that “improper” comment, according to reporters at the courthouse.

‘The only one who’s paid the price’

For just under five hours, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass led jurors through his closing argument, clocking the longest day of the trial.

Steinglass started off by telling them the prosecution only needs to prove the following: There were false business records used as part of the conspiracy and that Trump knew about them.

Steinglass reviewed earlier evidence presented to the jury — phone records, handwritten notes, recorded phone conversations and checks bearing Trump’s own signature. He also recalled the damning testimony of several Trump allies, including Pecker, the publisher.

“The conspiracy to unlawfully influence the 2016 election — you don’t need Michael Cohen to prove that one bit,” Steinglass said, according to reporters at the courthouse.

Steinglass leaned into Cohen’s seedy past, including his lying to Congress and his jail time for campaign finance violations related to hush money payments to women who alleged extramarital affairs with Trump.

These actions, he said, were taken on Trump’s behalf to defend and shield him; the irony, Steinglass said, is now they are being used against Cohen, again, to protect Trump.

Cohen transformed from a loyal Trump ally into a bitter foe who has published books titled “Disloyal” and “Revenge,” and produces a podcast called “Mea Culpa” on which he regularly lambastes Trump.

Cohen is “understandably angry that to date, he’s the only one who’s paid the price for his role in this conspiracy,” Blanche told the jurors, according to reporters, who noted Trump was shaking his head.

Steinglass attempted to humanize Cohen for the jurors, telling them one can “hardly blame” the former fixer — who now has a criminal record and no law license — for selling merchandise including t-shirts depicting Trump in an orange prison jumpsuit.

Steinglass also refuted the defense’s argument that Trump’s actions ahead of the 2016 were routine, describing the National Enquirer as “a covert arm” of the Trump campaign and “the very antithesis of a normal legitimate press function.”

“Everything Mr. Trump and his cohorts did in this case was cloaked in lies,” Steinglass said nearing the end of his closing statement. “The name of the game was concealment, and all roads lead to the man who benefited the most, Donald Trump.”

Biden deploys DeNiro

On the sidewalk just outside the New York County Supreme Court, the Biden campaign deployed DeNiro, the voice of the latest campaign ad, and former U.S. Capitol Police officers Harry Dunn and Michael Fanone. The officers are campaigning for Biden in battleground states, the campaign said in a press release.

The campaign’s Michael Tyler, communications director, introduced the trio and said they were not in Manhattan because of the trial proceedings, but rather because that’s where the media is concentrated.

Loud protesters, whom DeNiro called “crazy,” competed with the speakers.

“Donald Trump has created this,” DeNiro said, pointing to the demonstrators. “He wants to sow total chaos, which he’s succeeding in some areas … I love this city, and I don’t want to destroy it. Donald Trump wants to destroy, not only this city, but the country, and eventually he could destroy the world.”

“These guys are the true heroes,” De Niro said, pointing to Dunn and Fanone behind him. “They stood and put their lives on the line for these low lives, for Trump.”

A protester then interrupted DeNiro to call the officers “traitors.”

“I don’t even know how to deal with you, my friend,” DeNiro snapped back during the livestreamed event.

Both Dunn and Fanone testified two years ago before lawmakers investigating the violent mob that overran the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 as Congress gathered for a joint session to certify Biden’s 2020 presidential election victory. Trump still falsely claims he won the election.

Trump’s campaign immediately followed with its own press conference.

Jason Miller, senior adviser to Trump, held up Tuesday’s copy of the New York Post bearing the headline “Nothing to Bragg About,” a play on Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s name.

“Everybody knows this case is complete garbage,” Miller said. “President Trump did nothing wrong. This is all politics.”

On Trump’s social media platform Truth Social, the former president posted “BORING!” in all capital letters during a break in the Steinglass summation.

Late Monday, Trump posted in all caps a complaint about the order in which closing arguments would occur — a routine, well-established series of remarks in trials.

“WHY IS THE CORRUPT GOVERNMENT ALLOWED TO MAKE THE FINAL ARGUMENT IN THE CASE AGAINST ME? WHY CAN’T THE DEFENSE GO LAST? BIG ADVANTAGE, VERY UNFAIR. WITCH HUNT!” he wrote.

An attendee looks at a series of banners for the National Crime Victims’ Rights Week Candlelight Vigil on the National Mall on April 24, 2024, in Washington, D.C. The Justice Department’s Office for Victims of Crime held the event to pay tribute to victims and survivors of crime and individuals who provide service and support (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images).

Groups that assist crime victims across the United States are bracing for significant financial pain after the amount available from a major federal victim services fund plunged $700 million this year.

Congress recently lowered spending to $1.2 billion from the fund, which provides grants to nonprofit and local programs across the country.

This latest round of cuts has sparked widespread concern among district attorney’s offices, rape crisis centers, domestic violence shelters, child advocacy centers and law enforcement agencies that offer victim support services. Many of these organizations and agencies now expect to have to close locations, lay off staff and cut back on services.

Meanwhile, the drop in dollars has many experts and advocates rethinking the current, uncertain system of helping crime victims. How much federal money is available every year is determined by a complex three-year average of court fees, fines and penalties that have accumulated — a number that has plummeted by billions during the past six years. The fund does not receive any taxpayer dollars.

Karrie Delaney, director of federal affairs for the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, said the slowdown of court cases during the COVID-19 pandemic and the last administration not prosecuting as many corporate cases has affected the fund more than usual.

RAINN is the country’s largest anti-sexual-violence organization. It operates the National Sexual Assault Hotline (800-656-HOPE) alongside local organizations and runs the U.S. Defense Department’s Safe Helpline. It “also carries out programs to prevent sexual violence, help survivors, and ensure that perpetrators are brought to justice,” according to its website.

“I think what’s important from RAINN’s perspective is the actual impact that those fluctuations have on the survivors that we support and organizations and service providers across the country,” Delaney said.

When the federal cap decreases, she said, organizations that support crime victims often turn to state and local governments to make up the gap. And a lot of the times there isn’t enough money to do that.

Victim services providers say that smaller groups or branches, particularly those in rural towns or counties, are at an especially high risk of closing because of the expected cutbacks. Many rely solely on federal dollars.

Shakyra Diaz, the chief of federal advocacy with the Alliance for Safety and Justice, which advocates for crime victims, said many groups are “seriously in a situation where they may have to close their doors, they may have to cut services, they may have to cut staff, they may have to tell crime victims, ‘I cannot help you right now. You have to wait six months.’”

In at least three states — California, Colorado and Maine — state legislators have proposed bills that would create new avenues for state-based funding for victim services. A couple of bills would inject general state dollars into victim services to offset the federal cuts, while one would create a new tax on firearms and ammunition, and yet another would increase criminal penalties on corporations. The money collected from taxes or fines would then go toward supporting victim services.

The federal crime victims fund gets its money from fines, forfeited bonds and financial penalties in certain federal cases.

The year-by-year uncertainty around how much money will come from federal crime cases, which directly affects how much will be available to states to distribute to victim services providers, makes it challenging for groups to budget over the long term.

“Services for victims and resources for victim services are already so tight. And so when you’re talking about taking a pot of money that’s already stretched at its best and making it smaller — it’s frankly terrifying,” said Renée Williams, the executive director of the National Center for Victims of Crime.

The federal fund was established in 1984 under the Victims of Crime Act, known as VOCA. Congress tried to stabilize the fund in 2000 by setting an annual cap on withdrawals. The cap remained below $1 billion a year until 2015, but Congress raised it to $2.3 billion that year, and in 2018 it peaked at $4.4 billion.

But in fiscal year 2023, Congress lowered it to $1.9 billion, according to data from the U.S. Department of Justice.

Then, the cap plummeted, and by fiscal year 2023, Congress had set it at $1.9 billion, according to data from the U.S. Department of Justice.

This past March, Congress again lowered the cap, to $1.2 billion, a drop of more than 35%. The cuts will not take effect until October of this year, when the federal government’s next fiscal year begins.

Victim services groups say that the demand for help has continued to surge. Some anticipate the grant process to become even more competitive.

They’re asking state lawmakers for help.

State legislation

For Stand Up Placer, a nonprofit dedicated to supporting survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault and human trafficking in Placer County, California, the anticipated federal cuts are expected to slash about $700,000, or 22%, of the group’s budget, according to Cheryl Marcell, the organization’s CEO.

Some of the group’s services, such as legal counseling, are likely to be scaled back. Instead of serving the current caseload of 500, the group may only be able to accommodate 200 clients, Marcell said.

In California, local district attorney’s offices are grappling with how to address this funding shortfall, according to Jonathan Raven, assistant CEO of the California District Attorneys Association and former Yolo County chief deputy district attorney.

Offices are considering options such as laying off staff, requesting local funding or scaling back services altogether, Raven told Stateline.

“The people that are victimized that are the most vulnerable are no longer going to get the services that they should expect and they do deserve,” Raven said. “It’s really going to be a significant impact across California and across the country.”

State legislators in California have proposed two bills aimed at mitigating the federal cuts.

One of the bills would require state supplemental funding whenever the federal VOCA award is reduced more than 10% than the amount awarded the prior year. The bill is in committee.

The other bill, which is still under consideration in the Assembly, would increase fines levied on corporations convicted of misdemeanor and felony offenses. These fines would be used to fund a new California Crime Victims Fund.

In Colorado, the legislature passed a bill proposing a more permanent state funding source for victim services through a 9% gun and ammunition excise tax. The tax revenue would be spent on crime victim support services, mental health services, school safety and gun violence prevention.

The bill is now headed to Democratic Gov. Jared Polis, who has until June 7 to sign or veto it, according to his press secretary. If he signs it, the measure will go before voters on the November ballot.

Meanwhile, in Maine, Democratic Gov. Janet Mills signed a budget bill in April that includes a one-time allotment of $6 million for victim services.

Effects on services for victims

There are about 12,200 victim services providers in the United States, with nearly a quarter of them located in the country’s most populous states — California, Florida, Texas and New York, according to the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics’ 2017 census.

Ohio has more than 400 victim services providers, many of which receive funding from the federal crime victims fund. Last year, the state received $46.6 million.

But for fiscal year 2024, Ohio has been awarded just $26.7 million, a 42.8% decrease from 2023 and a 77% decrease from 2018.

With such a steep cut, some victim services providers in Ohio fear they will no longer be able to serve rural communities, particularly those in the Appalachian region. For the Ohio Alliance to End Sexual Violence, a statewide coalition that supports rape crisis centers, losing funding could reduce its support to the 12 counties that do not have local rape crisis centers or programs.

“It’s the places that already don’t have great access to services and that have never had access to services [that] will be the ones to have whatever access they have further reduced,” said Emily Gemar, the group’s director of public policy.

Court-appointed special advocate programs in Appalachian counties also are expected to bear the brunt of the funding cuts, according to Doug Stephens, the executive director of Ohio CASA, which oversees 47 local programs covering 60 counties that support children navigating the court system. Stephens anticipates as many as 10 local programs shutting down.

“They are working very hard to provide the same services as the big cities,” he said in an interview. “The only way they can stay open is with VOCA funding.”

In South Carolina, victim services providers and Republican Attorney General Alan Wilson are urging the state legislature to offset the looming federal cuts. Wilson has requested $15 million, which is just enough money to keep existing services.

The state Senate has proposed a $5 million allotment, while the House has put forward a $3 million proposal. Under either plan, current projects could face cuts ranging from about 15% to 30%, according to the attorney general’s office.

Richland County, South Carolina, Sheriff Leon Lott, whose department receives VOCA funding and employs victim advocates who help people go through the criminal legal system, said the state should offer more support.

“When things like this happen, people just think about dollars. What we see is the real people, we see the feelings, we see the pain and emotions they’re going through,” said Lott, a Democrat. “This loss of funding, I’m afraid, will have a negative impact on the things that we try to do with victims and may end up victimizing them even more.

“If the feds are not going to provide the money, then the state needs to do it.”

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org. Follow Stateline on Facebook and Twitter.

Former President Donald Trump sits in court during the final day of testimony in his New York trial. Trump, the first former U.S. president to face trial on criminal charges, is accused of falsifying business records to cover up hush money payments (Justin Lane-Pool/Getty Images).

WASHINGTON — The end of the first criminal trial of a former U.S. president is in sight as Donald Trump’s defense team rested its case Tuesday in Manhattan, where jurors have heard weeks of testimony from nearly two dozen witnesses about Trump’s alleged reimbursement of hush money meant to silence a porn star before the 2016 presidential election.

Trump did not take the stand after his team called just two witnesses.

The former president is accused of 34 felonies for falsifying business records. New York prosecutors allege that Trump covered up reimbursing his former personal lawyer Michael Cohen for paying hush money to porn star Stormy Daniels just before Election Day in 2016 to silence her about a tryst with Trump.

Trump, the presumptive 2024 Republican candidate for president, denies the affair and maintains that he was paying Cohen for routine legal work.

The case will not resume until after the Memorial Day holiday, when closing arguments are expected.

A back channel to Trump

Trump’s defense team’s second and final witness, former federal prosecutor and longtime New York-based attorney Robert Costello, stepped down from the witness stand Tuesday morning. His brief but tense appearance began Monday afternoon and included an admonishment from Justice Juan Merchan for “contemptuous” conduct.

Costello testified to meeting a panicked and “suicidal” Cohen in April 2018 after the FBI had raided Cohen’s New York City hotel room as part of an investigation of his $130,000 payment to Daniels just before the 2016 presidential election.

After Merchan sustained a series of objections from the prosecution Monday, Costello exclaimed, “jeez” and “ridiculous” on the mic and at one point rolled his eyes at Merchan. Merchan cleared the courtroom, including the press, to address Costello and Trump’s defense team.

Costello’s testimony confirmed that he offered a back channel for Cohen to communicate with then-President Trump through Costello’s close contact and Trump’s former legal counsel Rudy Giuliani as Cohen was under investigation, according to reporters at the courthouse.

New York does not allow recording in the courtroom but provides public transcripts of the proceedings.

During cross examination, prosecutor Susan Hoffinger showed a series of Costello’s emails in an attempt to convince jurors that Costello was actively working to assure Trump that Cohen would not turn against him during the federal investigation.

In one email between Costello and his law partner, he asks, “What should I say to this (expletive)? He is playing with the most powerful man on the planet,” according to reporters at the courthouse.

Hoffinger also established from Costello during her final series of questions that Cohen never officially retained him for legal help — reinforcing that Costello showed up in Cohen’s life only after the FBI raid.

Trump’s multiple indictments

Costello has been publicly critical of the hush money trial against Trump, and of Cohen, as recently as May 15, when he testified before the GOP-led U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.

There, Costello told lawmakers that the cases brought against Trump during this election year are “politically motivated.”

Trump, who faces dozens of criminal charges in four separate cases, was indicted in New York in April 2023.

Three other criminal cases were also brought against Trump in 2023. They all remain on hold.

• The former president was indicted by a federal grand jury in Florida in June 2023 on charges related to the mishandling of classified information. Federal District Judge Aileen Cannon indefinitely postponed proceedings, making a trial before the November election unlikely.

• Trump was indicted by a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., in August 2023. A four-count indictment accused him of knowingly spreading falsehoods about the 2020 presidential election results and scheming to overturn them. Trump claimed presidential immunity from the criminal charges in October 2023, which both the federal trial and appeals courts denied. Trump is awaiting a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court.

• Weeks after the federal election interference indictment, Trump was indicted on state charges in Fulton County, Georgia, for allegedly interfering in the state’s 2020 presidential election results. The Georgia case has been mired in pretrial disputes over alleged misconduct by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis.

Courtroom conditions

In the dim, tightly secured hallway just feet from the courtroom at the New York County Supreme Court, Trump again criticized the trial Monday and accused prosecutors of wanting to keep him off the campaign trail.

“We’re here an hour early today. I was supposed to be making a speech for political purposes. I’m not allowed to have anything to do with politics because I’m sitting in a very freezing cold courtroom for the last four weeks. It’s very unfair. They have no case, they have no crime,” he said before the news cameras that he’s stopped to speak in front of every day during the trial.

Trump told the cameras that outside the courtroom was like “Fort Knox.”

He complained that there are “more police than I’ve ever seen anywhere,” and said “there’s not a civilian within three blocks of the courthouse.”

That statement is false. States Newsroom attended the trial Monday and witnessed the scene outside the courthouse during the morning, mid-afternoon and late afternoon.

Just as dawn broke, people standing in the general-public line vying for the few public seats in the courtroom squabbled over who was in front of whom.

About an hour later, a woman with a bullhorn showed up in the adjacent Collect Pond Park to read the Bible and amplify contemporary Christian music played from her phone. A man paced the park holding a sign that read, “Trump 2 Terrified 2 Testify.”

Several people sat outside eating and talking at tables in Collect Pond Park during the 1 p.m. hour, as witnessed by reporters who left the courtroom after Merchan dismissed the jury for lunch.

By late afternoon, a small handful of protesters holding Trump flags and signs shouted that he was innocent.

Former President Donald Trump appears in court during his trial for allegedly covering up hush money payments at Manhattan Criminal Court on May 20, 2024, in New York City. Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first of his criminal cases to go to trial (Steven Hirsch-Pool/Getty Images).

NEW YORK — New York state prosecutors rested their case against Donald Trump Monday after four days of testimony from their key witness, Trump’s former fixer Michael Cohen, who says the former president was well aware of a hush money cover-up. The defense paints Cohen as a liar.

The Manhattan criminal trial, the first ever for a former president, now in its sixth week, was poised to reach closing arguments as early as Tuesday. But New York Justice Juan Merchan indicated Monday that proceedings would stretch beyond Memorial Day.

Trump attorney Todd Blanche, in a lengthy, and at times slow and disjointed cross- examination Monday, continued wringing Cohen for proof that would convince jurors the former fixer cannot be trusted.

Cohen’s earlier testimony that Trump reimbursed him for paying a porn star to stay quiet before the 2016 presidential election is at the crux of the prosecution’s case.

Trump is charged with falsifying 11 invoices, 11 checks, and 12 ledger entries as routine legal expenses rather than reimbursement of the hush money, amounting to 34 felony counts.

Trump denies any wrongdoing and maintains he never had a sexual relationship with adult film actress and director Stormy Daniels. She testified otherwise in excruciating and awkward detail in early May.

Monday’s proceedings were beset with objections and technology issues, and wrapped with tense testimony from the defense’s second witness, Robert Costello, Cohen’s legal counsel, who promised backdoor communication to Trump after Cohen was under the FBI’s thumb in 2018.

The day ended with a long shot, but expected, request from the defense to throw the case out. Merchan dismissed the court, saying he’d issue his ruling Tuesday. The defense is likely to rest its case then as well.

Closing arguments are expected after the holiday.

On a ‘journey’

Blanche began the day grilling Cohen on his previous business dealings, income and the money he’s made since breaking ties with the former president.

Cohen testified that he’s made millions of dollars on his books “Disloyal” and “Revenge,” and his podcast “Mea Culpa,” all of which sharply criticize the man from whom he used to seek praise, as he testified days earlier.

Prompted by Blanche, Cohen confirmed he’s mulling over a third book, has a television show in the works titled “The Fixer” and is considering a run for Congress because he has “the best name recognition” out there.

When Blanche suggested Cohen’s name recognition hinges on Trump, Cohen disagreed.

“I wouldn’t characterize it that way. My name recognition is because of the journey I’ve been on,” Cohen said.

“Well the journey you’ve been on … has included daily attacks on Trump,” Blanche responded.

Through the course of Blanche’s questioning, Cohen again acknowledged his previous crimes and also fessed up to stealing $30,000 from the Trump Organization when Trump lagged on paying a tech company to rig a CNBC poll of famous businessmen.

Minutes later, Blanche asked, “Do you have a financial interest in this case?”

“Yes, sir,” Cohen responded.

When Blanche pressed about whether a guilty verdict is Cohen’s preferred outcome, Cohen responded, “The answer is no. It’s better if he’s not (guilty) for me because it gives me more to talk about in the future.”

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger conducted her redirect at a tidy and speedy clip, leading Cohen through each of Blanche’s doubting lines of questioning to reaffirm for the jury Cohen’s testimony that Trump’s hand was behind the hush money reimbursements.

“They’ve asked you a lot of questions about how you’ve made money and (your) podcast… Putting aside financial matters, how has telling the truth affected your life?” Hoffinger asked.

“My entire life has been turned upside down as a direct result,” Cohen responded.

Before the prosecution rested its case, the defense lobbed a lengthy objection to a still frame of a C-SPAN video depicting Trump with his bodyguard Keith Schiller just before 8 p.m. on Oct. 24, 2016. The parties eventually agreed to admit it.

Evidence that Trump and Schiller were together that night looms large for Cohen’s claim that he spoke to both of them on the phone about paying off Daniels.

Trump’s support inside the courtroom

A steady flow of high-profile Republican supporters has shown up for the GOP’s presumed 2024 presidential nominee.

Monday’s supporters included Trump ally and attorney Alan Dershowitz; legal adviser Boris Epshteyn, who himself is indicted in Arizona for trying to subvert the 2020 presidential election results; and Chuck Zito, an actor and one of the founders of New York City’s Hells Angels chapter in the 1980s.

Several Republican lawmakers, including vice presidential hopefuls, have flocked to Manhattan for the trial.

North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio and former GOP primary hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy attended May 13. Sens. Rick Scott of Florida and Tommy Tuberville of Alabama also made appearances last week, alongside Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird.

House Speaker Mike Johnson delivered remarks outside the courthouse May 14, slamming the “sham trial” and accusing New York prosecutors of only wanting to keep the former president off the campaign trail.

The Louisiana Republican cast Trump as a victim of a “travesty of justice.”

Nearly a dozen far-right Republican House members showed up Thursday, led by Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida. Accompanying Gaetz were other right-wing House Freedom Caucus members: fellow Floridian Reps. Anna Paulina Luna and Mike Waltz; Eli Crane and Andy Biggs of Arizona; Lauren Boebert of Colorado; Ralph Norman of South Carolina; Diana Harshbarger and Andy Ogles of Tennessee; Mike Cloud of Texas; and caucus Chair Bob Good of Virginia.

Speaking on the sidewalk outside the courthouse, Gaetz described the charges as the “Mr. Potatohead doll of crimes,” accusing the prosecution of combining things “that did not belong together.”

Reps. Byron Donalds and Cory Mills of Florida attended earlier in the week.

Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, and U.S. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., watch as former U.S. President Donald Trump walks towards the courtroom for his hush money trial at Manhattan Criminal Court on Tuesday in New York City (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images).

WASHINGTON — Republican lawmakers are taking turns supporting former president and presumed 2024 GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump in his trial in Manhattan criminal court, where he is charged with covering up payments intended to silence porn star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election.

Dressed alike in navy blue suits and red ties, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, viewed as a 2024 vice presidential contender, former GOP primary hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy and U.S. Reps. Byron Donalds and Cory Mills of Florida filed behind Trump into the courtroom Tuesday morning, according to reporters present. Outside, U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, conducted a press conference.

The entourage followed appearances Monday by U.S. Sens. J.D. Vance of Ohio, another contender on Trump’s VP short list, and Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, and Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird, as well as an appearance last week by U.S. Sen. Rick Scott of Florida.

Tuesday’s show of solidarity occurred as the prosecution’s star witness and former Trump fixer Michael Cohen took the stand for a second day to testify that Trump signed off on falsifying reimbursement to Cohen for $130,000 of his own money that Cohen paid to Daniels on the eve of the 2016 election.

Jurors again saw checks signed by Trump, and heard from Cohen about instructions from Trump associates to submit fake invoices for “legal services rendered.” Cohen also described a February 2017 Oval Office meeting during which he discussed the reimbursement with Trump, according to reporters at the courthouse.

New York does not allow recording in the courtroom but provides public transcripts of the proceedings.

Cohen followed high-profile and detailed testimony last week from adult film actress and director Daniels about her alleged sex affair with Trump in 2006, an event he denies.

Trump is facing 34 felony counts for each alleged falsified business record related to his repayment to Cohen — 11 invoices, 11 checks and 12 ledger entries.

A ‘sham’ to ‘keep him off of the campaign trail’

Out on the sidewalk, Johnson — the second in line for presidential succession after the vice president — told reporters he wanted “to call out what is a travesty of justice.”

With a sarcastic snicker and gesture toward the New York County Supreme Court location on Centre Street in Lower Manhattan, Johnson lamented that he had to speak to media outside “because the court won’t allow us to speak inside the building. That’s just one of the many things that are wrong here.”

It’s worth noting that surrogates routinely make comments outside courthouses.

Johnson summed up what he called a “sham trial” as a conspiracy to stymie Trump’s reelection campaign — despite recent New York Times/Siena College polls showing the former president leading in several swing states.

“This is the fifth week that President Trump has been in court for this sham of a trial,” Johnson said. “They are doing this intentionally to keep him here and keep him off of the campaign trail, and I think everybody in the country can see that for what it is.”

The trial meets weekdays, except Wednesdays.

Trump hit the campaign trail Saturday at a rally in Wildwood, New Jersey, where he spoke for 90 minutes, criticizing the New York trial, repeating false claims that he won the 2020 presidential election, calling the “late, great” fictional cannibal serial killer Hannibal Lecter “a wonderful man,” and thanking the six U.S. Supreme Court justices — three of whom he appointed — for overturning Roe v. Wade.

‘Election interference’

Trump’s allies echoed Johnson’s earlier remarks in their own press conference later outside the courthouse, calling the trial a “scam” and “joke,” according to reporters at the event.

Ramaswamy reportedly likened the courtroom to a “Kafka novel” and called it “one of the most depressing places I have been in my life” and said the prosecution’s strategy is “to bore jurors into submission.”

In a video of the press conference he posted to X, the entrepreneur said the “justice system should be blind to politics” and accused Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg of targeting Trump for political reasons.

Burgum characterized the trial as “election interference” in the 2024 race. Meanwhile, Trump’s critics say the trial is squarely about election interference that occurred in 2016.

Mills said “what was the Department of Justice, now the department of injustice, has continued to be utilized against the American people.”

The charges for which Trump is now on trial did not originate with the U.S. Department of Justice, but rather from a New York state grand jury investigation.

Trump’s two federal cases are in a holding pattern while, for one, the U.S. Supreme Court deliberates over Trump’s claim of absolute immunity from criminal charges that he schemed to subvert the 2020 presidential election results. The second, centered on Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents following his presidency, has been put indefinitely on hold by federal district Judge Aileen Cannon in Florida.

The New York trial is expected to resume Thursday with further cross-examination of Cohen by Trump attorney Todd Blanche.

Christopher Dunn was convicted for a 1990 deadly shooting of a teen in St. Louis. Others involved in the case later admitted they lied about Dunn’s involvement. No DNA ever tied Dunn to the murder. A judge also admitted that the lack of evidence is enough to prove Dunn is innocent (photo submitted).

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey will oppose efforts by St. Louis Circuit Attorney Gabe Gore to vacate the murder conviction of Christopher Dunn, who Gore believes has spent 33 years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit.

In February, St.  Louis Circuit Attorney Gabe Gore announced he filed a motion with the court to vacate Dunn’s murder conviction in the 1991 fatal shooting of 15-year-old Ricco Rogers. When making the announcement, Gore said the evidence shows Dunn, a 54-year-old St. Louis native serving a life sentence without parole, is innocent of the murder for which he was convicted.

“The eyewitness recantations alone are enough to show clear and convincing evidence of actual innocence in this case,” Gore said. “Justice requires that Christopher Dunn’s murder conviction be vacated.”

Bailey disagrees, and according to Gore’s office, plans to oppose the motion to vacate Dunn’s conviction. A pre-trial conference is scheduled for May 16, and three lawyers with the Missouri Attorney General’s Office are listed as attorneys for the defendant, which in this case, is the state of Missouri.

A spokesperson for the attorney general’s office declined comment.

It’s part of a long track record for the attorney general’s office to oppose efforts to overturn convictions. Most recently, the state tried to stop St. Louis prosecutors from vacating the conviction of Lamar Johnson, though their efforts were unsuccessful, and Johnson was freed in early 2023.

St. Louis prosecutor announces he’ll seek to vacate Christopher Dunn conviction

Injustice Watch, a Chicago-based nonprofit journalism organization that examines issues of equity and justice in the court system, found that the Missouri attorney general’s office has opposed calls for relief in nearly every wrongful conviction case that came before it and has been vacated since 2000.

That includes 27 cases in which the office fought to uphold convictions for prisoners who were eventually exonerated. In roughly half of those cases, the office continued arguing that the originally guilty convictions should stand.

Dunn was convicted in 1991 of first-degree murder, first-degree assault and armed criminal action. He received a life sentence without the possibility of parole. The case against Dunn rested on the testimony of two eyewitnesses — a 12-year-old and a 14-year-old, both of whom later recanted.

Last year, Gore appointed Booker Shaw as a special assistant circuit attorney working on a pro-bono basis to assist him in the review of court transcripts, case exhibits and rulings, and advise him whether the filing of a motion to vacate the conviction was appropriate.

Shaw is the former chief judge of the Missouri Court of Appeals and served as a judge in the 22^nd Judicial Circuit Court from 1983 to 2002,

Circuit Judge William Hickle said in 2020 that while he believed a current jury would not find Dunn guilty, he could not set him free because of Missouri law that restricts innocence claims to death penalty inmates. In 2021, a new state law took effect that allows prosecutors to file petitions when they believe an innocent person is imprisoned.

The hearing in Dunn’s innocence case is set to begin May 20 before St. Louis Judge Jason Sengheiser.

In the Dunn case, Gore is essentially saying the prosecutor’s office “made a mistake. Help me correct this mistake,” said Michael Wolff, professor and dean emeritus of the Saint Louis University School of Law and a retired judge and chief justice of the Missouri Supreme Court.

In contrast, Wolff said attorneys general in Missouri over recent decades have shown “interest in the finality of judgments juries make” in their oppositions to vacating convictions despite evidence showing individuals were wrongfully convicted.

The 2021 Missouri law says, in part, that a court will grant the motion of the prosecuting or circuit attorney to vacate or set aside a judgment “where the court finds that there is clear and convincing evidence of actual innocence or constitutional error at the original trial or plea that undermines the confidence in the judgment.’’

In considering the motion, the law says the court “shall take into consideration the evidence presented at the original trial or plea; the evidence presented at any direct appeal or post-conviction proceedings, including state or federal habeas actions; and the information and evidence presented at the hearing on the motion.”

The Midwest Innocence Project is representing Dunn.

(Darrin Klimek/Getty Images).

When the U.S. Department of Education announced last summer that federal Pell Grants would become available to incarcerated college students, lawmakers and state corrections agencies scrambled to adjust statutes and step up potential partnerships with universities.

But nearly a year later, colleges and agencies are recognizing the steep administrative challenge to winning approval from the U.S. Department of Education. So far, just one new program eligible for the federal financial aid grant — in California — has gotten off the ground.

“We’re going to see an impact — it’s coming. It’s been a bit slow to arrive because of this quality focus within the regulations,” said Ruth Delaney, who leads a program at the Vera Institute of Justice to help scale up college programs in correctional institutions. “What’s great is that there’s a lot of energy in colleges and corrections to start new prison education programs.”

Pell Grants were officially restored for incarcerated students in July 2023, following a nearly 30-year federal ban that prohibited most incarcerated students from receiving the aid. The ban was one of the provisions in the sweeping 1994 federal crime bill signed by President Bill Clinton.

More than 750,000 incarcerated students could potentially become eligible for Pell Grants. But to qualify, they must be below the family income limits and be at a prison that offers a college program approved by the federal Department of Education.

To date, only one program has been fully approved, at Pelican Bay State Prison in northern California. Students there will be eligible to receive Pell Grants starting next fall to study for a degree in communications from California State Polytechnic University, Humboldt.

Still, officials from state corrections agencies in Maryland, Michigan and Wisconsin told Stateline that since Pell dollars became available, more colleges and universities have become interested in establishing prison education programs. Since last summer, 44 state corrections agencies and the federal Bureau of Prisons have developed applications or other systems to approve prison education programs, according to the Vera Institute of Justice.

“There are people in prison who have been waiting 30 years for this opportunity to come back, and they are just so eager to enroll,” Delaney said in an interview. “Anything we can do to move quickly to get high-quality programs in place — that’s what we’d like to see.”

State action

The Pell Grant, awarded by the U.S. Department of Education, is provided to low-income students across the country to help cover college expenses. Most students apply online using the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, or FAFSA. Incarcerated students are usually required to submit paper applications because internet access is restricted. The current maximum grant is $7,395 for a full academic year.

While states pay to house incarcerated people in their prison systems, many don’t pay for higher education; prison college programs often rely on alternative funding, such as donations and state grants. Some are a part of a federal pilot program called the Second Chance Pell Experimental Sites Initiative, which has included about 40,000 incarcerated learners. Otherwise, students have to pay out of their own pockets or use scholarships and donations from nonprofits and colleges.

No matter how it’s paid for, the goal of providing college-level instruction in prisons is to make it easier for incarcerated people to reenter society once they are released and to connect them to meaningful, good-paying jobs.

“College saved my life. It was a place where I could be free. I could read, I could learn, and I could grow. It was very transformative for me, and I realized that my life wasn’t over,” said Alexa Garza, who obtained two associate degrees and a bachelor’s degree while incarcerated in Texas. Garza now works as a Texas policy analyst and higher education justice initiatives analyst for The Education Trust, an education access advocacy group.

Prison education advocates say it’s important for schools to expand the college experience in prison beyond just offering classes. That means fostering meaningful relationships between professors and students.

“I didn’t have family in the courtroom. I had professors in the courtroom,” said William Freeman, who served time in Maryland and now leads the Justice Policy Fellowship at The Education Trust. “Now, I’m a first-gen everything — college graduate, homeowner. I don’t think my parents ever made the kind of money I’m making now.”

Many state lawmakers have worked, with varying outcomes, to boost prison college programs in anticipation that Pell Grants could help more incarcerated students earn degrees.

In Washington state, for example, a law set to take effect in June will allow more incarcerated learners to seek both federal and state financial aid grants to cover the costs of postsecondary education programs.

Maryland’s legislature has sent Democratic Gov. Wes Moore a bill that would require that the state corrections department help incarcerated students in accessing Pell Grants and set goals for participation. Moore’s office said the legislation is under consideration.

A Florida bill that would have allowed students to be eligible for in-state tuition even if they had been incarcerated in the state in the past year made it out of House and Senate committees but was tabled before the legislature adjourned.

And in Montana, lawmakers grilled state corrections officials after a legislative audit found that prison education and workforce programs are limited, featuring long waitlists and inequitable access between private and public facilities.

New programs and partnerships

Corrections agencies and colleges in several states have recently announced new partnerships, with some soon to become Pell-eligible.

Maryland’s corrections department recently announced a memorandum of understanding with the University System of Maryland to provide incarcerated students with the opportunity to obtain bachelor’s degrees or credit-based certificates from any of the 12 system universities. The university system will also be able to accept Pell Grants.

Danielle Cox, the state corrections department’s education director, said she aims to have a college or university program at every state facility by 2027.

In Utah, female incarcerated students at the Utah State Correctional Facility can apply to a new bachelor’s program at the University of Utah through the school’s Prison Education Project. At least 11 of 15 prospective students already have received their admissions decisions, according to Erin Castro, an associate professor of higher education at the University of Utah and co-founder of the Prison Education Project.

“This is the first time that the flagship public institution is admitting a currently incarcerated cohort,” Castro said.

The Nebraska Department of Correctional Services and Southeast Community College are expanding their partnership to offer more higher education opportunities to students in five state facilities. The college enrolled 229 students this spring semester, and also is working on gaining the federal approval to offer Pell Grants as an official prison education program.

The college now offers an associate of arts degree in academic transfer, and in the fall will offer an associate of applied science in business and more career and technical education programs.

Bureaucratic barriers

But navigating the new application process from the U.S. Department of Education has required significantly more administrative labor, some advocates say.

At least one university so far has decided to pull the plug on its prison education program. Georgia State University cited the feds’ new rules for Pell Grants and a $24 million budget cut as reasons to close its program this summer, according to Open Campus, a nonprofit news outlet that reports on higher ed. The program has been in operation since 2016.

“The shape and tenor of this new system is causing significant damage to the framework of college-in-prison,” Jessica Neptune, the director of national engagement for the Bard Prison Initiative at Bard College in New York, wrote in an email to Stateline.

“Much of the recent policy work related to Pell, especially, is moving in a direction that makes it harder and harder for colleges to just be colleges and not criminal justice interventions,” she said.

The Department of Education did not directly respond to advocates’ concerns about the new application requirements, but said it held a “negotiated rulemaking process that enlisted significant stakeholder input to put forward the best regulations possible.”

Some prison education advocates also argue that the new bureaucratic process isolates the mission of educating incarcerated students from that of other students and encourages the “othering” of current or formerly incarcerated individuals.

“Whenever we are creating separate systems for individuals — particularly when they’re incarcerated — that reinforce processes, isolation and marginalization, it is not going to go well,” said Dyjuan Tatro, a senior government affairs officer with the Bard Prison Initiative and a Bard College alum.

“Incarcerated students should have the same access to Pell Grants, full stop, as any other students in this country,” Tatro said.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org. Follow Stateline on Facebook and Twitter.

T’Montez Hurt went missing on Feb. 1 at a Greyhound bus station on Troost Avenue. The 19-year-old's disappearance has become a rallying cry for better police cooperation by family members of missing people (Mili Mansaray/ The Beacon).

T’Montez Hurt had just started working at a Price Chopper in Grain Valley to save money after a semester away from Missouri Western State University.

Then in the early hours of Feb. 1, the 19-year-old placed an anxious phone call to his grandmother, Tecona Donald-Sullivan, saying he thought he’d been drugged. The day before he’d had a mental breakdown and sounded distressed over the phone.

He asked his grandmother for her prayers.

She called 911 from St. Louis. Hurt was taken to a Kansas City hospital, where a urine test revealed no drugs in his system. Before he was discharged, his grandmother arranged with the hospital to call him a cab that would take him to a Greyhound bus station so he could return to St. Louis.

Security footage captured Hurt walking up to the door of the bus station at Troost Avenue and 11th Street before discovering it was closed. He then attempted to reenter the zTrip rideshare car. He’d left his cellphone in the car but the driver wouldn’t unlock the door. That was the last confirmed sighting of T’Montez.

Hurt’s disappearance ignited a communitywide search effort. Youth news platform KC Discover joined forces with his family to organize search parties. That outpouring of support reflects a rise of concern among residents regarding missing people in the area.

The Kansas City Police Department reports that Hurt is one of seven adults who have gone missing in Kansas City in 2024 and have yet to be found. That number likely represents only a fraction of missing people — many cases go unreported — yet it nearly doubles the four active missing-adult reports compared to the same time last year. And the increase in missing minors has been more significant, from seven at this time last year to 29 today.

The trend extends across the state. The Missouri State Highway Patrol reports a fourfold increase in active adult missing persons reports in Missouri compared to the same time last year.

Groups involved in finding missing people offer no single explanation for the rise. More active cases could mean an increase in disappearances. It might also signal a growing willingness by community members to report disappearances to police.

In Kansas City, police have revived the missing persons unit. Officers say they publish the number of missing people and communicate with the families involved with missing persons investigations.

Still, community leaders say families get frustrated that police sometimes won’t open a missing persons case without obvious evidence of foul play or unless their relative suffers from a physical or acute mental health problem. More broadly, families report a cumbersome process that makes it daunting to file a report.

“It’s about really catering to the needs of those families that have reported their loved ones missing,” said Damon Daniel, president of AdHoc Group Against Crime, an organization dedicated to fighting crime and violence in Kansas City. “Families (often) don’t feel like enough is being done.”

AdHoc has had a long-standing relationship with KCPD since its inception in 1977, when former police officer Alvin Brooks formed the organization to address the unsolved murders of Black women. The organization prepares videos and collaborates with the department on search parties and door-to-door canvasses, including one for Hurt.

KCPD Missing persons unit 

KCPD is actively investigating T’Montez Hurt’s disappearance, police spokesperson Capt. Jacob Becchina said in an email to The Beacon. While a search party organized by KC Discover found a bone near Troost Avenue and 81st Street on April 13, it wasn’t human. A body discovered nearby by police triggered a separate ongoing death investigation.

Statistics show a rise in both adult and juvenile missing persons cases. The number of active missing juvenile cases in Kansas City lept from seven in the first four months of 2023 to 29 this year.

That increase follows the reinstatement of the police department’s Missing Persons Section in April 2023.  Police Chief Stacey Graves reopened the unit in response to criticism that the department needed to put more effort into finding missing Black women. The unit had disbanded in 2022 because of staffing shortages. It now dedicates seven detectives and a sergeant specifically to missing person investigations.

“Re-dedicating a squad of detectives to focus primarily on missing persons provides a greater capacity to tend to the needs of those investigations,” the department’s spokesperson said in an email.

KCPD took a missing person report on Hurt on Feb. 2, the same day they were notified about Hurt, The Kansas City Star reports, but a flyer wasn’t posted on the department’s website or distributed to local media until March 27.

Community response

The case of Jaynie Crosdale shows the disconnect between law enforcement and Black communities, The Kansas City Defender founder Ryan Sorrell said.

Crosdale was reported by police as a potential witness in the case against Timothy Haslett Jr., who has been charged with kidnapping and torturing a young Black woman he picked up on Prospect Avenue in 2022.

Crosdale’s remains were later discovered in a barrel floating in the Missouri River in July 2023. Haslett has not been charged in her death. Sorrell said that when Crosdale went missing, Excelsior Springs police announced that she was a potential witness instead of a potential victim. He said the difference in that language matters.

“That scenario is indicative of how the police view missing Black people, more times than not, as criminals as opposed to victims who need help,” he said.

Sorrell said distrust of police because of historical criminalization of victims and police brutality makes it hard for police to rally cooperation in missing persons cases. Those suspicions of police have discouraged families from pursuing formal investigations. So many have taken on the work themselves.

The Defender has been receiving and amplifying community tips on missing people after it began to investigate the trend of missing Black women in Kansas City in 2022, Sorrell said.

“It continues to be an urgent crisis within our city that is not being adequately addressed — and is not even capable of being adequately addressed — by the police,” he said. “Many Black people don’t even feel safe going to the police department to report it.”

Black people make up 56% of all the missing persons reports in the past eight months, despite only making up 26% of the population in Kansas City, according to data from KCPD.

Families looking for missing people have also addressed the difficulty of filing a report. The department has no minimum time a person is gone before declaring them missing. But they must either have a life-threatening medical condition, be suffering from a mental illness or dementia, be suicidal or there must be strong evidence of foul play.

Kris Wade has seen this firsthand. She is the co-founder and executive director of The Justice Project, which advocates for women in poverty. She said families need to understand filing guidelines before approaching the police department.

“If they have the right information, they’ll start looking. But if they don’t have enough information, what can they do?” she said. “They can’t just send people out to aimlessly drive around the streets. That’s why people will need to do their homework before they go down there. Or to ask the police, ‘What do you need from me to make this work?’”

Daniel with AdHoc said police simply don’t have enough officers to conduct robust investigations into every missing persons tip, especially considering the number of violent crimes that take place in Kansas City. But he believes more can be done when families reach out.

“Does that mean that if I can’t file a report I’m not going to get any help at all?” he said. “That’s a little unacceptable.”

Becchina said that investigations are confidential and complex and require a unique approach for each case, but the department does what it can to be transparent.

“We publish the daily numbers and we are in contact regularly with reporting parties and available for follow-ups to answer questions when needed,” Becchina said.

Daniel said that KCPD needs to be straightforward about educating families on how to file a missing persons report and what to expect after one is filed.

“There has to be a better education to the public as to what those processes are,” he said. “They should put them (clearly) on their website. At least make it plain out there.”

Theda Wilson would agree. She founded Looking for an Angel in 2006, three years after her 9-year-old son, Christian Taylor Ferguson, went missing. The St. Louis-based nonprofit helps families find their missing loved ones.

Wilson said she’s had to be persistent with local law enforcement and the Missouri Highway Patrol to pursue missing persons investigations. She often has to remind officers, for example, that there is no time limit on an investigation when they insist that families wait 24 to 48 hours after a person goes missing.

“Most of the time these terms are new to them and they don’t know what to do,” she said.  “They’re expecting guidance from a representative like a police department or a police agency to tell them what they need to do. I’ll go down there and I’m going to get some answers and I’ll stand there until they open their door and talk to me and their parents.”

Editor’s note: Mili Mansaray has freelanced an article for The Kansas City Defender profiling Kansas City’s first poet laureate. 

This article first appeared on The Beacon and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

St. Louis Mayor Tishaura Jones called to shutter the Workhouse as early as 2016 (Photo courtesy of St. Louis Mayor's Office).

Inez Bordeaux had heard horror stories about the St. Louis jail commonly known as the Workhouse — named so for prisoners held there in the 1800s who were forced to labor for their freedom — but it was only once she was sent there herself in 2016 that she realized: “Everything I’ve heard about the Workhouse is absolutely true.”

There were rats, roaches, black mold. There was the pervasive odor: “I don’t know if I have the words to accurately describe it, but it just smells rotted,” she told Bolts. “It smells like mildew and rot—and, like, despair.”

And there was rampant neglect and abuse.

“The way people are treated inside of the facility — like you are something that someone has scraped off the bottom of their shoe,” she said.

In 2018, spurred by the memory of the six months she spent inside, Bordeaux got involved in the group Arch City Defenders’ fight to close down the Workhouse. Today, she works as the group’s deputy director of community collaborations.

The early 2021 mayoral win of Tishaura Jones, who had called to shutter the Workhouse as early as 2016, was a boon for the movement: Jones largely emptied the jail later that year, and permanently shut its doors in mid-2022. That might have been the end of some campaigns.

In St. Louis, it was just the beginning.

Many prisons and jails that get emptied of one incarcerated population still end up warehousing people under another carceral function: they become ICE detention facilities, or simply hold prisoners for another jurisdiction. St. Louis was determined to chart a different course.

Once the Workhouse was officially closed, the city embarked on an 18-month-long process to envision a future for the space, quite literally called Reenvisioning the Workhouse.

It involved soliciting input from 2,500 St. Louis organizations and individuals, including residents who live near the site, and, critically, people who had been incarcerated there. It would all lead up to a final report to be presented to the mayor’s office with recommendations for the building and its surrounding land.

As different groups came together to work through divergent ideas for the site, and ultimately produce a host of proposals about what might replace the Workhouse, the process tapped into a deep wellspring of feeling about a building that for many represents nothing but sorrow.

Then in March, two months after the Workhouse transition team released their final report, Jones announced a different plan: she wanted to use the site to build tiny homes for unhoused people. The move came as a shock to many organizers, including those who were involved throughout the process and believed that putting homeless people at the site, far away from community and services, was akin to an act of banishment.

“It feels like a punch in the face for a mayor who has said that she understands the Workhouse, who was calling for the closure of the Workhouse before the Close the Workhouse campaign even existed, to once again attempt to disappear the people that are seen as undesirable to a facility that we know is not fit for human habitation,” Bordeaux said.

The Close the Workhouse campaign is continuing to press the mayor and the city’s Board of Alders to reconsider and implement the recommendations laid out in the report, and the mayor’s office stresses that no official decisions have been made yet regarding the site, “If it can be changed, I want to change it,” said Jada Scaife, another community design organizer for the Reenvisioning the Workhouse steering committee who also spent time in the jail. But, they added, “they already heard us—that’s what the report was for—and they still chose to go the way they went.”

Both the report process, and the fracas that has accompanied the revelation of the city’s new plan for the site, illustrate the possibilities that arise when prisons and jails close, as well as the conflicts that likely accompany any serious discussion over what’s next. Is the ground a jail sits on a plot of land like any other, with the potential to provide a practical, stopgap fix to another ongoing municipal crisis? Or should it be treated with more reverence, akin to former sites of racial terror or confinement that have been commemorated with creative memorial projects? Should it be a place of remembrance?

Jails close across the country

Over the past two decades as the U.S. has begun to reevaluate the harsh approach to criminal justice that ballooned carceral populations in the 1980s and 1990s, prisons and jails have closed their doors across the country, leading to a reduction of at least 81,000 beds, according to an analysis from The Sentencing Report.

“There are active closure conversations happening this year in California and New York, Virginia, Washington state,” said Nicole D. Porter, the advocacy director at the Sentencing Project and the author of two reports on prison closure and repurposing.

Porter has observed that many closed carceral facilities end up holding migrants for ICE or otherwise furthering carceral purposes. But she has also documented a small but growing number of prisons and jails that have undergone adaptive reuse processes, transforming into upscale mixed-use developments, whiskey distilleries, film studios, homeless shelters, and more.

The vast majority of these end up as for-profit spaces, and some have even seemed to capitalize on the building’s past in a way that invites accusations of particularly poor taste.

Take “The Cell Block” hotel in Clifton, Texas, which invites guests to “break the chains of monotony” and promises “luxurious solitary confinement,” as Harper’s reported recently. In her report, Porter notes that Virginia organizers criticized one adaptive reuse project in Lorton, Virginia, for planning a “Nightmare Prison” haunted house event for Halloween just a few months after George Floyd’s murder.

A few projects have involved community participation or discussion around community reinvestment—the idea that proceeds from future site operations should go toward building up services in the neighborhoods where most incarcerated people come from.

In 2019, former Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms hired the Oakland-based abolitionist design firm Designing Justice + Designing Spaces to reimagine the Atlanta City Detention Center, in what the firm called the city’s “largest and most transparent community engagement process.”

Ultimately, the process stalled; today, the jail remains open. And Porter notes that she hasn’t yet seen successful examples of governments requiring companies to allocate funds towards community programs. “I think it’s something that needs to happen,” she said. “But at the end of the day, there’s not very many of these discussions happening… from my perspective, any outcome that permanently takes offline carceral capacity is a good outcome at this point.”

Given this landscape, the Reenvisioning the Workhouse process was charting largely unexplored territory. Three justice-oriented design firms facilitated the process, and the steering committee’s core group consisted of six formerly incarcerated locals and organizers, including Bordeaux. It also included several people who lived near, had worked at, or had family members formerly incarcerated at the Workhouse.

To come up with an initial round of ideas for the future of the jail and its land, participants canvassed neighborhoods, held community meetings, distributed flyers, and solicited input via social media. They took the initial batch of ideas they got, winnowed them down, sent them back out to procure people’s thoughts on more concrete proposals, and then worked with the city to examine whether the ideas were practically feasible.

The end result would be a detailed, 64-page report, to be presented to the city, with concrete recommendations for the site’s future.

Local organizations also participated in the process. Kristian Blackmon, the coalition coordinator at the housing justice organization Homes For All’s St. Louis chapter, told Bolts that in her informal conversations with the group’s base, mostly low-income tenants, many people liked the idea of replacing the Workhouse with a green space that could benefit the surrounding area, which is predominantly Black. Others, Blackmon said, just wanted to demolish the building.

For Bordeaux, the process was personally challenging given her past experience at the jail. “From the moment I stepped out of the building, I wanted to burn the Workhouse to the ground and salt the earth,” she told Bolts. “I think that the facility itself, and the land, has had such a horrific legacy that I at first was having a difficult time wrapping my brain around how it could be anything positive or useful.”

Bordeaux credited the careful process and the various people involved with helping expand her imagination. Ultimately, she said, “we were able to come up with things that I am comfortable with, and other directly impacted people are comfortable.”

As they got to work building out the report, the complexities of incorporating the views of a wide range of stakeholders—including people with no direct or indirect experience of incarceration—were encapsulated in one discussion over the prospect of turning the site into an animal shelter, with some amount of transitional housing for their unhoused pet owners, who tend to be blocked from nearly all other shelters.

While the report notes that the idea received “overwhelming public support” from the broader community, participants who’d spent time in the Workhouse detected an uglier subtext: “We were treated like animals there,” one said in response.

Meanwhile, Scaife worried that including any housing recommendation on the site, however conditional, would open the door for the city to turn the entire site into housing.

“Us saying that anything could live there made it where it was basically saying it’s okay to live there, period,” they told Bolts. 

After an emotional discussion, the committee ultimately decided to endorse the animal shelter option.

An additional challenge centered around the site’s isolation and possible environmental hazards; the Workhouse is located in an industrial zone along a truck corridor, and the soil it sits on contains contaminants such as arsenic, lead, and other potentially dangerous chemicals.

Any earnest attempt to transform carceral facilities will likely come up against the reality that prisons and jails tend to be built on remote, undesirable land: A 2017 report by Truthout and the Earth Island Journal found that at least 589 prisons in the U.S. are located within 3 miles of a federal Superfund site.

Given the site’s dark past — Arch City Defenders has documented at least seven people who died at the jail between 2009 and 2019—and concerns around pollution, the report ultimately lays out a vision that largely does not recommend services for community members on site. Instead, it recommends the creation of a community resource hub somewhere closer to the heart of St. Louis.

For the Workhouse itself, the report lays out a range of options; the animal shelter, for one, plus solar panels, prairie restoration, or industrial uses that could benefit the community indirectly. It additionally suggests the erection of a marker memorializing the site.

The report team knew that these recommendations were ambitious. The city had never promised to implement the report’s conclusions, but some team members were hopeful given the fact that the city had initiated the process in the first place. They were similarly cheered by the extent to which officials dug into feasibility as the process unfolded, looking into every major idea to make sure it was viable.

But the visioning process had also unearthed St. Louisans’ frustrations about participating in public processes only to see no real results or impact. As part of a “General process recommendation,” the report advises: “Community members have expressed being tired of repeatedly saying what they need only to end up in a report or recommendation that seem to only be followed when convenient, seen and celebrated at a meeting, or potentially put away on a shelf.”

‘Reenvisioning the Workhouse ‘

Last August, participants were about halfway through the Reenvisioning the Workhouse process: after going through one round of community outreach and feedback, they were preparing to embark on a second round to sharpen their recommendations for the site. However, unbeknownst to the steering committee, the city of St. Louis was exploring its own ideas for the old jail.

Emails between members of the city’s Board of Public Service, obtained by Bolts through a public records request, show that they discussed hiring an engineering firm to perform an environmental review of the site as early as mid-August.

“I want these tests to verify that neither the soil or air contains anything that would prohibit the construction of this tiny home village for the unhoused,” the board’s president wrote on Aug. 15. “Please keep me in the loop as time is of the essence.”

Two days later, he followed up, asking for an update to pass on to the mayor’s office.

The firm sent a work proposal to the city on Aug. 29 and completed its report in December. But the steering committee says it didn’t learn of the plan until late March,, almost two months after they had released their own report. After extensive participation from the city throughout the process, and signals from the mayor that she supported the idea of deeper change, many felt betrayed. One activist pointed to Jones’ own words in 2022, when the Workhouse closed, that the step wasn’t just a reform, but rather “a transformation of our city’s approach to public safety.” 

“You have no idea how incredibly frustrating it is to take time and energy and blood and sweat and tears and go through this entire process only to find out that it was just something [Jones] was checking off a to-do list,” Bordeaux told Bolts.

City officials in St. Louis have emphasized practical considerations in their decision to place a shelter at the Workhouse site. They stressed that local ordinances requiring the signed consent of at least 50 percent of nearby business owners or registered voters in order to open a homeless shelter in more populated areas of St. Louis leave them with few other options.

“There aren’t just ‘challenges’ to establishing homeless shelters in more populated areas, it’s downright impossible right now in the city because of ordinances already on the books,” a spokesperson for the mayor, Conner Kerrigan, told Bolts via email.

At a recent meeting, one alderperson said, referencing the area’s frigid winters, “I don’t want to spend time in any jail, but I’d rather spend time inside the Workhouse than freeze to death outside.” Later in the meeting the CEO of an existing tiny homes project testified that they can be a good way to get people back on their feet.

Blackmon of Homes For All agrees that the city’s housing and homelessness crisis is severe. St. Louis, she said, “ranks extremely low for affordable housing for folks of color, specifically Black folks.” The city hasn’t successfully opened a new shelter in years, and “the ones that we do have aren’t necessarily the best,” she said.

“Most of them are almost always consistently full. So there’s always additional need.” But Blackmon also felt that the city’s complaints about lack of options were disingenuous: “Most of those in positions of power do not want shelters in their wards.”

Individual alderpeople have frequently opposed the construction of homeless housing near them; last year, the mayor opposed an alderperson’s proposal to lower the signature threshold for establishing new shelters.

Blackmon acknowledged the tension that the tiny homes plan has provoked for local groups working on housing and homelessness. “What do you do when you might have a space that can house some people—but then it’s also like, at what cost?” she asked. “People don’t deserve…to be put in an area that’s secluded from many other people in the community,” she went on, “and to be somewhere on a piece of land that has a horrific history of violence and death and oppression.”

The city has downplayed environmental concerns about the site, noting that the environmental review recommended dumping gravel on top of the contaminated soil. Jones has committed to not using the space for carceral purposes, which Porter of The Sentencing Project stressed is a victory in itself. The mayor has also indicated that she will support the placement of a community memorial on the site alongside the tiny homes, one of the report’s recommendations.

Bordeaux, though, feels that the other suggestions are more materially significant. “I think the way that we really honor the legacy of the Workhouse, and the harm that it’s caused in so many communities, is by addressing the needs that cause most of us to end up in the Workhouse in the first place,” she said. Asked whether the mayor’s office would commit to funding community investment or reparations for Workhouse survivors, Kerrigan referenced the likelihood of a memorial and also mentioned the mayor’s new Office of Violence Prevention).

Organizers with the Close the Workhouse campaign say they’ll continue to fight to get its recommendations implemented and advance their goals, including reparations for people who’ve been held in the Workhouse, throughout the ongoing city budget allocation process.

The idea of reparations, especially, raises the question of what it means to try to heal the scars of one jail, to memorialize one site, when the larger structure it belongs to persists. St. Louis has another jail, the City Justice Center, where the Workhouse’s remaining population were transferred when it closed in 2022.

“Some of the same issues that were affecting people in the Workhouse are affecting people at CJC—like being indiscriminately maced, not having access to competent medical care, COs turning off the water of people who are being detained in CJC as punishment,” Bordeaux said. “I look forward to the campaign to close CJC also, if there ever is one—it will have my one thousand percent support.”

Sarai Holguin (left), Mireya Nelson (top right), and James Lemons (bottom right) all retained a bullet or bullet fragments after being shot at the Chiefs Super Bowl parade in Kansas City in February (Christpher Smith for KFF Health News; Erika Nelson; Brandie Lemons).

James Lemons, 39, wants the bullet removed from his thigh so he can go back to work.

Sarai Holguin, a 71-year-old woman originally from Mexico, has accepted the bullet lodged near her knee as her “compa” — a close friend.

Mireya Nelson, 15, was hit by a bullet that went through her jaw and broke her shoulder, where fragments remain. She’ll live with them for now, while doctors monitor lead levels in her blood for at least two years.

Nearly three months after the Kansas City Chiefs Super Bowl parade shooting left at least 24 people injured, recovery from those wounds is intensely personal and includes a surprising gray area in medicine: whether the bullets should be removed.

Medical protocol offers no clear answer. A 2016 survey of surgeons found that only about 15% of respondents worked at medical facilities that had policies on bullet removal. Doctors in the U.S. often leave bullets buried deep in a person’s body, at least at first, so as not to cause further trauma.

But as gun violence has emerged as a public health epidemic, some researchers wonder if that practice is best. Some of the wounded, like James Lemons, are left in a precarious place.

“If there’s a way to get it out, and it’s safely taken out, get it out of the person,” Lemons said. “Make that person feel more secure about themselves. And you’re not walking around with that memory in you.”

Lemons, Holguin, and Nelson are coping in very different ways.

Pain became a problem

Three days after the Chiefs won the Super Bowl, Lemons drove the 37 miles from Harrisonville, Missouri, to downtown Kansas City to celebrate the victory. The warehouse worker was carrying his 5-year-old daughter, Kensley, on his shoulders when he felt a bullet enter the back of his right thigh.

Gunfire erupted in the area packed with revelers, prosecutors later said, after a “verbal confrontation” between two groups. Detectives found “multiple 9mm and .40 caliber spent shell casings” at the scene. Lemons said he understood immediately what was happening.

“I know my city. We’re not shooting off fireworks,” he said.

Lemons shielded Kensley’s face as they fell to the ground so she wouldn’t hit the concrete. His first thought was getting his family — also including his wife, Brandie; 17-year-old daughter, Kallie; and 10-year-old son, Jaxson — to safety.

“I’m hit. But don’t worry about it,” Lemons recalled telling Brandie. “We gotta go.”

He carried Kensley on his shoulders as the family walked a mile to their car. His leg bled through his pants at first then stopped, he said. It burned with pain. Brandie insisted on driving him to the hospital but traffic was at a standstill so she put on her hazard lights and drove on the wrong side of the road.

“She’s like: ‘I’m getting you to a hospital. I’m tired of people being in my way,’” Lemons recalled. “I’ve never seen my wife like that. I’m looking at her like, ‘That’s kinda sexy.’”

Lemons clapped and smiled at his wife, he said, to which she replied, “What are you smiling for? You just got shot.” He stayed in quiet admiration until they were stopped by a sheriff, who summoned an ambulance, Lemons said.

He was taken to the emergency room at University Health, which admitted 12 patients from the rally, including eight with gunshot wounds. Imaging showed the bullet barely missed an artery, Lemons said. Doctors cleansed the wound, put his leg in a brace, and told him to come back in a week. The bullet was still in his leg.

“I was a little baffled by it, but I was like, ‘OK, whatever, I’ll get out of here,’” Lemons recalled.

When he returned, doctors removed the brace but explained they often leave bullets and fragments in the body — unless they grow too painful.

“I get it, but I don’t like that,” Lemons said. “Why wouldn’t you take it out if you could?”

University Health spokesperson Leslie Carto said the hospital can’t comment on individual patient care because of federal privacy laws.

Surgeons typically do remove bullets when they encounter them during surgery or they are in dangerous locations, like in the spinal canal or risking damage to an organ, said Brendan Campbell, a pediatric surgeon at Connecticut Children’s.

Campbell also chairs the Injury Prevention and Control Committee of the American College of Surgeons’ Committee on Trauma, which works on firearm injury prevention.

LJ Punch, a trauma surgeon by training and the founder of the Bullet Related Injury Clinic in St. Louis, said the origins of trauma care also help explain why bullets are so often left.

“Trauma care is war medicine,” Punch said. “It is set to be ready at any moment and any time, every day, to save a life. It is not equipped to take care of the healing that needs to come after.”

In the survey of surgeons, the most common reasons given for removing a bullet were pain, a palpable bullet lodged near the skin, or an infection. Far less common were lead poisoning and mental health concerns such as post-traumatic stress disorder and anxiety.

What patients wanted also affected their decisions, the surgeons said.

Lemons wanted the bullet out. The pain it caused in his leg radiated up from his thigh, making it difficult to move for more than an hour or two. Working his warehouse job was impossible.

“I gotta lift 100 pounds every night,” Lemons recalled telling his doctors. “I gotta lift my child. I can’t work like this.”

He has lost his income and his health insurance. Another stroke of bad luck: The family’s landlord sold their rental home soon after the parade, and they had to find a new place to live. This house is smaller, but it was important to keep the kids in the same school district with their friends, Lemons said in an interview in Kensley’s pink bedroom, the quietest spot to talk.

They’ve borrowed money and raised $6,500 on GoFundMe to help with the deposit and car repairs, but the parade shooting has left the family in a deep financial hole.

Without insurance, Lemons worried he couldn’t afford to have the bullet removed. Then he learned his surgery would be paid for by donations. He set up an appointment at a hospital north of the city, where a surgeon took measurements on his X-ray and explained the procedure.

“I need you to be involved as much as I’m going to be involved,” he remembered being told, “because — guess what — this ain’t my leg.”

The surgery is scheduled for this month.

‘We became friends’

Sarai Holguin isn’t much of a Chiefs fan, but she agreed to go to the rally at Union Station to show her friend the best spot to see the players on stage. It was an unseasonably warm day, and they were standing near an entrance where lots of police were stationed. Parents had babies in strollers, kids were playing football, and she felt safe.

A little before 2 p.m., Holguin heard what she thought were fireworks. People started running away from the stage. She turned to leave, trying to find her friend, but felt dizzy. She didn’t know she’d been shot. Three people quickly came to her aid and helped her to the ground, and a stranger took off his shirt and made a tourniquet to put on her left leg.

Holguin, a native of Puebla, Mexico, who became a U.S. citizen in 2018, had never seen so much chaos, so many paramedics working under such pressure. They were “anonymous heroes,” she said.

She saw them working on Lisa Lopez-Galvan, a well-known DJ and 43-year-old mother of two. Lopez-Galvan died at the scene, and was the sole fatality at the parade. Holguin was rushed to University Health, about five minutes from Union Station.

There doctors performed surgery, leaving the bullet in her leg. Holguin awoke to more chaos. She had lost her purse, along with her cellphone, so she couldn’t call her husband, Cesar. She had been admitted to the hospital under an alias — a common practice at medical centers to begin immediate care.

Her husband and daughter didn’t find her until about 10 p.m. — roughly eight hours after she’d been shot.

“It has been a huge trauma for me,” Holguin said through an interpreter. “I was injured and at the hospital without doing anything wrong. [The rally] was a moment to play, to relax, to be together.”

Holguin was hospitalized for a week, and two more outpatient surgeries quickly followed, mostly to remove dead tissue around the wound. She wore a wound VAC, or vacuum-assisted closure device, for several weeks and had medical appointments every other day.

Campbell, the trauma surgeon, said wound VACs are common when bullets damage tissue that isn’t easily reconstructed in surgery.

“It’s not just the physical injuries,” Campbell said. “Many times it’s the emotional, psychological injuries, which many of these patients take away as well.”

The bullet remains near Holguin’s knee.

“I’m going to have it for the rest of my life,” she said, saying she and the bullet became “compas,” close friends.

“We became friends so that she doesn’t do any bad to me anymore,” Holguin said with a smile.

Punch, of the Bullet Related Injury Clinic in St. Louis, said some people like Holguin are able to find a way to psychically live with bullets that remain.

“If you’re able to make a story around what that means for that bullet to be in your body, that gives you power; that gives you agency and choice,” Punch said.

Holguin’s life changed in an instant: She’s using a walker to get around. Her foot, she said, acts “like it had a stroke” — it dangles, and it’s difficult to move her toes.

The most frustrating consequence is that she cannot travel to see her 102-year-old father, still in Mexico. She has a live camera feed on her phone to see him, but that doesn’t offer much comfort, she said, and thinking about him brings tears.

She was told at the hospital that her medical bills would be taken care of, but then lots of them came in the mail. She tried to get victim assistance from the state of Missouri, but all the forms she had were in English, which made them difficult to comprehend. Renting the wound VAC alone cost $800 a month.

Finally she heard that the Mexican Consulate in Kansas City could help, and the consul pointed her to the Jackson County Prosecutor’s Office, with which she registered as an official victim. Now all of her bills are being paid, she said.

Holguin isn’t going to seek mental health treatment, as she believes one must learn to live with a given situation or it will become a burden.

“I have processed this new chapter in my life,” Holguin said. “I have never given up and I will move on with God’s help.”

‘I saw blood on my hands’

Mireya Nelson was late to the parade. Her mother, Erika, told her she should leave early, given traffic and the million people expected to crowd into downtown Kansas City, but she and her teenage friends ignored that advice. The Nelsons live in Belton, Missouri, about a half hour south of the city.

Mireya wanted to hold the Super Bowl trophy. When she and her three friends arrived, the parade that had moved through downtown was over and the rally at Union Station had begun. They were stuck in the large crowd and quickly grew bored, Mireya said.

Getting ready to leave, Mireya and one of her friends were trying to call the driver of their group, but they couldn’t get cell service in the large crowd.

Amid the chaos of people and noise, Mireya suddenly fell.

“I saw blood on my hands. So then I knew I got shot. Yeah, and I just crawled to a tree,” Mireya said. “I actually didn’t know where I got shot at, at first. I just saw blood on my hands.”

The bullet grazed Mireya’s chin, shot through her jaw, broke her shoulder, and left through her arm. Bullet fragments remain in her shoulder. Doctors decided to leave them because Mireya had already suffered so much damage.

Mireya’s mother supports that decision, for now, noting they were just “fragments.”

“I think if it’s not going to harm her the rest of her life,” Erika said, “I don’t want her to keep going back in the hospital and getting surgery. That’s more trauma to her and more recovery time, more physical therapy and stuff like that.”

Bullet fragments, particularly ones only skin-deep, often push their way out like splinters, according to Punch, although patients aren’t always told about that. Moreover, Punch said, injuries caused by bullets extend beyond those with damaged tissue to the people around them, like Erika. He called for a holistic approach to recover from all the trauma.

“When people stay in their trauma, that trauma can change them for a lifetime,” Punch said.

Mireya will be tested for lead levels in her blood for at least the next two years. Her levels are fine now, doctors told the family, but if they get worse she will need surgery to remove the fragments, her mother said.

Campbell, the pediatric surgeon, said lead is particularly concerning for young children, whose developing brains make them especially vulnerable to its harmful effects. Even a tiny amount of lead — 3.5 micrograms per deciliter — is enough to report to state health officials, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Mireya talks about cute teenage boys’ being “fine” but also still wears Cookie Monster pajamas. She appears confused by the shootings, by all the attention at home, at school, from reporters. Asked how she feels about the fragments in her arm, she said, “I don’t really care for them.”

Mireya was on antibiotics for 10 days after her hospital stay because doctors feared there was bacteria in the wound. She has had physical therapy, but it’s painful to do the exercises. She has a scar on her chin. “A dent,” she said, that’s “bumpy.”

“They said she was lucky because if she wouldn’t have turned her head in a certain way, she could be gone,” Erika said.

Mireya faces a psychiatric evaluation and therapy appointments, though she doesn’t like to talk about her feelings.

So far, Erika’s insurance is paying the medical bills, though she hopes to get some help from the United Way’s #KCStrong fund, which raised nearly $1.9 million, or a faith-based organization called Unite KC.

Erika doesn’t want a handout. She has a job in health care and just got a promotion.

The bullet has changed the family’s life in big ways. It is part of their conversation now. They talk about how they wish they knew what kind of ammunition it was, or what it looked like.

“Like, I wanted to keep the bullet that went through my arm,” Mireya said. “I want to know what kind of bullet it was.” That brought a sigh from her mom, who said her daughter had watched too many episodes of “Forensic Files.”

Erika beats herself up about the wound, because she couldn’t protect her daughter at the parade.

“It hits me hard because I feel bad because she begged me to get off work and I didn’t go there because when you have a new position, you can’t just take off work,” Erika said. “Because I would have took the bullet. Because I would do anything. It’s mom mode.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Amelia Ford, 15, speaks at a press conference in Little Rock on May 7, 2024, where Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin announced he and five other state attorneys general are suing the U.S. Department of Education over an expansion of federal Title IX protections to transgender students. Amelia and her mother are also plaintiffs in the litigation (Mary Hennigan/Arkansas Advocate).

Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin on Tuesday filed a lawsuit with five other states, including Missouri, against the U.S. Department of Education’s change to Title IX that codifies protections for LGBTQ students.

The federal rule, announced in April, protects students and employees from sex-based discrimination, requires schools to offer support for people who make complaints, sets guidelines for schools and codifies protections for transgender students. It is expected to go into effect on Aug. 1.

The 60-page lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, alleges the education department exceeded its authority by rewriting the law. It also claims the rule is unconstitutional through a violation of the First Amendment, goes against decades of understanding of Title IX making it arbitrary and capricious, and presents “an actual controversy” by redefining “sex” to include gender identity.

The suit seeks to ultimately stop the federal rule’s effective date.

Though Title IX applies broadly, Griffin’s press conference Tuesday largely focused on transgender students joining girls’ sports teams.

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey and Arkansas Solicitor General Nicholas Bronni joined Griffin at the press conference, as did Amelia Ford, a 15-year-old sophomore at Brookland High School near Jonesboro. Amelia and her mother Sara are plaintiffs in the suit, along with Missouri, Nebraska, Iowa, North Dakota and South Dakota.

Amelia, a basketball player, said she’s worked hard to earn her spot on the team and doesn’t want that opportunity taken away from her. She also expressed concerns about the possibility of having “a boy who identifies as a girl” in her bathroom, locker room or hotel room during overnight sports trips.

“You don’t just become a girl by what you feel or by what you think,” Amelia said. “The government should not force us to disregard common sense and reality.”

The lawsuit mentions Ford’s faith several times and states it would be a violation of her Christian beliefs to refer to someone using pronouns that don’t align with the person’s biological sex.

Bailey referred to the Title IX rule as being “in favor of a radical transgender ideology,” and Griffin seemed baffled by the idea of such a proposed change.

“For a legal suit, it can’t just be ridiculous, nonsensical, hard to believe, outrageous — there has to be a legal basis,” said Griffin, who also added that he thinks “nationally, a vast majority of people think this whole thing is nonsensical.”

Asked whether he saw the lawsuit as harmful to transgender students, Griffin said, “No, I see it as following the law.”

Griffin’s lawsuit comes days after Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed an executive order  instructing public schools to follow state law instead of the federal Title IX rule when it goes into effect in August.

“My message to Joe Biden and the federal government is that we will not comply,” Sanders said during a press conference.

A number of other states have also filed suit against the Title IX rule in their own federal circuit courts, and more are expected.

This story was originally published by the Arkansas Advocate, a States Newsroom affiliate. 

An attendee looks at a series of banners for National Crime Victims’ Rights Week Candlelight Vigil on the National Mall on April 24, 2024, in Washington, D.C. The Justice Department’s Office for Victims of Crime held the event to pay tribute to victims and survivors of crime and individuals who provide service and support (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images).

WASHINGTON — States and local organizations that aid victims of sexual assault and other crimes are raising the alarm about a multi-year plunge in funds, a major problem they say Congress must fix soon or programs will be forced to set up wait lists or turn victims away altogether.

Affected are rape crisis centers, domestic violence shelters, child advocacy centers and more that serve millions of Americans and can’t necessarily rely on scarce state or local dollars to keep the doors open if federal money runs short.

The problem has to do with a cap on withdrawals from the federal crime victims fund, put in place by Congress years ago in an earlier attempt at a solution.

Under the cap, how much money is available every year is determined by a complex three-year average of court fees, fines and penalties that have accumulated — a number that has plummeted by billions during the past six years. The fund does not receive any taxpayer dollars.

National Children’s Alliance CEO Teresa Huizar said in an interview with States Newsroom that child advocacy centers, which help connect children who have survived sexual or domestic abuse to essential services, have no fat left to trim in their budgets.

“What children’s advocacy centers are really looking at now are a set of extremely hard choices,” Huizar said. “Which kids to serve, which kids to turn away? CACs that have never had to triage cases previously, now will have to. CACs that have never had a waitlist for mental health services will now have long, lengthy waitlists to get kids in for therapy.”

“I mean, imagine being a kid who’s been sexually abused and being told you’re going to have to wait six months to see a counselor,” Huizar added. “It’s terrible.”

New Hampshire Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, chairwoman of the spending panel that sets the cap every year based on the dwindling revenue, and Kansas Republican Sen. Jerry Moran, the subcommittee’s ranking member, both indicated during brief interviews with States Newsroom that a fix is in the works, but declined to provide details.

“There is an effort to address that and we’re in the process of doing that, but in the meantime there’s not as much money there,” Shaheen said.

Fund goes up and down by billions every year

Congress established the crime victims fund in 1984 when it approved the Victims of Crime Act. Its funding comes from fines, forfeited bonds and other financial penalties in certain federal cases.

The money flowing into the fund fluctuates each year, making it difficult for the organizations that apply for and receive grant funding to plan their budgets. Congress hoped to alleviate those boom-and-bust cycles by placing the annual cap on how much money can be drawn from the crime victims fund.

But that cap has sharply decreased recently, causing frustration for organizations that rely on it and leading to repeated calls for Congress to find a long-term solution.

The cap stayed below $1 billion annually until fiscal year 2015 when it spiked to $2.3 billion before reaching a high of $4.4 billion in fiscal year 2018.

The annual ceiling then dropped by more than $1 billion, starting the downward trend, according to a report from the Congressional Research Service and data from the Department of Justice.

The cap was set at $2 billion in fiscal year 2021 before rising to $2.6 billion in fiscal 2022 and then dropping to $1.9 billion in fiscal 2023.

Congress set the cap on withdrawals at $1.2 billion for fiscal 2024 when it approved the latest round of appropriations in March, and states and localities have reacted with concern at the prospect of such a dramatic cut. In Iowa, for example, where the state receives $5 million a year, the potential loss of funding posed a major question as legislators wrote their budget for judicial services.

A better fix sought

Congress approved legislation in 2021 to increase the types of revenue from federal court cases moving into the crime victims fund, but advocates say a longer-term answer is needed.

Huizar said the National Children’s Alliance and prosecutors as well as organizations that combat domestic and sexual violence have been urging Congress to fix the funding stream or supplement it to provide stability and consistency.

“Now is the time for Congress to turn urgent attention to this issue if they do not want the safety net for kids and families and serious crime victims to just fall apart,” Huizar said.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers — Reps. Stephanie Bice, R-Okla., Jim Costa, D-Calif., Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., Nathaniel Moran, R-Texas and Ann Wagner, R-Mo. — have introduced legislation that would move unobligated funds collected from entities that defraud the federal government under the False Claims Act to the crime victims fund. The act is a main tool the federal government uses to fight fraud.

That bill is not a long-term solution, but a “temporary infusion of resources,” according to a summary released by lawmakers.

As for the Senate appropriators, Moran said he and others on the spending subcommittee “are waiting for the Judiciary Committee’s examination of the issue, so that we can take the authorizers’ suggestions and take them into account when we appropriate.”

Josh Sorbe, a spokesperson for the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, wrote in a statement the “sustainability of the CVF is extremely important, as evidenced by Senator Durbin’s work on the VOCA Fix that passed in 2021, and we continue to work with our colleagues and survivor advocates and service providers to examine further ways to strengthen the CVF.”

Shaheen’s office did not provide details about what changes may be in the works, following multiple requests from States Newsroom.

Should taxpayer dollars be tapped?

National District Attorneys Association President Charles Smith said his organization supports the House bill, but noted one problem with the short-term fix is that the crime victims fund would be last in line to get the additional revenue.

“I believe that the government gets their money first, the whistleblower second and then we’re in kind of third place there,” Smith said.

One struggle over the fluctuating revenue and available funding, Smith said, is debate about whether taxpayer dollars should be used to offset low balances.

“We need to set a number that everybody’s happy with, so to speak, and fund it through these available sources,” Smith said. “But if there’s a deficit, there needs to be some mechanism in place for it to come out of the general fund.”

The crime victims fund is essential for witness coordinators and victims assistance coordinators in prosecutors’ offices as well as other services for people who survive crimes.

“They’re critical for the well-being of the victim and a lot of times they are critical for the witness even showing up and testifying,” said Smith, who also is the state’s attorney for Frederick County, Maryland.

The organizations that support crime victims, like child advocacy centers, domestic violence shelters and rape crisis centers, are crucial to prosecutors, Smith said.

“Not only are we directly impacted by a loss of staffing and loss of resources, but a lot of the partner agencies that we rely on collaborating with are going to be hurt as well,” Smith said of the reduction to the funding cap.

‘Real alarm’ in states

Karrie Delaney, director of federal affairs for the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, said the slowdown of court cases during the COVID-19 pandemic and the last administration not prosecuting as many corporate cases has impacted the fund more than usual.

RAINN is the country’s largest anti-sexual-violence organization. It operates the National Sexual Assault Hotline (800-656-HOPE) alongside local organizations and runs the Defense Department’s Safe Helpline. It “also carries out programs to prevent sexual violence, help survivors, and ensure that perpetrators are brought to justice,” according to its website.

“I think what’s important from RAINN’s perspective is the actual impact that those fluctuations have on the survivors that we support and organizations and service providers across the country,” Delaney said.

When the federal cap decreases, she said, organizations that support crime victims often turn to state and local governments to make up the gap. And a lot of the times there aren’t enough funds to do that.

“What we’ve seen across the states is real alarm that the cuts coming down are not just impacting the ability of these organizations to offer certain services, but to really keep their doors open,” Delaney said.

Child advocacy centers, domestic violence shelters and rape crisis centers, Delaney added, are the “real boots on the ground organizations that are helping people in times of very active crisis that are at risk of seeing their programs drastically cut to the point where service is placed in jeopardy.”

A crew from Kansas City Fire Station 19 responded to a call in December 2021 when Dominic Biscari ran a red light and crashed into a car in the intersection and then three parked cars, killing three people. The city hopes to overturn an arbitration decision that Biscari could only be suspended for three days. The city had said it would seek to fire him. (Allison Kite/Missouri Independent)

Kansas City officials are hoping to overturn an arbitrator’s decision that a firefighter who crashed a fire truck and killed three people could only receive a three-day suspension.

On Tuesday, the city of Kansas City filed a motion in Jackson County Circuit Court to vacate an arbitration decision that determined Dominic Biscari could only be suspended for three days after he ran a red light in a fire department pumper truck and crashed into a car in the Westport neighborhood, killing both the driver and passenger. 

Biscari then veered and hit three parked cars, killing a pedestrian and running into a building that ultimately collapsed. He was charged with three felonies, and according to the city, lawsuits by loved ones of the deceased and the building’s owner have cost Kansas City $3.2 million.

After the crash, the city sought to suspend Biscari pending an investigation, citing the three felony charges. The city told him, according to documents filed Tuesday in circuit court, that the suspension would remain in effect until his felony charges were adjudicated. 

But the firefighters’ union, International Association of Firefighters Local 42, filed a grievance against the city, stating it was shocked at the suspension, which it said violated a previous arbitration decision, according to the city’s filing. The decision that Biscari could only be suspended for three days came as a result of that grievance.

According to the city’s petition, the arbitrator reached the decision, which it argues was an overreach, “without any explanation of how he arrived at a three-day suspension,”

“But it amounted to one day for each death and one day for each million dollars that (the) firefighter’s fatality accident cost the city,” the petition says.

Representatives from the union, as well as Biscari’s attorney, did not respond to requests for comment.

In February 2023, roughly 15 months after the crash, Bascari was charged with three felony counts of involuntary manslaughter in the second degree. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to three years of probation and 40 hours of community service. 

The city notified him of his suspension that same week. Interim Fire Chief Ross Grundyson told the Kansas City Star at the time that the department was suspending Biscari without pay and seeking to terminate his employment.

A few weeks later in March 2023, the union filed its grievance concerning Biscari’s suspension, saying it violated a previous arbitration decision concerning whether suspending firefighters pending an investigation violated their just cause and due process rights. 

The city’s petition emphasizes that the union’s grievance dealt with the suspension — not the investigation of the crash or any ultimate disciplinary action.

The issue went to an arbitrator to determine whether the city had cause to suspend Bascari and whether it gave him due process. The arbitrator decided last month in favor of the union. The decision, however, went beyond the question of whether the suspension was justified, the city argues in its petition. 

“The arbitrator issued discipline on the underlying fatality accident: that (the) firefighter only be suspended for three days and that most references to the underlying fatality accident be removed from his personnel file,” the city’s motion says. The arbitrator also ordered that the city pay Local 42 for its costs in pursuing the grievance. 

In its Tuesday filing, the city says Missouri’s Uniform Arbitration Act requires that a court overturn an arbitration decision if the arbitrator “exceeds their powers,” which the city argues occurred. 

The city repeatedly emphasizes that the arbitrator should have only issued an order on the suspension. It also says its collective bargaining agreement with Local 42 states parties to an arbitration will bear their own costs and that the arbitrator overstepped in awarding the union fees. 

“The city had not found him negligent with respect to the underlying fatality accident and had not fashioned discipline for such a finding were it to occur,” the motion says. “Despite this, the arbitrator took it upon himself to write a prospective cure for a future, hypothetical dispute that was not before him.” 

States that receive federal funding are required to report prison and jail deaths to the U.S. Department of Justice (Darrin Klimek/Getty Images).

The Missouri Department of Corrections must pay more than $60,000 for refusing to give records to a mother trying to find out how her son died in 2021 while in state custody.

And that amount could grow, both because the department lost an appeal of an order finding it violated the Sunshine Law and because the mother is now suing the state for wrongful death in her son’s death by suicide.

The wrongful death lawsuit asserts the department, its officers and contract medical provider were “negligent,  derelict, reckless and in breach of their ministerial duties” in the death of Jahi Hynes.

In a decision delivered Tuesday, the Western District Court of Appeals upheld a trial court judgment that the prison agency committed a “knowing and purposeful violation of the Sunshine Law” to prevent Willa Hynes of St. Louis from learning her son hanged himself with a bedsheet while in solitary confinement.

The department asserted the records were inmate medical records protected from disclosure and its investigation was not a law enforcement investigation as defined in the Sunshine Law. The appeals court rejected the first argument and did not address the second.

“We find there was substantial evidence from which the trial court could have found the DOC acted with the intent to achieve some purpose by violating the Sunshine Law, namely, to hinder Hynes from pursuing a potential civil claim against the DOC relating to her son’s death,” Judge Edward Ardini wrote in the unanimous decision. “Such conduct amounts to a purposeful violation.”

The ruling sets a precedent for the department’s Sunshine Law policies at a time when deaths are increasing in state prisons. Activists for prison reform have tracked deaths and found that deaths have increased by one-third as prison populations fell nearly 25%.

From 2012 to 2014, there was an average of 31,442 incarcerated people in state prisons. Deaths averaged 89 per year. Over the past three years, with an average of 23,409 incarcerated people in state prisons, deaths have averaged 122 per year.

There have been more than 100 deaths in Missouri prisons in five of the last six years.

Michelle Smith, director of the Missouri Justice Coalition, said at a January memorial service for deceased inmates that the department routinely withholds information about deaths from family members.

“We are trying to raise awareness of the fact that hundreds of people die in Missouri prisons every single year and nothing is done,” Smith said at the memorial service.

On April 1, Hynes filed a wrongful death lawsuit accusing the department, its contract medical providers and 11 corrections employees of negligence in allowing her son to possess the bedsheet and failing to conduct required checks on inmates in administrative segregation.

The department used every means possible to block access to information about the death, attorney Linda Powers, who represents Hynes, said in an interview with The Independent.

“They are doing death investigations internally without involving outside law enforcement and then skirting the requirements of the Sunshine Law that law enforcement produce investigative records by claiming they are not law enforcement,” Powers said. 

Karen Pojmann, spokeswoman for the corrections department, declined to answer questions about the department’s Sunshine Law practices and if they have changed as a result of Hynes’ lawsuit. She also declined to comment on the wrongful death lawsuit.

“The department doesn’t comment on litigation,” Pojmann wrote in an email.

The Sunshine Law penalty includes a $5,000 fine for the knowing violation and more than $55,000 in attorney fees.

In her request, Hynes asked for all of her son’s records since his incarceration, plus his medical records, the investigative report on his death, and surveillance video of the area where he was in administrative segregation.

All of the material was turned over late last year, but not before Cole County Circuit Judge Daniel Green issued an order giving the department five days to comply with his judgment in full. That order was issued after Powers asked Green to enforce the judgment and the records were produced only after she sought contempt sanctions because the department had done nothing for four additional weeks.

The investigative report, Powers said, was a document seemingly written to protect the department from liability, not to relate the truth about Jahi Hynes’ death.

“When you look at the evidence and what the video shows, you can determine what happened,” Powers said.

The video and other documents withheld by the corrections department until the court order form the basis of the factual allegations in the lawsuit, Powers said.

Jahi Hynes was sentenced in 2013 in St. Louis Circuit Court to 13 years in prison for first degree robbery. He was 27 when died April 4, 2021, at the Southeast Missouri Correctional Center in Charleston. 

He had a history of mental health problems, the lawsuit states. In September 2020, while housed at South Central Correctional Center in Licking, he spoke with a mental health professional about extreme mood swings and his history of hospitalizations for attempted suicide. He asked to be put back on psychotropic medications he had not been taking since he was incarcerated.

Jahi Hynes was denied the medication and about three months after his transfer to the Southeast Correctional Center, the lawsuit states, he was cited for a “minor assault” for allowing his food port door to strike a correction officer’s hand, causing abrasions.

He was moved to the administrative segregation unit, and placed on restrictions for allowed personal property intended to prevent inmates from harming themselves. On the first day, Hynes was only to be allowed boxer shorts and eyeglasses, receiving pants, a blanket and a mattress the next day and allowed shoes, socks, and bed sheets on the fourth day.

The lawsuit states that department regulations require checks at least every 30 minutes on inmates in solitary confinement. There were periods of more than five hours where no checks were made, the video surveillance shows, according to the lawsuit.

The surveillance video also shows the ease at which prisoners cut off from contact with other inmates can trade items on strings run from cell to cell in a system called “cadillacing.” 

While he wasn’t supposed to have pants, the video shows an inmate working as a porter giving him a pair of sweatpants taken from Hynes and placed on a hook outside the cell just four hours after being placed in the cell.

One inmate gave Hynes a bedsheet via the cadillacing system and another gave him a T-shirt. The system is elaborate enough to transfer items from one side of the prison wing to the other and from one floor to another.

“From approximately 11:09 a.m. to 11:45 a.m. (April 4), in plain view of the cameras, using the line secured by the offender, the inmates cadillaced items from one side of C-Wing to the other four times,” the lawsuit states.

At 3:26 p.m., Jahi Hynes was found hanging in his cell, from the bedsheet he had received from the other prisoner, wearing the T-shirt and sweatpants. A corrections officer had done a cell check about a half-hour earlier and seen Hynes had the prohibited items.

“None of the defendant correction officers removed the t-shirt, pants or bed sheets that were cadillaced to decedent from decedent’s cell, despite orders mandating that they do so,” the lawsuit states.

The delays in receiving the information compounded Willa Hynes grief over the death of her son, Powers said.

“It is unconscionable,” she said. “Ms. Hynes went two-and-a-half years wondering what happened to her son.”

Former U.S. President Donald Trump appears in court for his trial for allegedly covering up hush money payments on April 23, 2024, at Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City. Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first of his criminal cases to go to trial (Brendan McDermid-Pool/Getty Images).

The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s criminal case in New York appeared to strongly disagree Tuesday with the former president’s lawyers’ explanation for why he should be considered in compliance with a gag order in the case.

In a Tuesday morning hearing to determine whether to fine Trump for violating the order, Judge Juan Merchan warned Trump’s legal team it was “losing all credibility with the court” for failing to provide any backing for its argument.

Trump has routinely posted on his social media platform, Truth Social, to complain about the case, despite a gag order that prohibits him from making public statements about potential witnesses.

Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records for reimbursing his attorney and personal fixer at the time, Michael Cohen, for a $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels. It is the first criminal trial against a former U.S. president.

Trump has posted on social media to criticize Cohen and Daniels, as well as reposting articles and video clips that disparage the case entirely.

Trump attorney Todd Blanche argued Tuesday that many of Trump’s posts were sharing others’ content, including a clip from the Fox News host Jesse Watters that complained of supposed unfair treatment toward Trump.

Merchan asked Blanche why sharing content should be considered different from Trump using his own words to violate the order. The judge asked Blanche if there was case law to back up his argument.

Blanche said he had none and called it “common sense,” according to reporters in the courtroom.

Trump was trying hard to comply with the gag order, Blanche said.

“You’re losing all credibility with the court,” Merchan responded, according to reports.

Prosecutors have asked Merchan to fine Trump $1,000 for each violation of the gag order and to warn him that future violations could lead to jail time.

Merchan did not rule on the issue Tuesday.

After the trial wrapped for the day, Trump re-aired his complaints about the order.

“I think it’s a disgrace, it’s totally unconstitutional,” Trump told reporters leaving the courtroom. “I’m not allowed to defend myself and yet, other people are allowed to say whatever they want about me. Very, very unfair.”

Second day of testimony

The jury of 12 New Yorkers was absent for the arguments on the gag order but arrived to hear a second day of testimony from David Pecker, the former publisher of the tabloid National Enquirer.

Pecker had for years protected Trump from damaging stories, including those involving extramarital affairs, by buying the rights to such stories and not publishing them. The exercise is known as catch and kill. It is made possible by National Enquirer’s practice, unlike mainstream news outlets, of paying sources for the rights to stories.

Prosecutors sought to establish Trump and Pecker had a deal that was aimed at protecting Trump’s reputation into the 2016 election.

That would bolster prosecutors’ argument that Trump paid Stormy Daniels, an adult film star who says she had an affair with Trump, in return for her silence in the closing weeks of the election.

Pecker testified Tuesday that he met with Trump and Cohen in 2015 and the three came to an “agreement among friends” that Pecker would seek to catch and kill potentially damaging stories to Trump.

He did so twice, he said.

He paid $30,000 to a doorman at Trump Tower who shared a rumor that Trump fathered a child out of wedlock.

And he paid $150,000 to a former Playboy model who said she had a long-term affair with Trump, he said, according to reports.

The tabloid also completely fabricated a story meant to help Trump, Pecker testified.

He said a 2016 story linking the father of Trump’s then-rival for the GOP nomination, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, to the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy was “created” by manipulating unrelated photographs, NBC News reported.

Pecker said he took direction from Cohen on which primary opponents to target with negative stories.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to the media as he arrives with his attorney Todd Blanche, right, in court for opening statements in his trial for allegedly covering up hush money payments at Manhattan Criminal Court on April 22, 2024, in New York City. Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first of his criminal cases to go to trial (Yuki Iwamura-Pool/Getty Images).

WASHINGTON — Oral arguments in former President Donald Trump’s historic case in New York began Monday in a Manhattan courtroom where jurors will be tasked with deciding whether deceptive hush money payments to hide an affair amount to a criminal conviction.

The first-ever criminal trial of an ex-U.S. president centers on Trump’s alleged falsified business records to cover up a $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels, with whom he denies he had a sexual relationship.

Assistant District Attorney Matthew Colangelo told jurors Monday that Trump’s payments to Daniels in 2016, which he reimbursed to his former lawyer Michael Cohen as legal expenses, were meant to “influence the presidential election,” according to reporters at the courthouse.

“This case is about a criminal conspiracy and fraud. The defendant, Donald Trump, orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election, then he covered up that conspiracy by lying in his New York business records over, and over, and over again,” Colangelo argued, according to journalists present.

The New York court does not permit audio or video recording but will provide daily transcripts on its website.

Calling him ‘President Trump’

Defense attorney Todd Blanche argued for Trump, whom he said will be referred to as “President Trump” throughout the trial “out of respect” and because he “earned” the title.

Blanche told the jurors “President Trump is innocent. President Trump did not commit any crimes. The Manhattan district attorney should never have brought this case.”

Claiming that Trump was unaware of the nuances of the payments, Blanche argued, “You’ll learn that President Trump had nothing to do with any of the 34 pieces of paper … except he signed the checks.”

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged Trump with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first degree for each reimbursement payment to Cohen.

Blanche also told the jurors to dismiss the prosecution’s election interference theory: “I have a spoiler alert: there’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election, it’s called democracy,” he said, according to reporters in the courthouse.

Trump raised his fist and did not take questions as he left the courtroom for a brief recess after opening statements, according to reporters.

National Enquirer exec called

The prosecution called David Pecker, former chairman of the tabloid National Enquirer’s parent company, as its first witness Monday. Pecker was involved in the scheme with Cohen to identify and purchase, nicknamed “catch and kill,” damaging stories about Trump ahead of the 2016 election.

The prosecution is also expected to call Cohen, who has already served prison time in relation to the payments, and Hope Hicks, a former Trump campaign press secretary.

The trial could last for longer than a month, possibly two, keeping the presumed 2024 Republican presidential nominee off the campaign trail four days a week.

The New York proceeding also overlaps with Trump’s immunity arguments scheduled for Thursday before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The former president claims he enjoys absolute criminal immunity for his actions while in office, including immunity from special counsel Jack Smith’s charges that he allegedly schemed to subvert the 2020 presidential election results, culminating in a violent attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

New York Judge Juan Merchan denied Trump’s request to attend the Supreme Court arguments, saying he must be present at his Manhattan trial, according to media reports.

In early morning posts to his social media platform Truth Social, Trump blamed President Joe Biden — despite the case being at the state level — and repeated his refrain that the trial is politically motivated. He wrote, partially in all caps, that he will now be “STUCK in a courtroom, and not be allowed to campaign for President of the United States!”

Washington Metropolitan Police body camera footage shows Joseph W. Fischer in the U.S. Capitol at 3:25 p.m. Eastern on Jan. 6, 2021 (U.S. District Court documents).

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday in a Jan. 6, 2021, case that could potentially upend convictions for a mass of Capitol riot defendants and slash some election interference charges against former President Donald Trump.

The case, Fischer v. United States, centers on whether former Pennsylvania police officer and Jan. 6 defendant Joseph W. Fischer violated an obstruction statute when he joined the mob that entered the U.S. Capitol and prevented Congress from certifying the 2020 presidential election results for several hours.

The justices, appearing split and at times opaque in their individual stances, questioned Fischer’s attorney Jeffrey Green and U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar for more than 90 minutes, though they grilled Prelogar for twice as long as Green.

“We thought it went about as well as it could, but we still think it will be a very close case,” Green told States Newsroom outside the court following arguments.

The provision in question stems from an early 2000s law, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, that passed after the Enron accounting scandal and targets “whoever corruptly … otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so.”

In this particular case, the proceeding is referring to the joint session of Congress to certify the 2020 presidential election results.

The government maintains that Fischer had an intent to disrupt the proceeding, and points to his text messages in the preceding days that discuss stopping the democratic process and committing physical harm of Congress members.

The Justice Department also maintains video evidence shows Fischer assaulting a police officer and encouraging rioters to “charge” into the Capitol.

Fischer’s team argues that he wasn’t present while Congress was meeting, and that he only had a “four-minute foray to about 20 feet inside the Capitol.”

A lower trial court last year granted Fischer’s motion to dismiss the felony charge against him after he argued the clause is inseparable from preceding language that refers only to tampering with physical evidence.

The U.S. Circuit of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit reversed the ruling, though the three-judge panel split. Judge Florence Y. Pan wrote in the lead opinion that the statute is “unambiguous” in its meaning of what constitutes obstructing an official proceeding.

Roughly 350 Jan. 6 defendants have been charged under the same statute, and about 50 have been sentenced, according to Prelogar.

The clause in the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act is also at the core of two of the four election subversion charges brought against Trump by U.S. Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith.

Whether those charges stand now hangs on whether the justices agree that the law applies to Fischer’s actions at the U.S Capitol.

If the justices rule in Fischer’s favor, Trump would almost certainly challenge the government’s case, further delaying an already drawn out legal process as the 2024 presidential election inches closer.

Additionally, numerous Jan. 6 defendants convicted of the charge, among the most serious levied against them, could challenge and potentially re-open their cases.

A ruling is expected in late June or early July.

This developing story will be updated.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump appears ahead of the start of jury selection at Manhattan Criminal Court on April 15, 2024 in New York City. Former President Donald Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first of his criminal cases to go to trial (Jabin Botsford-Pool/Getty Images).

NEW YORK — The trial of former President Donald Trump kicked off Monday in a lower Manhattan courtroom, marking the first time in U.S. history that an ex-president has been tried on criminal charges.

Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for president, appeared in the state of New York courtroom, where he is charged with falsifying business records to conceal a sex scandal involving a porn star.

The case, brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, is one of four state and federal indictments the former president is facing. But because of delays in the other cases, it may be the only one that goes to trial before the November election, significantly boosting its potential political impact.

Jury selection began Monday afternoon, and is expected to last around two weeks.

But before potential jurors were brought in to the courtroom, Justice Juan Merchan announced rulings on several motions.

Merchan said he would reject a motion from Trump’s defense team which cited alleged conflicts of interest involving the judge’s family and asked him to step down from the case.

“There is no agenda here,” Merchan said, adding: “We want to follow the law. We want justice to be done.”

But Merchan said he would not allow the prosecution to introduce evidence about allegations that Trump committed sexual assaults, calling the claims “rumors.”

Bragg’s team wanted jurors to hear the claims, made in the leadup to the 2016 election, to bolster their case that Trump schemed to hide evidence of an affair, because he was worried about losing support from women voters.

Merchan also said he would not allow the jury to hear the “Access Hollywood” tape, but that prosecutors could introduce into evidence comments made by Trump and caught on the tape. In the recording, which emerged shortly before the 2016 election, Trump brags about grabbing women’s genitals, adding: “When you’re a star, they let you do it.”

Prosecutors asked Merchan Monday to fine Trump for violating an April 1 gag order imposed by the judge. In recent social media posts, Trump attacked Michael Cohen, his former fixer, and the porn star Stormy Daniels.

Merchan said he would hear arguments April 23 on that issue.

Cohen, a former lawyer who has fallen out with Trump, is expected to be a key witness in the case, and Daniels also may testify. Defense lawyers have not yet said whether Trump will testify in his own defense.

Payments to Daniels

At the center of the case are payments totaling $130,000 to Daniels, made by Cohen in the closing weeks of the 2016 election campaign. Cohen admitted in his plea deal the payments were aimed at buying Daniels’ silence about an affair she says she had with Trump a decade earlier.

Trump faces 34 felony counts, and he could face a maximum of four years in prison if convicted. But Merchan also could sentence him to probation without prison time.

Legal experts have noted a major challenge facing Bragg: In New York state, falsifying business records on its own is a misdemeanor, not a felony. But it becomes a felony if the falsification was done to conceal another crime.

Bragg alleges that Trump intended to conceal state and federal campaign finance violations. The payments, prosecutors allege, were illegal and unreported donations to Trump’s campaign, because if Daniels’ story became public, it could have damaged Trump’s image when voters went to the polls.

Bragg also alleges that Trump intended to conceal a tax crime stemming from how Cohen was reimbursed for the payments to Daniels.

Prosecutors don’t need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump committed these alleged underlying crimes. But they do need to show that Trump intended to conceal them — something defense lawyers are expected to strongly contest.

Political effect

The most important impact of any Trump conviction could be political. Most polling averages currently give Trump a very slim lead over President Joe Biden. But there is some evidence that if Trump were to be convicted of a felony, a small but significant slice of the electorate would be less likely to support him.

Though the charges in the case may seem simultaneously salacious and dry — prosecutors will present reams of sometimes arcane corporate documents — democracy advocates say it in fact involves important principles, and centers on a scheme to undermine a fair election.

“This is not a case solely about hush money payments,” Norm Eisen, a legal analyst and prominent Trump critic who was Democratic co-counsel for the U.S. House Judiciary Committee during Trump’s first impeachment, told reporters Thursday. “It’s about Trump’s alleged actions to hide information from voters to cover up election interference.”

In a small park outside the Manhattan Criminal Court, Trump supporters gathered Monday to affirm their loyalty to the former president, and to lambaste the trial — as Trump himself has frequently done — as a politically motivated witch hunt.

“What’s happening in that courtroom is a total sham,” said Steve Merczynski, of New York City, who wore a hand-embroidered scarf declaring “MAGA again.”

“This is all run by the Biden criminal administration,” Merczynski added. (There is no evidence that the Biden administration influenced the prosecution.)

Another Trump supporter, Dion Cini, said he didn’t want to judge Trump’s personal life.

“I’ve been to Thailand three times,” said Cini, a New Yorker who was once banned from Disney World for holding a Trump 2020 flag on Splash Mountain. “What do you think I do in Thailand, just sit in a chair? No, I go out and have fun and meet women. That’s what we do as men.”

Among the few anti-Trump demonstrators was Marc Leavitt, who stood on a park bench as he played the national anthem and other patriotic songs on a flute.

“I think the rule of law should proceed appropriately, and that’s what’s happening today,” said Leavitt. “And that’s a very good thing for America.”

Students leave Raytown High School at the end of a school day in April. After the school saw an unusual number of fights and gun incidents, students spoke out about their need to feel safer in school (Maria Benevento/The Beacon).

In early February, Raytown High School sophomore Harper York crossed the street to pick up some M&Ms from a Casey’s store before her next rehearsal.

Suddenly, she turned around from the checkout and saw a “mob fight” had broken out.

When the chaos died down and she got over her initial shock, Harper made a break for it.

“I don’t think I’ve ever run so fast across the parking lot in my life,” she said. “And before I cross the street, I look back and another (fight) is starting. … I can hear police sirens and ambulances, and people are on the ground, and people are crying. And it’s just like: Is this who we are?”

While the gas station fight was the biggest Harper had seen, physical altercations in or near school had become common.

Even bystanders weren’t safe. A few days later, junior Chase Dernier ended up near a fight that turned into a large-scale shoving match. He got slammed into a wall, hitting his head hard enough to make it ache for days.

“A lot of us, we were scared to go to school. We were scared to leave our class to go to the next class,” Chase said. “We thought we were going to get caught up in a mob fight.”

The last straw came when school officials confiscated three firearms from students in a two-week period.

Chase and Harper recruited classmates and other district residents to call leadership, attend the February school board meeting and sign up for public comment. They pushed for changes such as longer suspensions for students who fight and adding metal detectors to school.

Since that public pressure, students say Raytown High School has made effective changes, such as hall sweeps targeting students who aren’t in class. They’ve also seen signs that the district is seriously considering other measures such as installing weapons detectors.

Superintendent Penelope Martin-Knox said fully solving the problems of frequent fights and guns entering school requires combing through all the ideas to find what will actually work.

Schools throughout the country have been grappling with the ways traditional discipline and security tactics can cause long-term harm to students who make mistakes, exacerbate racial disparities and make school feel a little like jail.

Martin-Knox has also watched other districts seize on solutions that fail, such as when weapons make it past metal detectors.

“I don’t want to give people a false sense of hope,” she said. “I just need to make sure that what we do is going to be as effective as it possibly can be.”

What’s happening at Raytown High School

Reiko Groves first appeared in front of the school board to perform a song from Raytown High School’s spring musical, “Six,” which reimagines Henry VIII’s wives as pop icons.

Reiko wishes she could have focused on her performance alone.

Instead, still in costume, the high school junior returned to the front of the audience and addressed the board as herself: a teenager worried about guns and violence.

“I go from performing for this great show that I was so proud of, to now I have to go speak about how, even though I love the (school) building, I don’t feel safe in it,” she said later. “I have to go fight for … almost my ability to perform (and) make sure everybody’s safe while performing.”

After students’ basic physical safety is secure, Reiko said, “we can focus on the well-being of our students to find solutions to not only survive, but thrive in Raytown schools.”

Students say the school climate hasn’t always been like this. But during the fall semester, violence started to feel like an everyday thing.

Incidents reached a peak in December, according to district data reported to the board. Students were in school for less than three weeks that month. But during that time, there were 50 suspensions for fighting and school officials confiscated three firearms.

Harper said she started begging her parents to let her stay home from school, even though it meant she would miss beloved activities like theater rehearsals. Chase, normally proud of his high attendance, was skipping school to lie in bed, feeling “mentally drained.”

They weren’t aware of the firearms found in December until later, but they did hear about three additional guns found during a two-week period in late January and early February.

The weapons weren’t fired or brandished, Martin-Knox said. School officials found them by searching students after suspicions were raised: a bullet found on a hallway floor, a phone call about a social media post.

The students said they weren’t planning to use the guns at school, Martin-Knox said.

“I heard the reasonings of, ‘You don’t know where I have to walk when I go home. You don’t know what happens when I get off the bus. I have to go to a relative’s house in a different community somewhere. And I just need to safeguard myself,’” she said.

But bringing a gun to school is a “nonnegotiable” that comes with legal consequences and the student’s permanent removal from in-person school, Martin-Knox said.

Consequences for fights can vary, but some students have argued they should be harsher.

“They think they’re trying to help the students,” Chase said. “But in reality, by lowering the suspension rates, it’s not holding students accountable.”

A rumor that suspensions for fighting have been uniformly reduced to three days from nine days isn’t true, Martin-Knox said. But she has emphasized to principals that they have discretion to set suspension lengths based on the circumstances.

In recent years, some schools have made a concerted effort to reduce discipline tactics that can harm students’ education or life prospects, such as removing them from school or involving law enforcement. That’s especially in light of evidence that they can disproportionately target students of color and those with disabilities.

Martin-Knox said schools also need to figure out how to help students understand and take responsibility for their actions when they return from suspension.

“Because otherwise,” she said, “I’m going to send you back out there, (and) you’re going to do it again.”

High tech vs. low tech solutions 

Schools nationwide are seeing more verbal and physical aggression from students since the return to in-person school after the pandemic, said Kenneth Trump, a school safety consultant.

Administrators face pressure to solve those issues, he said, especially when there are high-profile incidents involving weapons.

“It puts school leaders at great risk of what I call ‘do something, do anything, do it now and do it fast’ type of policy and practice rather than having a comprehensive assessment done of their safety,” he said. “We’re seeing many cases where that includes turning to physical security measures, security hardware products and technology.”

Those solutions don’t always work as promised, Trump said, especially when they aren’t executed perfectly.

Locally, Kansas City Public Schools faced a lawsuit when a knife used in a fatal stabbing made it through a metal detector.

“Your high school coach and a teacher’s aide and the principal working the screening at the front doors, (who) probably got an hour of training, total, on a new product they spent millions of dollars for in your district, is not going to be comparable to the TSA,” he said.

And when those staff members are pulled from other areas of the school, they lose opportunities to interact, head off conflicts before they escalate and build relationships with students who might be willing to tell a trusted adult about a weapons plot.

“One of the best, strongest security measures in a school is a visible, actively supervising adult,” he said.

That has borne out at Raytown High School, according to several students who credited a reduction in fights to regular hall sweeps — where students late to class are locked out, rounded up and warned or disciplined —  and increased patrolling by security staff and administrators.

Some of the security measures can be double-edged swords.

Reiko says she understands why the school no longer holds assemblies — they were leading to fights — but is sad to miss out on the experiences.

The hallway sweeps can be anxiety-inducing, and she’s been stopped and questioned more often while on legitimate errands for her classes.

But she also appreciates the reduction in fights and being able to go to the bathroom without finding all the stalls filled by students skipping class.

“Probably the hardest part about this is finding that balance between … making sure it is truly a safe environment, but also not making it feel like it’s a prison or giving punishment that’s too harsh,” she said.

Weapons detection

Students said they’d appreciate weapons detectors in schools despite potential drawbacks, such as feeding into racist stereotypes and perceptions that the school is dangerous.

“As a Black student in the school district, I care more about our Black bodies than our reputation in the schools in the surrounding area,” Reiko told the board. “And being brutally honest, ‘they’ will think we are ghetto no matter what we do.”

Martin-Knox isn’t ruling out metal detectors in schools, but she says she needs to think through what schools would need to make them work, such as locking and putting sensors on additional doors and windows.

“I’m not going to invest district money, taxpayer money, or even grant money on something just to say I’ve done it,” she said.

The district has already begun increasing security measures for sporting events, which can bring large numbers of unknown people onto school grounds, Martin-Knox said.

At its March meeting, the board approved purchase of a weapons detection system that it hopes will streamline the security scans, spending $300,000 in Department of Elementary and Secondary Education safety grant funding and more than $22,000 in other district funds.

The system can be set to target dense metal shapes that might be a firearm, said Josh Hustad, director of facility operations, allowing people to pass through more quickly without taking small items out of their pockets and bags.

Raytown has spoken with other districts who have used the system, such as Wichita, to learn how it works and what pitfalls to expect, Hustad said.

For example, they’ve heard a laptop, a folded umbrella, or “two Red Bull cans side by side” could set it off, he said.

The three students who spoke with The Beacon said they were invited to join a student committee on school safety and participated in a test of the detectors at the school entrance.

Chase and Harper appreciated that they were unobtrusive and only required them to remove laptops from bags.

Chase said students speculate that moving the portable detectors from sports games to school entrances could be an easy next step once the devices are in schools’ possession.

Next steps at Raytown High School

After major incidents, Martin-Knox said she always visits the affected school, talks to students and works on refining safety plans.

In addition to the student committee, the district recently launched a school safety task force that will make recommendations.

Chase hopes for more safety measures such as clear backpacks — which he’s heard are on backorder but will arrive next year — and weapons detectors in schools, he said.

In general, he feels seen, heard and supported by Martin-Knox and Raytown High School’s principal and assistant principals, but would like to see school board members take action on policy and spend more time in schools.

Students also wish they hadn’t had to speak out before they started seeing concrete changes.

“They obviously want us to be safe,” Chase said of leadership. “I think they could have done things in a more proactive manner. But that change is happening now.”

This article first appeared on The Beacon and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump arrives for his arraignment at Manhattan Criminal Court on April 4, 2023 in New York City. With the indictment, Trump becomes the first former U.S. president in history to be charged with a criminal offense (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images).

Donald Trump on Monday in a New York City courtroom will make history as the first former U.S. president to stand trial in criminal proceedings.

And it raises new issues for the presumptive Republican nominee for president in November, even as he builds a political brand that so far has seemed immune from accusations of wrongdoing.

Trump is accused of falsifying business records to cover up payments made during his first White House run in 2016 to the adult film star Stormy Daniels in return for her silence about an alleged affair.

It’s a somewhat complicated, documents-based case in which prosecutors must convince jurors that bookkeeping errors were committed with the aim of illegally affecting an election, Jessica A. Levinson, the director of the Public Service Institute at Loyola Marymount University’s law school, said in an interview.

And though some experts consider it an election interference case, it’s neither the most serious allegation Trump faces nor the easiest for prosecutors to prove, Levinson said.

“This case is being asked to bear more weight than it possibly should or could,” Levinson said. “It’s being asked to be a bellwether, a referendum on Trump. And it’s a state criminal case. It’s not more, it’s not less, but the amount of attention it’s getting is obviously outsized.

“For people who feel like Trump should be held to account, now all eyes are on this one business records case,” she added. “When you think about the things that were most harmful to our democracy, arguably this isn’t the case that should have gone first.”

The outcome of the trial could affect voters’ perceptions of the other prosecutions, Levinson said.

The case is one of four against Trump involving criminal charges, two in state courts and two in federal courts. A state prosecution in Georgia accuses him of conspiring to overturn that state’s election results.

The two cases in the federal courts include a federal charge related to Trump’s efforts to overturn his loss in the 2020 presidential election that culminated in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, and another federal case charging Trump with improperly storing classified documents after he left office.

Election interference?

Norm Eisen, a legal analyst who was Democratic co-counsel for the U.S. House Judiciary Committee during Trump’s first impeachment on charges he solicited election interference from Ukraine during the 2016 election, said the New York state case should also be considered an election interference case.

Levinson, an expert on the law of the political process, including campaign finance law, agreed, though she said the allegations are not at the same level as charges related to attempts to overturn the 2020 election results.

The payments to Daniels were meant to disrupt the 2016 election by withholding key information from voters, she said. They began shortly after video footage surfaced of Trump bragging about grabbing women’s genitals.

Prosecutors say allegations of infidelity with a porn actor would have further eroded Trump’s support with women voters and the payments were meant to stop that.

The allegations in the case are violations of election law and campaign finance law, Levinson noted.

“It’s not the same as ‘I don’t want you to count up Electoral College votes,’” she said, referring to the charges in other election interference cases. But “it is about, in my view, trying to hide a story from the voters right after they had just heard the ‘Access Hollywood’ tape and right before they were going to the ballot box.”

Trump has consistently characterized the case, as he has with all the criminal charges against him, as a political witch hunt by Democrats to undermine a political rival.

In a fundraising appeal Friday, Trump repeated the message.

“ON MONDAY ALL HELL BREAKS LOOSE!” the email said. “BIDEN AND HIS ALLIES WANT ME LOCKED AWAY IN PRISON! RABID DEMOCRATS ARE POISED TO RAISE MILLIONS WHILE I’M STUCK DEFENDING MYSELF IN COURT!”

That critique ignores the high standard of evidence needed to bring criminal charges, and doesn’t refute the allegations, but that type of all-caps accusation has proved effective at keeping many Republican voters supportive of Trump.

Spokespeople for the Trump campaign did not return messages seeking comment for this story.

In the courtroom

The trial will start Monday with jury selection, which could last several days or longer.

Once the actual arguments begin, the case will hinge on Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s ability to show jurors that the irregularities in Trump’s business records were in service of committing another crime.

Paying hush money is not illegal by itself, Levinson said, so the violation of campaign finance law is crucial to the case.

Bragg and his team should try to simplify the case and “emphasize over and over again” that the payments were meant to influence the election, she said.

Trump’s defense will likely focus on Michael Cohen, the former vice president of the Trump Organization and Trump’s onetime personal counsel who allegedly delivered the payments to Daniels.

Cohen, who served a federal prison sentence for tax fraud and perjury, has publicly described Trump’s role in the alleged scheme. But his credibility, after his convictions and the public reversal of his account, is a major question.

Electoral impact of conviction unclear

For more than eight years, Trump has successfully deflected and even used to his advantage the types of scandals that were previously believed to be fatal to political candidates, disproving predictions of an imminent political collapse so regularly it became a cliche.

He has so far weathered any significant damage from the criminal proceedings, including the New York case, and even gained some political benefit from them.

He has said the prosecutions are politically motivated attempts by Democrats to weaken their chief political opponent. Republican voters, at least, seem to largely accept that argument, allowing Trump to coast to the nomination early this year.

And the criminal allegations have not yet critically damaged Trump’s reputation with general election voters. He is polling close to President Joe Biden in several swing states and in national surveys, though voters have told pollsters that their opinions may change if Trump is convicted.

But there is reason to doubt that a conviction would have any impact on Trump’s position with voters, Seth Masket, the director of the Center on American Politics at the University of Denver, said in an interview with States Newsroom.

Political observers wondered throughout 2023 how much the four criminal indictments against Trump would affect the former president in the 2024 primaries, Masket said.

The accusations, especially the New York charges that were the first to be revealed, seemed to actually help in the nominating race. His rivals in that contest largely defended Trump.

Even if he’s convicted, Republican voters in a polarized country are more likely to side with Trump than a judicial system he describes daily as corrupt, Masket said.

“Everything we’ve seen so far suggests that every bad thing that happens to him causes Republicans to rally behind him and ratify his view that the system is after him,” he said. “The idea that a conviction would be perceived broadly enough across parties as completely legitimate and aboveboard I think is pretty unlikely.”

Eisen, who said he expects Trump to be convicted in the New York case, disagrees, saying the spectacle of a criminal conviction would break Trump’s hold on voters.

“When a jury of Trump’s peers — and their peers, ordinary Americans — sit in judgment and reach a verdict, if they do, that’s a different order of magnitude,” Eisen said. “And then when you combine that with a criminal sentence following that kind of verdict, well then you really are in a whole different ballgame.”

Beyond the first trial

But if Trump is not convicted, or if the charges are reduced to misdemeanors, it could insulate him in voters’ minds against the other pending cases, Levinson said.

Because Trump has for years described the legal actions against him as political, winning the first case to reach court could help reinforce that message, she said.

“If he’s anything short of convicted on the felonies, then it’s just a huge win for him because he’s going to take this to say, ‘Look, every legal action against me is baseless,’” Levinson said. “I don’t think it has anything to do legally with the other cases. But it will be politically a huge win for the former president.”

It’s unclear what the historical import of the first trial of a former president will be, Masket said. But the concept that Trump remains a viable presidential contender — and therefore somewhat immune from criminal accountability — is a troubling sign for U.S. democracy.

“We repeatedly get this message that no one is above the law, except maybe this one guy,” Masket said. “And that’s a problem. That just undermines a lot of people’s faith in the democratic system.”

Potential buyers try out guns which are displayed on an exhibitor’s table during the Nation’s Gun Show on Nov. 18, 2016 at Dulles Expo Center in Chantilly, Virginia (Alex Wong/Getty Images).

WASHINGTON — The Biden administration on Thursday finalized a new rule that would require anyone selling a gun to obtain a federal license and conduct background checks.

The rule aims to close what’s known as the “gun show loophole.” Gun merchants who sell online, by mail or at flea markets and gun shows until now have not been subject to the same federal regulations as those who own and operate gun stores as their main source of income.

“This single gap in our federal background check system has caused unimaginable pain and suffering,” Vice President Kamala Harris, who oversees the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, said on a call with reporters Wednesday previewing the regulation.

The new rule by the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, stems from requirements of the bipartisan gun safety legislation package Congress passed in 2022. 

It’s likely to face legal challenges, but a senior White House official told  reporters on the call that the Biden administration is confident the rule will survive any legal disputes.

“Strong regulations like this one are not in conflict with the Second Amendment,” the senior White House official said.

The 2022 law would require those gun sellers to obtain a Federal Firearm License, record gun purchases and conduct background checks, which are the same requirements as brick-and-mortar gun shops.

Prior to the rule, if someone claimed that selling guns was not a main source of income, they were not required to obtain a license or perform a background check.

There are 80,000 individuals who have a Federal Firearm License, a senior Department of Justice official on the call said. Under the new rule, there would be about 20,000 additional individuals who would be required to obtain a license and “that has the potential to impact tens and tens of thousands of gun sales,” the official said.

“This is part of a broader administration effort, where the president has focused our attention, resources and strategy at the source of illegal guns,” the senior Department of Justice official said. “All of this is intended to get beyond the individual who has committed a crime and look to the source of those illegal guns.”

Attorney General Merrick Garland said on the call that the new rule is one of the “most significant gun regulations in decades.”

“Under this regulation, it will not matter if guns are sold on the internet, at a gun show, or in a brick and mortar store,” Garland said. “If you sell guns predominantly to earn a profit, you must be licensed and you must conduct background checks.”

ATF Director Steven Dettelbach said that “repeatedly selling guns for profit without running a criminal background check is not safe for innocent, abiding Americans, in fact, it’s doggone dangerous.”

Dettelbach added that there are some exemptions to the rule for hobbyists, antique gun collectors and occasional family transfers.

“(The rule) provides … clarity to make sure that true hobbyists and true collectors can enhance or liquidate their professional and personal collection without fear of violating the law,” Dettelbach said.

The new rule will go into effect 30 days after being published in the Federal Register.

State Rep. Lane Roberts, R-Joplin, speaks on the House floor during the 2022 session (Tim Bommel/Missouri House Communications).

Special counsel Jack Smith delivers remarks on a recently unsealed indictment against former President Donald Trump at the Justice Department on June 9, 2023, in Washington, D.C. Former U.S. President Donald Trump had been indicted on 37 felony counts in the special counsel’s classified documents probe. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Donald Trump’s view of absolute immunity for actions he took as president would radically change U.S. democracy and give presidents unprecedented power akin to monarchs rather than elected leaders, U.S. Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith wrote in a reply brief to the U.S. Supreme Court late Monday.

Smith’s 66-page brief, answering Trump’s argument to the high court that federal criminal charges against him for seeking to overturn the 2020 presidential election should be dropped because he was president at the time, called Trump’s claim a “radical suggestion” that would upend foundational principles of U.S. democracy.

Trump’s argument that conduct a president commits in office cannot be prosecuted “would free the President from virtually all criminal law — even crimes such as bribery, murder, treason, and sedition,” Smith wrote.

At oral arguments in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in January, Trump lawyer D. John Sauer said his team’s theory of broad presidential immunity would mean that a president could not be prosecuted for ordering SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival, unless the president was first impeached and removed from office by Congress.

In Trump’s brief to the court last month, his lawyers claimed a theory of “absolute presidential immunity” that asserts a president cannot be criminally indicted for actions taken in office.

The one exception to that rule is a president who has been impeached and removed from office, Trump’s legal team has argued.

Trump was impeached by the Democrat-controlled U.S. House for inciting an insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, when a mob of his supporters attempted to block the certification of the 2020 election results. An evenly split Senate fell short of the two-thirds standard for conviction, though seven Republicans voted with all Democrats and independents to convict.

Trump is the presumptive Republican nominee for president this year.

Smith said Monday that Trump’s broad immunity argument placed too much faith in Congress’ execution of an inherently political process to achieve criminal accountability.

Impeachment is “not intended to provide accountability under the ordinary course of law,” he wrote.

Historical examples

The prosecutor also took aim at the historical examples Trump cited to back up his immunity claim.

The examples Trump used either applied only to sitting presidents and not to former presidents, or were used to dismiss civil lawsuits and not criminal charges, Smith said.

In contrast, the Watergate scandal provided an example to show that presidents have long understood they are subject to criminal justice after they leave office.

By offering a pardon, President Gerald R. Ford implied that former President Richard Nixon could be held liable for criminal conduct. And by accepting the pardon, Nixon endorsed that view, Smith said.

Every president since George Washington has understood they are subject to criminal charges and punishment, Smith said.

The U.S. legal system rests on the principle that no person — no matter their office — is above the law, Smith said.

A different interpretation, including the one advanced by Trump and his legal team, would make the presidency indistinguishable from a monarchy, Smith wrote. That view “would have been anathema to the Framers” of the Constitution, who “adopted a system of checks and balances to avoid” dangers of a monarch who is above the law.

Criminal charges are not civil suits

Smith also argued that Trump’s claim that rejecting a broad interpretation of presidential immunity would motivate political prosecutions of every future former president was unfounded.

Protections against civil suits may be appropriate, Smith said, citing Supreme Court precedent.

But federal criminal charges, which can be brought only by the Department of Justice and are subject to “institutional standards of impartial prosecution,” are much harder to abuse, Smith said.

There are “strong safeguards against groundless prosecutions,” Smith said.

Smith’s brief was a response to Trump’s argument last month in which the former president advanced his theory of “absolute presidential immunity.”

Trump’s attorneys said presidents needed immunity from any criminal prosecutions for the office itself to function. The framers were willing to trade a president’s criminal accountability for the office’s independence, Trump’s team argued, saying that a similar prohibition against civil suits should apply to the charges brought by a federal grand jury.

Up next

Trump has the option to respond to Smith’s brief by the end of the day April 15.

Oral arguments on the immunity question are scheduled for April 25.

The Supreme Court case is meant to decide a pretrial issue in a federal case related to Trump’s part in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Trump asked the trial court to dismiss the charges based on his presidential immunity claim. Both the trial judge and the D.C. Circuit rejected that argument.

In the Monday brief, prosecutors asked the court to quickly issue an opinion in the case. The start of the trial has been delayed for months while the immunity question has been pending.

With less than seven months to Election Day, the four criminal proceedings against Trump will increasingly conflict with his campaign schedule as he pursues a return to the White House.

A separate criminal trial — on New York state business records falsification charges — against Trump is scheduled to begin April 15.

Over the past several years, national voting rights and gun violence prevention advocates have been sounding the alarm over increased threats around elections, pointing to ballooning disinformation, looser gun laws, record firearm sales and vigilantism at polling locations and ballot tabulation centers (Photo illustration by Getty images).

Facing increased threats to election workers and superheated political rhetoric from former President Donald Trump and his supporters, more states are considering firearm bans at polling places and ballot drop boxes ahead of November’s presidential election.

This month, New Mexico became the latest state to restrict guns where people vote or hand in ballots, joining at least 21 other states with similar laws — some banning either open or concealed carry but most banning both.

Nine of those prohibitions were enacted in the past two years, as states have sought to prevent voter intimidation or even violence at the polls driven by Trump’s false claims of election rigging. At least six states are debating bills that would ban firearms at polling places or expand existing bans to include more locations.

The New Mexico measure, which was supported entirely by Democrats, applies to within 100 feet of polling places and 50 feet of ballot drop boxes. People who violate the law are subject to a petty misdemeanor charge that could result in six months in jail.

“Our national climate is increasingly polarized,” said Democratic state Rep. Reena Szczepanski, one of the bill’s sponsors. “Anything we can do to turn the temperature down and allow for the safe operation of our very basic democratic right, voting, is critical.”

She told Stateline that she and her co-sponsors were inspired to introduce the legislation after concerned Santa Fe poll workers, who faced harassment by people openly carrying firearms during the 2020 presidential election, reached out to them.

The bill carved out an exception for people with concealed carry permits and members of law enforcement. Still, every Republican in the New Mexico legislature opposed the measure; many said they worried that gun owners might get charged with a crime for accidentally bringing their firearm to the polling place.

“We have a lot of real crime problems in this state,” said House Minority Floor Leader Ryan Lane, a Republican, during a House Judiciary Committee hearing last month. “It’s puzzling to me why we’re making this a priority.”

But over the past several years, national voting rights and gun violence prevention advocates have been sounding the alarm over increased threats around elections, pointing to ballooning disinformation, looser gun laws, record firearm sales and vigilantism at polling locations and ballot tabulation centers.

National surveys show that election officials have left the field in droves because of the threats they’re facing, and many who remain in their posts are concerned for their safety.

Add in aggressive rhetoric from Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, and it becomes “a storm” that makes it essential for states to pass laws that prohibit guns at polling places, said Robyn Sanders, a Democracy Program counsel for the Brennan Center for Justice, a voting rights group based at the New York University School of Law.

“Our democracy has come under new and unnerving pressure based on the emergence of the election denial movement, disinformation and false narratives about the integrity of our elections,” said Sanders, who co-authored a September report on how to protect elections from gun violence. The report was a partnership between the Brennan Center and the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

“The presence of guns in these places presents a risk of violence,” she added.

Increased threat environment

Over the past four years, threats have gone beyond voicemails, emails or social media posts. Armed vigilantes have harassed voters at ballot drop boxes and shown up outside vote tabulation centers. Other people reportedly have shot at local election officials.

While several states have enacted laws in recent years criminalizing threats to election officials, some states want to take it a step further through gun restrictions.

This year, primarily Democratic lawmakers in Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan Pennsylvania, Vermont and Virginia have introduced legislation that would ban most firearms in or near polling places or other election-related places. Most of these bills remain in committee.

Some of the states have seen political violence in recent years, including Pennsylvania, where a man tried to go into a Harrisburg polling place in November with a firearm and acted threateningly, confronting voters and pointing an unloaded gun at an unoccupied police cruiser.

A bill in Virginia to ban firearms at polling places got through the state legislature on a party-line vote this month, but Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin has not yet acted on the legislation. His press office did not respond to a request for more information.

Two Democratic-backed bills in Michigan seek to ban most firearms at or within 100 feet of polling places, and ballot drop boxes and clerks’ offices during the 40 days before an election. They have passed the state Senate but await votes in the House.

Democratic state Rep. Penelope Tsernoglou, the sponsor of one of those bills, told Stateline she expects the legislation to pass in April, after special elections fill two vacant seats.

“We want to make sure that we’re able to attract the needed election workers, and that they feel safe doing those jobs,” she said. “Sadly, we’re seeing more and more gun violence throughout our state and our nation. And I strongly believe that everyone should feel safe when they’re voting.”

But these bills are “good for headlines and nothing else,” said GOP state Sen. Jim Runestad in a statement on the Senate Republicans’ website.

“When one considers the sheer number of drop boxes placed throughout larger communities, like in the city of Detroit, these places could be nearly impossible to avoid,” he wrote, referring to gun owners.

One of his proposed amendments that failed would have exempted gun owners carrying guns for non-election-related business, such as going into a store near a ballot drop box.

In 2020, Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson attempted to ban firearms within 100 feet of polling places, clerks’ offices and absentee ballot counting centers. But Michigan courts blocked her effort, finding she didn’t have the authority.

Michigan was one of many states where election officials faced violent threats during the 2020 presidential election. Last month, a man pleaded guilty to federal charges for threatening the life of former Rochester Hills Clerk Tina Barton, saying she deserved a “throat to the knife.”

There is broad bipartisan support among voters to ban firearms at polling places. According to a 2022 poll of more than 1,000 adults commissioned by the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, nearly 80% of Democrats and more than half of Republicans and independents polled thought guns should be banned at polling places. Overall, 63% of adults surveyed supported a ban.

But that cross-party support has not translated to state legislatures.

Where are the bans?

Democratic-controlled states have spearheaded the effort to ban firearms at polling places in recent years, with only a handful of Republican lawmakers joining Democrats to pass the bills in some states.

In 2022, Colorado, New Jersey, New York and Washington state passed firearm restrictions at polling places. In 2023, California, Delaware, Hawaii and Maryland joined the list.

Nevada’s majority-Democratic legislature passed a similar ban last year, but Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo vetoed it. He said the measure would have infringed on the constitutional rights of Nevadans.

Maryland’s ban is facing a legal challenge from gun rights groups and activists who argue such bans infringe on Second Amendment protections and are ineffective.

“It’s a solution looking for a problem,” said Andi Turner, a spokesperson for the Maryland State Rifle and Pistol Association, which is part of the lawsuit challenging the law. “We don’t have people threatening at polling places or going and shooting up election workers. I don’t see why this needs to be a thing.”

The states that had polling place firearm bans prior to the 2020 presidential election now have Republican-controlled legislatures: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, South Carolina and Texas.

Georgia’s ban dates back to 1870, and in 1874 the state Supreme Court wrote that having a firearm at a polling place “is a thing so improper in itself, so shocking to all sense of propriety, so wholly useless and full of evil, that it would be strange if the framers of the constitution have used words broad enough to give it a constitutional guarantee.”

More Republican-led states should consider firearm prohibitions at polling places, said Jessie Ojeda, the guns and democracy attorney fellow at the Giffords Law Center, and one of the co-authors of the joint Brennan and Giffords report.

Gun safety advocates such as Ojeda see an opening for these laws, even after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision that widened the definition of protected firearm access. While the court struck down New York’s law that prohibited firearms in public, it did leave open the potential for bans in “sensitive places,” specifically noting polling places.

“We need to take action before 2024,” said Ojeda. “We have a growing number of incidents when firearms are thankfully not being used to shoot people, but they are being used to intimidate and deter voters and election officials from doing their job.”

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org. Follow Stateline on Facebook and Twitter.

U.S. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN) photographed in a meeting of the House Oversight and Reform Committee in the Rayburn House Office Building on January 31, 2023 (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images).

Denton “Denny” Loudermill, the Kansas man who was erroneously accused of being the shooter at the Kansas City Chiefs’ victory parade, has filed a defamation suit against U.S. Rep. Tim Burchett of Tennessee.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Kansas, alleges Burchett shared photos of Loudermill on his personal social media account saying he was one of the shooters and referring to him as an “illegal alien.”

Loudermill, a native of Olathe, Kansas, attended the parade celebrating the Chiefs’ Super Bowl win. An argument broke out during the parade and ended in the shooting, which killed one person and wounded more than 20 people.

Loudermill’s lawsuit states that he attended the parade and was detained by police following the shooting for “moving too slow” as law enforcement was clearing the area. As he sat on a curb in handcuffs, people took photos of him and shared them on social media, according to the complaint.

Police did not charge Loudermill with any crime.

Burchett later deleted the tweet but included a screenshot of it that is still visible in a separate post.

Attorneys for Loudermill allege he has received death threats as a result of Burchett’s post on X, formerly known as Twitter, and are asking $75,000 in damages for acts considered “willful, wanton, reckless and malicious.”

A spokesman for Burchett said: “Our office is not able to comment on pending or active litigation.”

In February, Loudermill told The Independent that “sometimes I’m afraid to go outside of my house or think that somebody who’s going to come into my house because some people probably don’t even see that I was innocent.”

Loudermill’s lawsuit did not include several members of the Missouri Senate Freedom Caucus, who also helped spread incorrect information about Loudermill and the mass shooting on social media.

Asked about the possibility of future defamation litigation against other public officials, LaRonna Lassiter Saunders, an attorney working as Loudermill’s legal advocate, said in an email to The Independent: “We are just getting started.”

This story was originally published by the Tennessee Lookout, a States Newsroom affiliate. 

The Independent’s Rudi Keller contributed to this story. 

(Douglas Sacha/Getty Images).

Fueled by public outrage over the 2020 murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer and other high-profile incidents of police violence, a seismic shift swept across the United States shortly afterward, with a wave of initiatives aimed at reining in police powers and reimagining criminal-legal systems.

Yet less than half a decade later, political leaders from coast to coast are embracing a return to “tough-on-crime” policies, often undoing the changes of recent years.

This resurgence is most palpable in the nation’s major urban centers, traditionally bastions of progressive politics. San Francisco voters earlier this month approved ballot initiatives that would require drug screenings for welfare recipients and would loosen restrictions on police operations. The District of Columbia, too, has pivoted toward a harder stance on crime, with its mayor signing into law a sweeping package that toughens penalties for gun crimes, establishes drug-free zones and allows police to collect DNA from suspects before a conviction.

Local and state leaders in blue and red states — including California, Georgia, Louisiana, Oregon, Tennessee and Vermont — also have looked to toughen their approaches to crime and public safety in a variety of ways. Lawmakers have proposed bills that would stiffen retail theft charges, re-criminalize certain hard street drugs, keep more suspects in jail in lieu of bail and expand police powers.

Many are passing with bipartisan support.

“The issue for most people isn’t whether something is up or down by 10%. It’s that they are seeing randomness and brazenness, and getting a sense of lawlessness,” said Adam Gelb, the president and CEO of the Council on Criminal Justice, a nonpartisan think tank. “Some of what we’re seeing is more like … shaving off the edges of some of the policies that felt too lenient.”

The percentage of Americans who think the United States is “not tough enough” on crime grew for the first time in 30 years, according to a Gallup poll released in November. Fifty-eight percent of respondents said they believe the criminal-legal system is too soft, up from 41% in 2020.

While national crime data is notoriously difficult to track and understand, violent crime across the United States decreased in 2022 — dropping to about the same level as before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the FBI’s annual crime report. Property crimes rose during the same period. Crime data compiled by the Council on Criminal Justice also suggests that most types of crime are reverting toward pre-pandemic levels.

Georgia’s legislature earlier this year passed a bill that would add 30 additional felony and misdemeanor crimes to the state’s list of bail-restricted offenses, meaning that people accused of those crimes would be required to post cash bail. Republican Gov. Brian Kemp hasn’t said whether he will sign the bill.

Last week, the Tennessee Senate passed a bill that would prohibit local governments from altering police traffic stop policies. If signed into law, it would overturn a Memphis city ordinance that bans pretextual traffic stops, which is when police use minor traffic infractions such as broken taillights as grounds to investigate motorists for more serious crimes.

Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek, a Democrat who leads the first state to decriminalize drugs, announced in early March she plans to sign legislation that would redefine the possession of small amounts of hard drugs, such as fentanyl or methamphetamine, as a misdemeanor punishable by a maximum of six months in jail.

The bill also would allow law enforcement to take action to prevent the distribution and use of controlled substances in public areas, such as parks or sidewalks.

“What we did is we tried to make sure that we could blend together our public safety in a behavioral health approach when folks are caught with drugs,” said Oregon state Rep. Jason Kropf, a Democrat and one of the bill’s lead authors.

Still, critics of the new legislation argue that re-criminalizing drug use would disproportionately affect Black, Latino and Indigenous communities, and further burden Oregon’s already overwhelmed criminal justice system. There are more than 2,800 people in the state currently unrepresented in court and about half are facing misdemeanor charges, according to the Oregon Judicial Department’s dashboard.

Some of these concerns are why Oregon state Sen. Floyd Prozanski, a Democrat, voted against the new legislation.

“I do believe that this [bill] will in fact reinstitute the war on drugs,” Prozanski said in an interview. “We’re just gonna compound the problem to what’s happened in the current caseload without attorneys — cases being dismissed, cases being delayed. And that doesn’t help anyone in the system, including victims of crime.”

Why some lawmakers are reworking policies

Some criminal justice advocates and experts perceive the recent trend of states dialing back reforms as impulsive reactions to what might be a temporary, pandemic-related spike in certain crimes. They argue that these measures are more about sending a political message than finding solutions.

“Some of the knee-jerk reactions aren’t even responsive to the actual problem at hand,” said David Muhammad, the executive director of the National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform, an advocacy and research group.

Others, though, say recent votes are a “rejection of pro-criminal policies” that prioritized the rights of offenders over the needs of crime victims.

“This is a return to normalcy — to common sense. The fact is that their ideas failed. They were bad,” said Charles Stimson, a senior legal fellow and deputy director of the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

“This isn’t a Democrat or Republican thing or a blue or red state thing. This is a law and order versus chaos thing. Period.”

In Vermont, Republican Gov. Phil Scott urged lawmakers this year to revisit criminal justice reform legislation passed a few years ago, bills that he signed into law. Among them is the state’s “Raise the Age” law, which reclassified 18-year-old adults as juveniles within the criminal justice system. He has urged lawmakers to postpone the plan to do the same for 19-year-old adults. Scott said the state isn’t ready to house those suspects as juveniles.

“I wish I had better anticipated the challenge,” he said in his State of the State address earlier this year.

Last week, the Vermont House approved a bill that would stiffen repeat retail theft violations, allowing aggregation of stolen goods’ value to shift charges from misdemeanors to felonies. The bill will now go to the Senate for consideration.

Meanwhile, in California, a bipartisan effort is underway to amend Proposition 47, which was passed by voters in 2014. It raised the threshold to $950 of stolen goods for shoplifting to be considered a felony and reclassified some drug charges from felonies to misdemeanors. The proposition was widely supported as a way to reduce prison overcrowding. Now, a new bill would, as in Vermont, allow prosecutors to charge repeat retail theft offenders on a cumulative basis for goods stolen.

“Shoplifting, smash-and-grab thefts, and other acts of retail theft trends are causing retailers to close their businesses and endangering customers and employees,” Democratic Assemblymember James Ramos, the bill’s lead author, said in a news release. “Since the pandemic, these crimes have increased. That is not the direction California needs to go.”

Rollbacks in Louisiana

Louisiana earned national attention in 2017 when then-Gov. John Bel Edwards, a Democrat, signed a legislative package intended to reduce the state prison population and bolster alternatives to incarceration. Louisiana saved nearly $153 million, and the number of people held in state custody decreased by 1,627 people, or 11%, from 2016 to 2023, according to state records.

The state again earned national attention this winter after lawmakers met for a special session on public safety and considered a slew of bills. These included allowing 17-year-olds to be charged as adults, unsealing some juvenile criminal records, limiting post-conviction appeals and expanding the state’s methods of performing executions to include nitrogen gas and electrocution.

A proposal to move Louisiana’s public defender system under the governor’s direct control was also discussed. The bill raised concerns among attorneys, public defenders and retired judges, according to the Louisiana Illuminator.

“I definitely believe there’s a fear now that public defense will be affected by politics,” said Alaina Bloodworth, who is from Louisiana and is the executive director of the Black Public Defender Association, in an interview.

To date, Republican Gov. Jeff Landry has signed 19 bills into law, encompassing measures such as allowing concealed carry of a gun without a permit, imposing harsher penalties for carjackings and treating all 17-year-olds charged with crimes, including misdemeanors, as adults.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org. Follow Stateline on Facebook and Twitter.

Linn County Associate Circuit Judge Tracey Mason-White ruled Tritium International Consultants’s business practices are markedly different from other raffle supply companies (Getty Images).

A company that supplies “electronic raffle” games to fraternal and veterans organizations on Friday lost a lawsuit it filed seeking to prove its games do not violate state gambling laws.

Linn County Associate Circuit Judge Tracey Mason-White ruled that Tritium International Consultants, a company based in Florida, could make its arguments in any criminal case that may be filed against it but it didn’t have standing to do so in a civil case.

A finding that a litigant lacks standing to sue is generally enough to dismiss the case, but Mason-White went further and discussed at length how Tritium’s business practices are markedly different from other raffle supply companies.

Tritium filed the lawsuit in 2019 after the Brookfield Police Department seized six of Tritium’s games at the Eagles Lodge in Brookfield and before the company was charged with promotion of gambling, a felony.

In the criminal case, and in the civil case filed against then-Linn County Prosecuting Attorney Shiante McMahon, Tritium argued its games were electronic versions of raffles. Under the Missouri Constitution, raffles conducted by charitable or religious organizations are exempt from anti-gambling laws.

Charges were dropped in the criminal case after Linn County elected a new prosecutor in 2022. The newly elected prosecutor, Tracy Carlson, also dropped cases against two companies that provide “pre-reveal” games played in convenience stores and other locations.

The constitutional exemption is for the organization offering the raffle and doesn’t apply to Tritium, Mason-White wrote.

Missouri judge to rule in January on legality of electronic raffle games

Tritium isn’t like other raffle supply companies that merely produce tickets to be sold to the general public, Mason-White wrote. Those other supply companies don’t share in the profits of a raffle or have any role after producing the tickets, she wrote.

“Tritium plays a larger role than merely providing the machines at a set fee to the Eagles Club,” Mason-White wrote. “It is responsible for the maintenance and care of the machines and, most notably, shares in a 50/50 split of the profits obtained by participants playing these machines.  The evidence shows that Tritium has received thousands of dollars in profits.”

The ruling is the second to shoot down a lawsuit seeking to block prosecution of the “gray market” games that have flooded the state since 2019. In October, Cole County Circuit Judge Daniel Green dismissed a lawsuit filed by Torch Electronics, one of the major providers of “pre-reveal” games, that sought to block enforcement actions by the Missouri State Highway Patrol.

Torch’s games allow a player to see the outcome of the next play to determine if they have won a cash prize. The player must accept that result to continue playing and find out if the next play will be a winner.

Tritium’s games operate by creating a “pool” of raffle tickets when the player starts a game. The winning plays are determined in advance and the player buys one chance at a time and learns whether that play is a winner.

Unlike a standard raffle, where tickets are sold to anyone in the public and there is a fixed date for the drawing, a Tritium game raffle is over when the player ends the game. 

“Tritium’s activity exceeds the mere providing products or equipment to assist the Eagles Club in raising funds under the constitutional protection…” Mason-White wrote.

If the Eagles Club or another organization fears prosecution, they could seek the protection of the courts, Mason-White wrote.

But because Tritium is a for-profit business, the constitutional protections don’t apply. That means it had no right to bring the lawsuit, she wrote.

Every argument made by Tritium should be made in a criminal case if a new one is filed, Mason-White wrote. Declaring a business is legal in a case that does not challenge the constitutionality of a statute isn’t the role of the courts, Mason-White wrote.

“Even if Tritium is found to have standing to bring this declaratory action, the court would find that it fails to show there is an inadequate remedy of law,” the judge wrote.

This article has been updated to correct the timeline of the civil case and the criminal charges.

A rioter holds a Trump flag inside the US Capitol Building near the Senate Chamber on Jan. 6, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Win McNamee/Getty Images).

Former President Donald Trump renewed his call to the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday to dismiss charges against him, asserting that presidents enjoy near-total immunity from criminal prosecution.

In addition, as a deadline loomed for briefs in the case, 18 Republican-led states filed an amicus brief Tuesday urging the Supreme Court to reverse the lower courts and grant Trump blanket immunity. Oral arguments before the high court on the immunity question are scheduled for April 25, and federal district court proceedings have been halted until the Supreme Court issues a ruling.

Trump’s lawyers, led by D. John Sauer of St. Louis, in a 52-page brief argued that a strong executive with virtually no criminal liability from the judicial system was intended by the framers of the Constitution and part of a “234-year unbroken tradition” of not prosecuting presidents for action taken while in office.

The justices should weigh that tradition and dismiss the federal charges accusing Trump — now the presumptive presidential nominee of the Republican Party — of conspiring to overturn his reelection loss in 2020, they wrote.

U.S. Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith oversaw an investigation into Trump that led to the criminal charges that the president spearheaded a multipart conspiracy trying to avoid leaving office.

But Trump’s attorneys have argued that those charges should be dismissed under a doctrine of “absolute presidential immunity,” which they said presidents must have to properly exercise their powers.

“The President cannot function, and the Presidency itself cannot retain its vital independence, if the President faces criminal prosecution for official acts once he leaves office,” the attorneys wrote in the brief’s opening paragraph.

That view is in line with how framers of the Constitution saw the presidency, they said.

“Even if some level of Presidential malfeasance, not present in this case at all, were to escape punishment, that risk is inherent in the Constitution’s design,” Trump’s attorneys wrote.

“The Founders viewed protecting the independence of the Presidency as well worth the risk that some Presidents might evade punishment in marginal cases. They were unwilling to burn the Presidency itself to the ground to get at every single alleged malefactor.”

Impeachment

The only exception to absolute immunity is a president who is impeached by the House and convicted in the Senate, Trump’s lawyers said.

Trump was twice impeached by the House while in office, but acquitted in two Senate trials that required a two-thirds vote for conviction. A majority of senators — with seven Republicans joining all Democrats — voted to convict him in 2021 on charges similar to those he faces in criminal court related to his efforts to subvert the 2020 election results.

Trump’s lawyers argued, as they have in previous filings, that federal courts should never be able to review the conduct of presidents who haven’t been convicted in an impeachment trial.

They asked the court to reject an argument that another exception to presidential immunity could be made for criminal charges stemming from a president’s desire to stay in power.

“Because virtually all first-term Presidents’ official actions carry some, at least partial, motivation to be re-elected, this exception to immunity would swiftly engulf the rule,” they wrote.

Prosecuting or not prosecuting a president is inherently a political act, Trump’s attorneys said.

“This observation applies to former Presidents as well — and it applies most of all to a former President who is the leading candidate to replace the incumbent who is prosecuting him,” they wrote.

Trump has amassed enough delegates to win his party’s nomination and  face President Joe Biden in a fall rematch of the 2020 election.

A Feb. 6 decision by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upholding a lower court’s ruling against Trump noted that the charges allege criminal action that emanated from an effort to unlawfully retain the presidency.

Trump appealed that decision to the Supreme Court.

Red states line up behind Trump

Attorneys general from Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and West Virginia signed a brief to the court filed Tuesday, accusing the government’s timing of the 2020 election interference case as politically motivated.

“After waiting 30 months to indict President Trump, the Special Counsel has demanded extreme expedition from every court at every stage of the case. His only stated reason, the ‘public interest,’ is so thin it’s almost transparent,” the attorneys general wrote.

In the 54-page amicus brief, the state officials allege that the prosecution’s “failure to explain its extraordinary haste suggests one troubling answer: That the timing of the prosecution is designed to inflict maximum damage on President Biden’s political opponent before the November 2024 election.”

The attorneys general argued that the threat of liability could distort a president’s decision-making and lead to a worse job performance, citing several cases, including 1997’s Clinton v. Jones.

The attorneys general, led by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, further accuse the lower courts of “mistreatment” of concerns over opening the proverbial “floodgates” for future partisan prosecutions. Marshall has taken a lead role in advancing a string of legal arguments surrounding election rules likely to boost Trump.

“The court below also underestimated the risk of ‘a torrent of politically motivated prosecutions’ on the ground that ‘this is the first time since the Founding that a former President has been federally indicted,’” the attorneys general wrote, citing the appeals court.

“Glaringly absent is the fact this case is the second of two federal prosecutions against President Trump, who also faces two state prosecutions. How can the ‘risk’ possibly ‘appear slight’?”

The state officials pointed to state and civil cases against Trump in Georgia and New York as evidence that the 2020 election interference case “is not the only one to raise concerns of partisanship.”

Another view, from Ohio, Alaska and Wyoming

Another brief, signed by only three Republican attorneys general, called on the court to assert a more complex legal standard that would still provide broad immunity on a sliding scale.

The three Republican attorneys general told the U.S. Supreme Court that the justices should take a broad view of presidential immunity when the court hears Trump’s attempt to dismiss criminal charges related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost led a brief to the court that was also signed by Alaska Attorney General Treg R. Taylor and Wyoming Attorney General Bridget Hill. The Republicans argued not for absolute immunity, but a two-part test that would still allow for broad immunity.

Arguing more about legal theory than the specifics of Trump’s case, Yost, Taylor and Hill said the judiciary must balance the need for a president to exercise wide discretion in executing the office’s powers with the need for accountability of a rogue executive.

“Very broad, but not limitless, presidential immunity is dictated by our constitutional structure,” they wrote.

The three attorneys general proposed a two-part test to settle a claim of presidential immunity.

First, the courts should determine how closely the alleged acts are tied to the president’s core constitutional duty, they said. As an example, they said presidents should be given more latitude in conducting foreign affairs than in investigating a political rival because conducting foreign affairs is a central constitutional duty.

Courts should also determine the “urgency of the situation surrounding” alleged crimes by a president, they said. For example, a president seizing property of political opponents should be considered differently than a president seizing property during a war.

The attorneys general did not say how courts should decide Trump’s case, suggesting instead the Supreme Court simply announce that it is adopting the two-part test and leave the trial court responsible for determining how to apply it to the facts of the case.

A Supreme Court-sanctioned test would help the trial court conduct unprecedented proceedings and could also give the public confidence that the trial was nonpolitical, they said.

Other arguments

Several other interested parties submitted briefs Tuesday, the last day for so-called friend-of-the-court briefs in Trump’s case before the high court.

Senate Republicans’ campaign arm, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, led by Montana’s Steve Daines, wrote that the court should adopt the absolute immunity standard, worrying that a decision otherwise would create a cycle of political prosecutions for every future president.

“The D.C. Circuit opinion is akin to a loaded gun lying on the table that future prosecutors can now wield against Presidents (and former Presidents) of all political persuasions,” the NRSC wrote. “The D.C. Circuit seems to believe that partisan actors will be able to resist the temptation to use that weapon against their political enemies; anyone who pays the slightest attention to American politics knows better.”

Mark Meadows, Trump’s White House chief of staff during the 2020 election and his subsequent efforts to overturn the results, also wrote to the court to ask that a decision in the case reinforce the legal principle giving lower federal officials immunity from state prosecution.

Meadows, a former U.S. House member from North Carolina, is among Trump’s co-defendants on state charges in Georgia related to the effort to overturn the 2020 election.

Protestors backing a social media case against the U.S. government rallied outside the Supreme Court on March 18, 2024, as arguments in the case were being heard inside. The lawsuit filed in 2022 by attorneys general in Missouri and Louisiana alleges the federal government colluded with social media companies to suppress the freedom of speech (Jane Norman/States Newsroom).

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court seemed skeptical Monday of a lawsuit alleging the federal government colluded with social media companies to suppress the freedom of speech, with a majority of justices across the ideological spectrum raising issues with the case and its potential consequences.

The Biden administration argued to the court there is no evidence that the government violated the First Amendment in its efforts to combat false, misleading or dangerous information online.

Beyond that, the court should dismiss the litigation because plaintiffs don’t have the right to sue, said Brian Fletcher, principal deputy solicitor general.

Arguments occurred in a packed courtroom, where just outside dozens of protesters held signs accusing the government of infringing on free speech.

The lawsuit was filed in 2022 by two states — Missouri and Louisiana — and five individuals who either were banned from a platform or whose posts were not prominently featured on social media sites such as Facebook, YouTube and X, formerly known as Twitter.

Fletcher argued that the plaintiffs have not shown any evidence that decisions by social media companies to remove or deprioritize content can be attributed to the government. Instead, the companies made their own decisions relying on their own content moderation policies.

There was no coercion or attempted intimidation, Fletcher said, and the best proof of that is that social media companies “routinely said ‘no’ to the government.”

“They didn’t hesitate to do it, and when they said ‘no’ to the government, the government never engaged in any sort of retaliation,” Fletcher said. “Instead, (the federal government) engaged in more speech. Ultimately, the president and the press secretary and the surgeon general took to the bully pulpit. We just don’t think that’s coercion.”

Benjamin Aguiñaga, the solicitor general for the Louisiana attorney general, argued that the government has no right to persuade platforms to violate Americans’ constitutional rights, “and pressuring platforms in back rooms shielded from public view is not using the bully pulpit at all. That is just being a bully.”

Emails obtained as part of the lawsuit, Aguiñaga contends, show the government badgered platforms behind closed doors, abused them with profanity and “ominously says that the White House is considering its options… all to get the platforms to censor more speech.”

“Under this onslaught,” he said, “the platforms routinely cave.”

Government agencies have routinely encouraged social media companies to restrict harmful or illegal content for years, including posts involving terrorism and human trafficking.

Aguiñaga argued that speech involving criminal activity is not protected. But the Biden administration, he said, began to push social media companies in 2021 to restrict misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine.

Content was also targeted that involved election disinformation.

In 2022, U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty, a court nominee of President Donald Trump, ruled that officials under both President Joe Biden and Trump coerced social media companies to censor content over concerns it would fuel vaccine hesitancy during the COVID-19 pandemic or upend elections.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans prohibited the White House, the Surgeon General’s Office, the FBI, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from having practically any contact with the social media companies. It found that the Biden administration most likely overstepped the First Amendment by urging the major social media platforms to remove misleading or false content.

The Supreme Court placed a temporary stay on the order in October until it decides the case.

Standing and traceability

A question at the core of Monday’s arguments was whether any harm to the plaintiffs could be, in fact, traced back to the government’s actions or could be remedied by judicial relief.

Justice Elena Kagan asked Aguiñaga to highlight “the single piece of evidence that most clearly shows the government was responsible for one of your clients having material taken down.”

“How do you decide that it’s government action as opposed to platform action?” Kagan followed.

Aguiñaga pointed to a May 2021 email the Biden administration sent to a social media platform regarding misinformation about COVID-19. Aguiñaga argued that evidence shows two months later content from one of the plaintiffs, Jill Hines of Louisiana, was suppressed.

“A lot of things can happen in two months,” Kagan said. “So that decision two months later could have been caused by the government’s email or that government email might have been long since forgotten because there are a thousand other communications that platform employees have had with each other, a thousand other things that platform employees have read in the newspaper.”

“I mean why would we point to one email two months earlier and say it was that email that made all the difference?” Kagan said.

Justices question consequences for public safety, national security

During Monday’s arguments, the justices focused on whether encouragement by federal officials amounted to illegal coercion, rather than merely informing or persuading social media companies.

“There are lots of contexts where government officials can persuade private parties to do things the officials couldn’t do directly,” Fletcher argued when Justice Clarence Thomas questioned him about coercion versus censorship.

“For example, recently after the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel, a number of public officials called on colleges and universities to do more about antisemitic hate speech on campus,” Fletcher said.

An ideologically diverse majority of justices raised concerns about the potential consequences of the litigation for things like public safety and national security.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh questioned whether the government violates the First Amendment when it requests the removal of factually inaccurate posts. He suggested there could be national security concerns if false information was posted online about troops.

Kavanaugh also asked how the federal government’s communications with social media companies were any different than when news organizations are warned that a story they are about to publish could affect national security.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett continued along that line of questions, asking whether the FBI would still be able to warn social media platforms if an individual had been doxxed in a way that might put them at risk.

Aguiñaga countered that he is a free speech purist but in that circumstance, the government would be allowed to issue warnings to social media companies about content.

But when speech is protected, the government has no right to intervene to push for it to be censored, he said.

“When the government is identifying a specific viewpoint and specific content that it wishes to wholly eliminate from public discourse, that’s when the First Amendment problem arises,” he said, later adding that the government has lots of tools at its disposal to combat misinformation.

“Censorship,” he said, “has never been the default remedy for a perceived First Amendment violation.”

That argument didn’t move Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

“You have to admit that there are certain circumstances,” she said, “in which the government can provide information and encourage the platforms to take it down.”

The most scathing criticism of the day came from Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

“I have such a problem with your brief, counselor,” Sotomayor said to Aguiñaga. “You omit information that changes the context of some of your claims. You attribute things to people who it didn’t happen to. I don’t know what to make of all this.”

Aguiñaga apologized if “any aspect of our brief was not as forthcoming as it should have been.”

Justice Samuel Alito, who sat back and rocked his chair with his hands behind his head, seemed most sympathetic to the plaintiffs’ case, reframing the discussion as Aguiñaga was facing a series of difficult questions.

“Coercion doesn’t only apply when the government says ‘do this, and if you don’t do this, there are going to be legal consequences,’” Alito said, adding: “It’s a more flexible standard and… you have to take into account the whole course of the relationship.”

In his rebuttal, Fletcher compared the Biden administration’s communications with social media companies and public comments about misinformation to President George W. Bush’s public condemnation of pornography and President Ronald Reagan’s criticism of media influence of drugs and violence.

A ruling on the case is not expected for several months.

Plaintiff reaction

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey said afterward he believes the Supreme Court justices “will make the right decision here.”

“Ultimately that (decision) will continue to build a wall of separation between tech and state using this lawsuit. The court will affirm the district court injunction and we’re excited to get back to the district court level,” Bailey told reporters on the plaza in front of the Supreme Court after arguments concluded.

When asked for his reaction to the justices’ skepticism of Aguiñaga’s argument of government coercion, Bailey said “the evidence clearly establishes coercion.”

Bailey argued that evidence gathered by Missouri, Louisiana and the individual plaintiffs reveals the Biden administration threatened reform of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which currently shields social media companies from liability for content published on their platforms.

“Those are direct explicit threats against the big tech social media giants,” he said.

The Department of Justice declined to comment on the ongoing litigation.

Jason Hancock reported from Columbia, Mo. Ashley Murray reported from Washington, D.C.

This story was updated at 1:45 p.m. to add comments from Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey. 

The Barton family is not included in the official tally of 24 injured survivors of a mass shooting at the Kansas City Chiefs Super Bowl parade in February. But Jason Barton; his wife, Bridget; and her 13-year-old daughter, Gabriella, are still reeling from their roles at its epicenter (Christopher Smith/KFF Health News).

Jason Barton didn’t want to attend the Super Bowl parade this year. He told a co-worker the night before that he worried about a mass shooting. But it was Valentine’s Day, his wife is a Kansas City Chiefs superfan, and he couldn’t afford to take her to games since ticket prices soared after the team won the championship in 2020.

So Barton drove 50 miles from Osawatomie, Kansas, to downtown Kansas City with his wife, Bridget, her 13-year-old daughter, Gabriella, and Gabriella’s school friend. When they finally arrived home that night, they cleaned blood from Gabriella’s sneakers and found a bullet in Bridget’s backpack.

Gabriella’s legs were burned by sparks from a ricocheted bullet, Bridget was trampled while shielding Gabriella in the chaos and Jason gave chest compressions to a man injured by gunfire. He believes it was Lyndell Mays, one of two men charged with second-degree felony murder.

“There’s never going to be a Valentine’s Day where I look back and I don’t think about it,” Gabriella said, “because that’s a day where we’re supposed to have fun and appreciate the people that we have.”

One month after the parade in which the U.S. public health crisis that is gun violence played out on live television, the Bartons are reeling from their role at its epicenter. They were just feet from 43-year-old Lisa Lopez-Galvan, who was killed. Twenty-four other people were injured.

Although the Bartons aren’t included in that official victim number, they were traumatized, physically and emotionally, and pain permeates their lives: Bridget and Jason keep canceling plans to go out, opting instead to stay home together; Gabriella plans to join a boxing club instead of the dance team.

During this first month, Kansas City community leaders have weighed how to care for people caught in the bloody crossfire and how to divide more than $2 million donated to public funds for victims in the initial outpouring of grief.

The questions are far-reaching: How does a city compensate people for medical bills, recovery treatments, counseling, and lost wages? And what about those who have PTSD-like symptoms that could last years? How does a community identify and care for victims often overlooked in the first flush of reporting on a mass shooting: the injured?

The injured list could grow. Prosecutors and Kansas City police are mounting a legal case against four of the shooting suspects, and are encouraging additional victims to come forward.

“Specifically, we’re looking for individuals who suffered wounds from their trying to escape. A stampede occurred while people were trying to flee,” said Jackson County Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker. Anyone who “in the fleeing of this event that maybe fell down, you were trampled, you sprained an ankle, you broke a bone.”

Meanwhile, people who took charge of raising money and providing services to care for the injured are wrestling with who gets the money — and who doesn’t. Due to large donations from celebrities like Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce, some victims or their families will have access to hundreds of thousands of dollars for medical expenses. Other victims may simply have their counseling covered.

The overall economic cost of U.S. firearm injuries is estimated by a recent Harvard Medical School study at $557 billion annually. Most of that — 88% — represented quality-of-life losses among those injured by firearms and their families. The JAMA-published study found that each nonfatal firearm injury leads to roughly $30,000 in direct health care spending per survivor in the first year alone.

In the immediate aftermath of the shootings, as well-intentioned GoFundMe pages popped up to help victims, executives at United Way of Greater Kansas City gathered to devise a collective donation response. They came up with “three concentric circles of victims,” said Jessica Blubaugh, the United Way’s chief philanthropy officer, and launched the #KCStrong campaign.

“There were folks that were obviously directly impacted by gunfire. Then the next circle out is folks that were impacted, not necessarily by gunshots, but by physical impact. So maybe they were trampled and maybe they tore a ligament or something because they were running away,” Blubaugh said. “Then third is folks that were just adjacent and/or bystanders that have a lot of trauma from all of this.”

PTSD, panic, and the echo of gunfire

Bridget Barton returned to Kansas City the day after the shooting to turn in the bullet she found in her backpack and to give a statement at police headquarters. Unbeknownst to her, Mayor Quinton Lucas and the police and fire chiefs had just finished a press conference outside the building. She was mobbed by the media assembled there — interviews that are now a blur.

“I don’t know how you guys do this every day,” she remembered telling a detective once she finally got inside.

The Bartons have been overwhelmed by well wishes from close friends and family as they navigate the trauma, almost to the point of exhaustion. Bridget took to social media to explain she wasn’t ignoring the messages, she’s just responding as she feels able — some days she can hardly look at her phone, she said.

A family friend bought new Barbie blankets for Gabriella and her friend after the ones they brought to the parade were lost or ruined. Bridget tried replacing the blankets herself at her local Walmart, but when she was bumped accidentally, it triggered a panic attack. She abandoned her cart and drove home.

“I’m trying to get my anxiety under control,” Bridget said.

That means therapy. Before the parade, she was already seeing a therapist and planning to begin eye movement desensitization and reprocessing, a form of therapy associated with treating post-traumatic stress disorder. Now the shooting is the first thing she wants to talk about in therapy.

Since Gabriella, an eighth grader, has returned to middle school, she has dealt with the compounding immaturity of adolescence: peers telling her to get over it, pointing finger guns at her, or even saying it should have been her who was shot. But her friends are checking on her and asking how she’s doing. She wishes more people would do the same for her friend, who took off running when the shooting started and avoided injury. Gabriella feels guilty about bringing her to what turned into a horrifying experience.

“We can tell her all day long, ‘It wasn’t your fault. She’s not your responsibility.’ Just like I can tell myself, ‘It wasn’t my fault or my responsibility,’” Bridget said. “But I still bawled on her mom’s shoulder telling her how sorry I was that I grabbed my kid first.”

The two girls have spent a lot of time talking since the shooting, which Gabriella said helps with her own stress. So does spending time with her dog and her lizard, putting on makeup, and listening to music — Tech N9ne’s performance was a highlight of the Super Bowl celebration for her.

In addition to the spark burns on Gabriella’s legs, when she fell to the concrete in the pandemonium she split open a burn wound on her stomach previously caused by a styling iron.

“When I see that, I just picture my mom trying to protect me and seeing everyone run,” Gabriella said of the wound.

It’s hard not to feel forgotten by the public, Bridget said. The shooting, especially its survivors, have largely faded from the headlines aside from court dates. Two additional high-profile shootings have occurred in the area since the parade. Doesn’t the community care, she wonders, that her family is still living with the fallout every day?

“I’m going to put this as plainly as possible. I’m f—ing pissed because my family went through something traumatic,” Bridget vented in a recent social media post. “I don’t really want anything other [than], ‘Your story matters, too, and we want to know how you’re doing.’ Have we gotten that? Abso-f—lutely not.”

‘What is the landscape of need?’

Helped in part by celebrities like Swift and Kelce, donations for the family of Lopez-Galvan, the lone fatality, and other victims poured in immediately after the shootings. Swift and Kelce donated $100,000 each. With the help of an initial $200,000 donation from the Kansas City Chiefs, the United Way’s #KCStrong campaign took off, reaching $1 million in the first two weeks and sitting at $1.2 million now.

Six verified GoFundMe funds were established. One solely for the Lopez-Galvan family has collected over $406,000. Smaller ones were started by a local college student and Swift fans. Churches have also stepped up, and one local coalition had raised $183,000, money set aside for Lopez-Galvan’s funeral, counseling services for five victims, and other medical bills from Children’s Mercy Kansas City hospital, said Ray Jarrett, executive director of Unite KC.

Meanwhile, those leading the efforts found models in other cities. The United Way’s Blubaugh called counterparts who’d responded to their own mass shootings in Orlando, Florida; Buffalo, New York; and Newtown, Connecticut.

“The unfortunate reality is we have a cadre of communities across the country who have already faced tragedies like this,” Blubaugh said. “So there is an unfortunate protocol that is, sort of, already in place.”

#KCStrong monies could start being paid out by the end of March, Blubaugh said. Hundreds of people called the nonprofit’s 211 line, and the United Way is consulting with hospitals and law enforcement to verify victims and then offer services they may need, she said.

The range of needs is staggering — several people are still recovering at home, some are seeking counseling, and many weren’t even counted in the beginning. For instance, a plainclothes police officer was injured in the melee but is doing fine now, said Police Chief Stacey Graves.

Determining who is eligible for assistance was one of the first conversations United Way officials had when creating the fund. They prioritized three areas of focus: first were the wounded victims and their families, second was collaborating with organizations already helping victims in violence intervention and prevention and mental health services, and third were the first responders.

Specifically, the funds will be steered to cover medical bills, or lost wages for those who haven’t been able to work since the shootings, Blubaugh said. The goal is to work quickly to help people, she said, but also to spend the money in a judicious, strategic way.

“We don’t have a clear sightline of the entire landscape that we’re dealing with,” Blubaugh said. “Not only of how much money do we have to work with, but also, what is the landscape of need? And we need both of those things to be able to make those decisions.”

Firsthand experience of daily Kansas City violence

Jason used his lone remaining sick day to stay home with Bridget and Gabriella. An overnight automation technician, he is the family’s primary breadwinner.

“I can’t take off work, you know?” he said. “It happened. It sucked. But it’s time to move on.”

“He’s a guy’s guy,” Bridget interjected.

On Jason’s first night back at work, the sudden sound of falling dishes startled Bridget and Gabriella, sending them into each other’s arms crying.

“It’s just those moments of flashbacks that are kicking our butts,” Bridget said.

In a way, the shooting has brought the family closer. They’ve been through a lot recently. Jason survived a heart attack and cancer last year. Raising a teenager is never easy.

Bridget can appreciate that the bullet lodged in her backpack, narrowly missing her, and that Gabriella’s legs were burned by sparks but she wasn’t shot.

Jason is grateful for another reason: It wasn’t a terrorist attack, as he initially feared. Instead, it fits into the type of gun violence he’d become accustomed to growing up in Kansas City, which recorded its deadliest year last year, although he’d never been this close to it before.

“This crap happens every single day,” he said. “The only difference is we were here for it.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Former special counsel Robert K. Hur prepares to testify to the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, March 12, 2024, in Washington, DC. Hur investigated President Joe Biden’s mishandling of classified documents and published a final report with contentious conclusions about Biden’s memory. (Win McNamee/Getty Images).

Former U.S. Justice Department special counsel Robert Hur on Tuesday defended from both Republican and Democratic critics on the U.S. House Judiciary Committee his conclusion that President Joe Biden’s mishandling of classified documents likely broke federal law but was not worthy of prosecution.

Few new facts emerged from the acrimonious five-hour hearing. But Hur’s conclusions gave members of the panel ammunition to promote their party’s presumptive presidential nominee and criticize the other, while also giving each side things to complain about.

Biden knowingly took classified papers in the waning days of his vice presidency and read classified material to a ghostwriter, Hur said. But, Hur concluded, a prosecution would likely not yield a conviction and he therefore opted not to recommend charges.

“We identified evidence that the president willfully retained classified materials after the end of his vice presidency when he was a private citizen,” Hur said.

“We did not, however, identify evidence that rose to the level of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Because the evidence fell short of that standard, I declined to recommend criminal charges against Mr. Biden.”

Hur takes issue with Biden rebuttal

Biden’s public response to Hur’s report contained inaccuracies, Hur said.

In a hastily organized press conference the day Hur published his report, Biden said he never shared classified material with his ghostwriter and that all the material in question was either locked away or in areas that could have been locked.

Hur said those descriptions were “inconsistent with the findings of our investigation.”

​​Prosecutors discovered an audio recording of Biden telling his ghostwriter, Mark Zwonitzer, that he had “found all the classified stuff downstairs,” Hur said. They also discovered that Zwonitzer attempted to delete computer files once Hur was named as special counsel.

Hur defended his finding that a potential jury may have declined to convict Biden of a serious felony because he presents as “an elderly man with a poor memory.”

Biden strongly objected to the characterization, and many of the president’s supporters considered it an unfair criticism from a registered Republican that was extraneous to the investigation.

But Hur said Tuesday it was Biden who raised the issue of his memory.

“We interviewed the president and asked him about his recorded statement ‘Well, I just found all the classified stuff downstairs,’” Hur said. “He told us that he didn’t remember saying that to his ghostwriter. He also said he didn’t remember finding any classified material in his home after his vice presidency. And he didn’t remember anything about how classified documents about Afghanistan made their way into his garage.

“My assessment in the report about the relevance of the president’s memory was necessary and accurate and fair.”

Hur said from the hearing’s outset he was appearing solely to clarify information contained in his report and would decline to expand on any questions beyond the report’s scope.

But committee members seemed less interested in examining the report’s details than in making partisan appeals highlighting sections of the report that could support their party’s candidate for president — Democrats for Biden and Republicans for former President Donald Trump — while finding elements of Hur’s conclusion or process to criticize.

Hur testified as a private citizen no longer associated with the Justice Department after he resigned from the department Monday.

Republicans see double standard

Several Republicans on the panel noted Hur’s finding that Biden knowingly took classified documents at the end of his vice presidency, held them in unsecured areas and shared them with a ghostwriter.

“Joe Biden kept classified information,” Chairman Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican, said. “Joe Biden failed to properly secure classified information. Joe Biden shared classified information with people he wasn’t supposed to. Joe Biden broke the law. But because he’s a forgetful old man who would appear sympathetic to a jury, Mr. Hur chose not to bring charges.”

Biden received an $8 million advance for a memoir of his vice presidency, Jordan said, citing Hur’s report. Biden used classified materials to inform the book and shared them directly with the ghostwriter, Jordan said.

“He had 8 million reasons” to take classified documents, Jordan said. Doing so put national security at risk, he added.

Republicans also claimed a double standard occurred when Hur declined to prosecute Biden after the U.S. Department of Justice opted to prosecute former President Donald Trump on similar charges.

The Trump case, one of four felony prosecutions the former president faces even as his general election campaign against Biden approaches, accuses Trump of keeping classified documents unsecured at his Mar-a-Lago estate.

“Donald Trump’s being prosecuted for exactly the same act that Joe Biden committed,” Rep. Tom McClintock, a Republican of California, told Hur.

A separate special counsel, Jack Smith, oversaw the investigation into Trump. Hur declined to answer questions from Republicans about Smith’s decision to recommend charges against Trump.

Trump has made central to his campaign the idea that political and governmental elites — the so-called deep state that includes the Justice Department — are unfairly targeting him.

He renewed that theme Tuesday in a post about the hearing to his social media site, Truth Social.

“Big day in Congress for the Biden Documents Hoax,” Trump wrote. “He had many times more documents, including classified documents, than I, or any other president, had. He had them all over the place, with ZERO supervision or security. …The DOJ gave Biden, and virtually every other person and President, a free pass. Me, I’m still fighting!!!”

Democrats embrace Trump comparison

Democrats appeared happy to contrast Biden and Trump’s approaches to being investigated.

Hur’s report noted that Biden cooperated with an investigation, authorizing searches of his homes and voluntarily sitting for an interview with prosecutors.

Trump, on the other hand, refused repeated chances to avoid prosecution by returning missing classified material.

Trump is also accused of lying about what documents he still had, Maryland Democrat Jamie Raskin said.

The federal indictment against Trump also accused him of obstructing the investigation by hiding documents and destroying incriminating video evidence. And unlike Biden, Trump did not agree to sit for an interview with prosecutors.

“This report is so damning in the contrast between Biden and Trump, it is hard for me to see why our (Republican) colleagues think that this hearing advances their flailing and embarrassing quest to impeach the president of the United States,” Raskin said.

“What America sees today is evidence of one president who believes in the rule of law and works to protect it, and one who has nothing but contempt for the rule of law and acts solely in pursuit of his own constantly multiplying corrupt schemes.”

Several Democrats also said that Biden’s performance at the State of the Union last week should dispel any concerns that the octogenarian’s age is holding him back.

Most important, Democrats said, was the first sentence of Hur’s report that found “no criminal charges are warranted in this matter.”

“President Biden probably committed a verbal slip or two during the interview,” House Judiciary ranking Democrat Jerry Nadler of New York said. “I’m not sure any of that matters, because when the interview was over, Mr. Hur completely exonerated President Biden.”

State Sen. Mike Moon, R-Ash Grove (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).

A bill that would add child sex trafficking and statutory rape to the crimes eligible for the death penalty was debated Monday in a Missouri Senate committee — despite conflicting with U.S. Supreme Court precedent.

The legislation is sponsored by state Sen. Mike Moon, an Ash Grove Republican who said Monday that one of the “principal purposes of government” is to “punish evil.”

Rape of children under 14 and child trafficking of children under 12 would be crimes eligible for the death penalty under his bill.

“And what’s more evil than taking the innocence of the child during the act of a rape? Children are in large part defenseless and an act such as rape can kill the child emotionally,” he said.

“And so I believe a just consequence, after a reasonable opportunity for defense, is death.”

The Senate Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee heard the bill Monday.

State Sen. Karla May, a Democrat from St. Louis, pointed to Moon’s stance of “believing in life” as an outspoken opponent of abortion without exception for rape or incest, yet supporting expanding the death penalty. 

“A 12 year old who gets pregnant, you believe that she should bring that child in the world, am I correct?” May asked.

“What crime did that child, that developing human child, commit to deserve death?” Moon replied.

“…But you believe in killing the father to that child?” May asked, if the father is a rapist.

“Yes,” Moon said.”If an attacker commits a heinous crime such as the ones that I mentioned in this presentation, I believe that if they’re charged and convicted, absolutely.”

The Rev. Timothy Faber testified in support of Moon’s bill, pointing to the “lifelong repercussions” of child rape and trafficking.

“It’s also a well established fact that those who commit sexual crimes seldom if ever change their ways,” he said. “Once a sexual offender, always a sexual offender.”

Elyse Max, co-director of Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty, opposed the bill during Monday’s hearing. 

“If the goal is to overturn established U.S. Supreme Court precedent, it’s far from a guarantee,” Max said, “and the amount of resources the state of Missouri would have to spend as well as the trauma to child victims during the process cannot be understated.”

The U.S. Supreme Court in the 2008 case Kennedy v. Louisiana ruled giving the death penalty to those convicted of child rape violates the constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment unless the crime results in the victim’s death or is intended to. Only homicide and a narrow set of “crimes against the state” can be punishable by death, the court ruled.

“Adding statutory rape and trafficking as death-eligible crimes are a slippery slope,” Max said, “of expanding the death penalty to non-murder crimes that would bring the constitutionality of Missouri’s death penalty into doubt.”

“Instead of spending millions of dollars to possibly change long-standing precedent, Missouri resources should be spent to protect children from abuse in the first place, and ensure survivors have access to mental health treatment and proper support, following the offense,” Max said.

Moon said, regarding the Supreme Court precedent, that it’s worth challenging.

“That’s something that we need to start the conversation about,” he said, “and those things need to be challenged.”

Florida passed a similar law for victims of rape under age 12 last year. It received bipartisan support. In December, prosecutors in that state announced they’d seek the death penalty in a case of a man accused of sexually abusing a child.

Florida’s Gov. Ron DeSantis has said the state’s bill could lead the U.S. Supreme Court to revisit the issue.

Mary Fox, director of Missouri State Public Defender, which provides defense for the majority of death penalty cases in the state, argued Monday that the death penalty is “no deterrent to a crime.”

Fox also noted that an 18 year old dating a 14 year old could be executed under Moon’s legislation because that would be considered statutory rape.

Mei Hall, a resident of Columbia who also said she was a victim of sexual abuse, also testified in opposition.

“I don’t wish my abuser death,” Hall said. “I wish them to be sequestered away and unable to harm more people, for sure. But I don’t think it’s the state’s place to kill people in general and I don’t think it’s the state’s place to make it more difficult for child victims to come forward.” 

Lobbyists from Empower Missouri and Missouri Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers also testified against the bill. A lobbyist from ArmorVine, testified in support.

Missouri was one of only five states to carry out death sentences last year, along with Texas, Florida, Oklahoma and Alabama. There are two executions scheduled for this year.

Three House bills filed this year would eliminate the state’s death penalty, but none has made it to a committee hearing. 

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson prior to the State of the State address on Jan. 24, 2024 (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson drew condemnation from across the political spectrum over the weekend after he reduced the sentence of former Kansas City Chiefs assistant coach Britt Reid for a drunken driving crash that permanently injured a 5-year-old girl.

Reid, the son of Chiefs head coach Andy Reid, was drunk in February 2021 when he crashed his truck into two vehicles on the side of an exit ramp along an interstate near the Chiefs’ practice facility. 

Six people were injured, including 5-year-old Ariel Young, who sustained a traumatic brain injury and was in a coma for 11 days. According to her family, Young continues to suffer memory loss and issues with speech and movement.

Reid pleaded guilty and was sentenced to three years in prison. 

But on Friday, with little explanation and without consulting with local prosecutors or the victims’ family, Parson commuted Reid’s sentence — allowing him to serve under house arrest until October 2025. 

Parson’s decision drew immediate outrage.

“There simply can be no response that explains away the failure to notify victims of the offender,” Jackson County Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker said in a press release. She later added: “I simply say I am saddened by the self-serving political actions of the governor and the resulting harm that it brings to the system of justice.”

Tom Porto, the attorney for Young’s family, told the Daily Beast that the family “is disgusted, I am disgusted and I believe… that the majority of the people in the state of Missouri are disgusted by the governor’s actions.”

State Rep. Keri Ingle, a Lee’s Summit Democrat, posted on social media that she “really cannot imagine any justification for commuting a drunk driver who severely injured a 5 year old.”

Criticism also came from Parson’s fellow Republicans. 

State Sen. Tony Luetkemeyer, a Parkville Republican who chairs the Missouri Senate Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee, posted on social media that he “cannot imagine the pain this must cause to the family of the victim, an innocent 5-year-old girl whose life is forever changed. This is not justice.”

Luetkemeyer’s sentiment was echoed by state Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman, a Republican from Arnold running for Congress.

“This isn’t justice,” she wrote on social media.

A convicted drunk driver “should never have their sentence commuted,” state Rep. Adam Schwadron, a Republican from St. Charles who is running for secretary of state, posted on social media. “A convicted drunk driver that injured a child should never be considered to have their sentence commuted.”

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, the GOP frontrunner to replace Parson when he leaves office because of term limits this year, released a statement to the Kansas City Star saying the sentence reduction was “not a good look for the governor and not something I believe I would do.”

“Britt Reid’s reckless decision to drive drunk left Ariel Young with a lifelong traumatic brain injury,” Ashcroft told the Star, “and while the Reid family obviously holds a special place in the hearts of Missourians and Kansas City Chiefs fans, that does not entitle them to special treatment. My heart goes out to the Young family.”

In her statement, Peters Baker noted that Parson refused to use his power to commute the sentences of Kevin Strickland and Lamar Johnson, who both served long prison sentences and were eventually exonerated and set free despite the governor declining to intervene.

“We are reminded that this governor did not use his political power to commute the sentence of Kevin Strickland and Lamar Johnson. He used his political power to free a man with status, privilege and connections,” Peters Baker said. “Both Kevin and Lamar are freed today under the rule of law, but only after difficult battles to gain their freedom.”

Parson is a longtime Chiefs season ticket-holder holder who attended Super Bowl this year and celebrated with the team at its victory parade. Reid’s sentencing reprieve was included among three commutations and 36 pardons announced late Friday afternoon by the governor’s office.

A spokesperson for the governor did not respond to a request for comment on the criticism.

Sen. Rick Brattin of Harrisonville, speaking, and fellow Freedom Caucus members Sen. Denny Hoskins of Warrensburg, left, and Sen. Bill Eigel, speak to reporters (Rudi Keller/Missouri Independent).

Right-wing politicians who won’t apologize for labeling Denton Loudermill as the shooter responsible for a death and almost two dozen injuries at the Kansas City Chiefs’ victory parade will have to answer for their falsehoods, he and his legal advocate told The Independent.

And if Loudermill needs it, Bootheel businessman and lifelong Democrat Barry Aycock says he’s ready to foot the bill for the lawyers.

Loudermill, an Olathe, Kansas, native, father of three and a lifelong Chiefs fan, said he lives in fear when he’s at home and draws stares when he ventures out.

“Sometimes I’m afraid to go outside of my house,” Loudermill said, “or think that somebody who’s going to come into my house because some people probably don’t even see that I was innocent.” . 

The argument that ended with gunfire left Lisa Lopez-Galvan, a local radio personality, dead and nearly two dozen others wounded. 

In the chaos, Loudermill was grabbed by police and handcuffed. Police told him he was detained because he was taking too long to clear the area of the shooting, Loudermill said.

He was released soon afterwards and has not been charged with any offense.

While he was detained, he was photographed seated on a curb. An account on X, formally known as Twitter, with the name Deep Truth Intel used the photo and labeled Loudermill an “illegal immigrant” under arrest as the shooter.

From there, the misinformation spread quickly. It showed up in posts from the Missouri Freedom Caucus, the group of six Republican state senators who have disrupted floor action as they battle with the Senate’s GOP leadership. Three of those senators also spread the incorrect information on social media, including the Deep Truth Intel post or a similar post with Loudermill’s photo.

At a Freedom Caucus news conference last week, state Sen. Rick Brattin of Harrisonville said he and the others who shared the false information had nothing to apologize for.

“There’s nothing that I see even worth that,” Brattin said when asked if he planned to apologize. “We’ve done nothing and, you know, I have no comment.”

The total refusal to apologize, or acknowledge any wrongdoing, infuriated Loudermill and the attorney who has been working with him to clear his name. 

Both agree a defamation lawsuit may be the only recourse, and those conversations are already taking place.

“We’ve already been contacted by some huge, huge hitters in the legal field,” said LaRonna Lassiter Saunders, an attorney working as Loudermill’s legal advocate.

The potential defendants include anyone who used social media to spread or amplify the posts making false accusations, Lassiter Saunders said.

“Every time you share this misinformation, legally, that’s another account that we could have for defamation,” she said.

The speed at which the smear to Loudermill’s reputation spread appalled him, Aycock said in an interview with The Independent. Aycock, of Parma, founded a successful farm consulting firm called AgXplore that he sold in 2018, lists himself on his Linked-In bio as semi-retired. Over the years, he’s flirted with running for political office as a Democrat but has never entered a campaign. 

“The Freedom Caucus is probably the worst thing that’s ever happened to Missourians,” Aycock said. “They’re just plumb nuts. And they’ve really caused this guy a lot of trouble by retweeting all that false information. And I just don’t like seeing anybody done like that.”

Anti-immigration politicians were quick to share the false posts, Aycock said, because it fit the narrative that the U.S. is being overrun.

“They’re more worried about making a political statement and making the president of the United States look bad instead of being worried about this ‘illegal alien shooter’ in Kansas City,” Aycock said.

Apologies would help mitigate the damage done to his reputation, Lassiter Saunders said.

“Some counsel may say don’t apologize, because you’re admitting liability, but I disagree,” she said. “You can say I’m sorry this happened. At that point we can say it’s understandable, but when you just take a stance and are just going to disregard any parts you had in it, now that’s another level.”

State Sen. Denny Hoskins, one of the Freedom Caucus members who reposted the Deep Truth Intel post, declined to apologize when asked about the situation Wednesday.

“I’m not going to comment on the Denton Loudermill tweets and that situation,” Hoskins said.

What they said

The post from the Deep Truth Intel incorrectly identified Loudermill with a name associated with misinformation posted after other shootings, including an October mass shooting in Lewiston, Maine, that left 18 dead.

Soon after the initial social media post, the Missouri Freedom Caucus and three state Senators who are members posted their own versions.

“These are 3 people arrested at the parade…at least one of those arrested is an illegal immigrant. CLOSE OUR BORDERS!” the Missouri Freedom Caucus posted on X. 

The post has since been deleted.

“Fact – President Biden’s open border policies & cities who promote themselves as Sanctuary Cities like #Kansas City invite illegal violent immigrants into the U.S.,” Hoskins, a Warrensburg Republican, posted, along with a screenshot of the Deep Truth Intel post.

That post has also been deleted, but a Feb. 14 post without a photo from Hoskins repeats “information I’ve seen” that “at least one of the alleged shooters is an illegal immigrant and all 3 arrested are repeat violent offenders.”

Hoskins hedged it with “IF THIS IS ACCURATE” and repetition of conservative rhetoric to stop immigration and restrain cities that help immigrants, blaming crime on “catch and release policies of liberal cities.” 

In an interview, Hoskins said the second post sums up his views that undocumented immigrants are dangerous.

“I’m very passionate about making sure that illegal immigrants are not here in the state, especially those that are violent criminals, and we need to make sure that we lock up repeat, violent offenders,” Hoskins said.

Brattin’s first post linking Loudermill to the shooting remains online, stating “#POTUS CLOSE THE BORDER.” When originally posted, those words were a response to the deleted Deep Truth Intel post.

The least certain post about the immigration and arrest status of Loudermill from Missouri Freedom Caucus members was from Sen. Nick Schroer, a Republican from Defiance.

Schroer’s post included a link to one from U.S. Rep. Tim Burchett of Tennessee stating, over Loudermill’s photo, that “One of the Kansas City Chiefs victory parade shooters has been identified as an illegal Alien.”

Burchett has since deleted that post.

“Can we get any confirmation or denial of this from local officials or law enforcement?” Schroer wrote on X. “I’ve been sent videos or stills showing at least 6 different people arrested from yesterday but officially told only 3 still in custody. The people deserve answers.”

Burchett’s original post has been deleted, but it is still visible as a screenshot in a Feb. 19 post by the congressman.

“It has come to my attention that in one of my previous posts, one of the shooters was identified as an illegal alien,” Burchett posted. “This was based on multiple, incorrect news reports stating that. I have removed the post.”

The Missouri Freedom Caucus also sought to retrace its steps, linking to a KMBC post about Loudermill’s effort to clear his name.

“Denton is an Olathe native, a father of three & a proud @Chiefs fan,” the post states. “He’s not a mass shooter. Images of him being detained for being intoxicated & not moving away from the crime scene at the Chiefs rally have spread online. He just wants to clear his name.”

What’s next

A GoFundMe effort on Loudermill’s behalf has raised $1,500 of its $15,000 goal and the money is being used to support efforts to scrub his image and inaccurate information from the internet, Lassiter Saunders said.

“That’s a full day’s work every day,” she said.

At the same time, Lassiter Saunders is working to assemble a legal team if Loudermill wants to redeem his reputation in court. While she has already been contacted by some lawyers experienced in defamation cases, Lassiter Saunders said she is still working through potential representation.

“If there’s a firm with significant defamation experience, we’re definitely open to speaking with them as well,” she said.

The mitigating statements, both from Burchett and the Freedom Caucus, miss the mark as apologies, she said. Burchett’s new post, by resharing his original post and failing to state that Loudermill was not the shooter, is almost as bad as the original, she said. 

And the Freedom Caucus post, which does not acknowledge that it helped in the online spread of false images, isn’t an apology, Lassiter Saunders said.

“When you get representatives who are supposed to represent the American people, and they’re allowing one of their own citizens to be smeared, they have taken part in that smearing and won’t even say two simple words, that’s a sad day,” she said.

The most important thing at this point, Loudermill said, is an apology and acknowledgement that he had nothing to do with the shootings. 

And he wants accountability.

“Everybody that said everything and posted everything should be held accountable,” Loudermill said.

The more the false information spread, Lassiter Saunders said, the harder it will be for Loudermill.

“This man’s life is potentially ruined because five years from now someone can Google KC parade shooter, and his picture could still pop up,” she said. “And so we just need people to first of all, screenshot and send us information if they’re still being posted.

Part of the social media effort is to find out who was responsible for the initial posts, where the photo started and who has reposted the falsehoods, Lassiter Saunders said.

“Every time you share this misinformation, legally, that’s another account that we could have for defamation,” she said.

Despite his own troubles, Loudermill said he’s heartbroken over the death of Lopez-Galvan and the injuries to others including children caught in the crossfire.

“I just want to give my condolences to the families and especially to the family of the young lady who died,” Loudermill said. “I just want to give my condolences to everybody.”

State Rep. Scott Cupps, chairman of the House Subcommittee on Appropriations - General Administration, makes a point to State Treasurer Vivek Malek during a hearing Tuesday on Unclaimed Property decals on Torch Electronics machines while staff member and State Rep. Maggie Nurrenbern, far right, listen (Rudi Keller/Missouri Independent).

State Treasurer Vivek Malek endured a bipartisan beatdown Tuesday as members of a House subcommittee spent two hours telling him it was a big mistake to put decals advertising the Unclaimed Property program on unregulated gambling machines.

A few hours later, Malek gave in to demands from members of the House Subcommittee on Appropriations – General Administration and removed the ads from machines owned by Torch Electronics.

“I have today revoked permission for Torch Electronics to display Unclaimed Property messages on their devices, and I have asked Torch Electronics to immediately begin the process of removing any reference to the Unclaimed Property Program from Torch’s devices,” Malek wrote to Republican state Rep. Scott Cupps of Shell Knob, the subcommittee chairman.

Malek was absent last week when Cupps first sought answers on how the decals turned up on slot machines owned by Torch. During Tuesday’s hearing, Malek was told repeatedly that he had made a mistake by agreeing to place the ads.

“This might just be the most egregious thing done during my time in office by a statewide elected official,” said state Rep. Maggie Nurrenbern, a Kansas City Democrat.

Cupps was not pleased with the answers received during the hearing.

“Your legacy will go down as making a mockery of the state treasurer’s office,” Cupps said near the end of the hearing.

Throughout, Malek sought to assure lawmakers that his only goal was to expand the places where he is getting out the message that the state is holding more than $1 billion in funds collected from financial institutions, businesses, government agencies, and other organizations unable to locate a person owed money or property. 

The legality of the Torch games is not certain, Malek said, and he wasn’t going to judge how Missourians conduct business or spend their money.

“I am the state treasurer,” Malek said. “I am not the state pastor. Missourians have the right to spend their money on their own.”

Missouri Treasurer faces scrutiny over state advertising on unregulated slot machines

Torch is the largest purveyor of the games offering cash prizes that have proliferated in Missouri convenience stores, truck stops and other locations since 2018. The company has been sued, charged criminally with promoting gambling and even sued the Missouri State Highway Patrol to block enforcement actions, but no final court decision on the legality of Torch’s machines has come from any court.

The company has also spent heavily on lobbying to prevent any legislative action to define its games as illegal and donated more than $1 million since 2018 to politicians in both political parties.

In his testimony Tuesday, Malek said the state has not paid Torch to place the decals and did not pay for production of the decals. The idea to use Torch machines for the ads, Malek said, stems from an August meeting he had in a Chesterfield airplane hangar owned by Torch lobbyist Steve Tilley.

Tilley set up the meeting where Malek met Steve Miltenberger, owner of Torch, and two other Torch lobbyists. After some chit-chat, Malek said one of his top priorities as treasurer was to increase the amount of money being returned, and he would appreciate any help.

“They expressed that they had a lot of machines located in high traffic areas such as convenience stores and gas stations,” Malek said.

Malek said he described discussions he was having with the Missouri Bankers Association about decals being prepared for placement on automatic teller machines. 

“I suggested maybe the same decal would work for them,” Malek said. “They liked it and we verbally agreed to follow up in early October.”

Malek, who took office in January 2023 after his appointment by Gov. Mike Parson, is seeking election to a full term this year. He faces Republican primary challenges from House Budget Committee Chairman Cody Smith of Carthage, state Sen. Andrew Koenig of Manchester and attorney Lori Rook of Springfield.

Cupps is supporting Smith.

During questioning, Cupps suggested that the August meeting was about more than unclaimed property. He questioned Malek if any discussion of political support occurred.

“I fully believe that there was a deal made,” Cupps said during the hearing. “I didn’t know that it was made in an airplane hangar.”

Malek denied that any political discussions took place.

Much of the committee’s time was spent on whether Malek should have appeared at last week’s hearing. Cupps sent the request to Malek on Feb. 19 and was told on Feb. 20 he would not come to the next day’s hearing.

He had committed to testify on a bill important to his office, Malek said, and had appointments throughout the day. He did, at that time, offer to meet in person with Cupps.

That explanation, however, upset Cupps. 

“When you say that you are given short notice, that’s a lie,” Cupps said. “For you to say that you were not given a chance to say when you could meet, that’s a lie.” 

In a letter sent to Cupps last week, Malek criticized him for the amount of time between Cupps discovering the decals and raising questions about them. Documents provided to the committee Tuesday show the treasurer’s office has been anticipating questions about the decals since early January.

On Jan. 5, Malek’s chief of staff Ray Bozarth sent Brittany Robbins, a registered lobbyist for Torch, a statement for release if any reporters asked about the decals.

“The Missouri State Treasurer’s Office is currently in custody of roughly $1.2 billion in unclaimed property,” the statement read. “The Treasurer’s Office is happy to work with small business owners to help raise awareness for Missouri’s unclaimed property, so that more folks can get their money back.”

The statement is identical to one sent to The Independent on Wednesday. The only change was an additional sentence: “Promotions for Unclaimed Property at retail outlets cost the state nothing.”

Other records provided to the committee detail the work done to create a poster for the Unclaimed Property program to be placed in state license offices. During his testimony, Malek tried to use that to show he is using every possible idea to increase traffic to the program’s website.

Members, however, kept bringing the question back to the particular placement on Torch machines.

“I appreciate your bogus rhetoric,” Cupps said. “I appreciate your skill and your ability to come to this committee and deliver it.”

Rep. Kemp Strickler, a Democrat from Lee’s Summit, asked Malek if there are any boundaries for placing Unclaimed Property decals:

“Are there any places where we won’t put those stickers?” Strickler asked. “Strip clubs? Porn magazines?”

Malek replied: “I don’t know we would have the focus of attention at those locations for these stickers.”

At the end of the hearing, Cupps asked Malek to promise to have the stickers removed from the Torch games. Malek declined at that time, before relenting several hours later.

“I will have to deliberate on that issue before I make a decision,” Malek said after the hearing. “I do not have an answer at this point.”

(Getty Images).

Crime is shaping up as a potent election issue, and one of the key points of debate is over bail: Which suspects should be jailed before trial, and which ones should be released on bond — and for how much money?

Some conservatives argue that lenient bail policies put suspects who are likely to commit crimes before their upcoming court hearings, or who might skip bail altogether, back on the street. But some progressives say research does not support that contention. They argue that detaining defendants because they can’t afford financial bonds is unfair, and note that such defendants are disproportionately Black, Latino and low income.

Illinois, New Jersey and New Mexico have moved away from the use of money bonds. But other states, such as Georgia and New York, are moving in the opposite direction, implementing stricter rules. Tennessee is considering a constitutional amendment that would give judges more discretion to deny bail amid concerns about rising crime rates.

Politicians on both sides of the debate often connect bail policy to crime rates. But experts say doing so is problematic, because so much of the crime data that states and cities use is unreliable.

The reality, experts say, is that most crime data is too unreliable to pinpoint specific policies as the sole cause of increasing or decreasing crime rates. The bail system also is oftentimes misunderstood as a form of punishment rather than the process for releasing individuals before trial under certain conditions.

“There’s nothing out there that shows a correlation or a connection of any sort between increasing the rates of pretrial release and the rates of crime,” said Spurgeon Kennedy, vice president of the Crime and Justice Institute, a nonprofit criminal justice research organization. Kennedy previously served as president of the National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies.

These misconceptions about crime can leave voters vulnerable to misinformation ahead of local and national elections.

“If you ask the typical person on the streets, ‘Do you think crime is up or down over the last year,’ they will tell you, ‘Oh, it’s up. It’s way up.’ But we’ve seen reductions in crime overall and also in violent crime,” Kennedy said. “So the facts don’t follow the argument, and that’s unfortunate because that makes it much more easier to keep this out as a political football.”

Both chambers of Georgia’s legislature passed a bill this month that would add 30 additional felony and misdemeanor crimes to the state’s list of bail-restricted offenses, which means that people accused of those crimes would be required to post cash bail. They include charges of unlawful assembly, racketeering, domestic terrorism and possession of marijuana.

The bill also would prevent any individuals or organizations from posting cash bail more than three times per year unless they establish themselves as bail bonding companies, severely limiting charitable bail funds. The bill is now headed to Republican Gov. Brian Kemp’s desk.

Some criminal justice advocates say the bill, if enacted, would clash with changes made by a 2018 law to the state’s legal system for people accused of misdemeanors. That law, which was championed by former Republican Gov. Nathan Deal, mandates that judges take into account the financial circumstances of the accused when setting bail.

Proponents of the new bill, which was first introduced last year, argue that the measure is necessary to deter crime, support victims of crimes and hold repeat offenders accountable. State Sen. Randy Robertson, who sponsored the bill, said it focuses on people accused of violent crimes.

“What we’re focusing on is trying to get the nonviolent individuals back out into the workforce and back to their families,” Robertson said in an interview. Robertson, a Republican, argued that the bill would also lead to a “dramatic decrease” in the state’s jail population because it offers a pathway for organizations, such as churches and nonprofits, to set themselves up as bail bonding companies.

Those organizations would have to meet the same legal requirements as bond companies, including undergoing background checks, paying fees, and having an application approved by a local sheriff’s department.

Some opponents, though, argue that it would lead to overcrowding of jails and disproportionately harm low-income and Black and Hispanic communities. The ACLU of Georgia has threatened to sue the state if the bill is signed into law, arguing that it’s unconstitutional.

Robertson said that some of the criticisms raised are “rehash complaints” he has heard for the past 25 or 30 years.

“There has been no evidence, independent research that shows placing low bails, allowing judges to set bails at whatever they choose to, keeps a disproportionate amount of individuals held in our jails,” Robertson said. “I don’t think that [this bill] touches the third rail of constitutionality at all.”

Pretrial data and research

Several research studies, though, suggest that setting money bail isn’t effective in ensuring court appearances or improving public safety.

Pretrial policy experts say that being in jail for even a few days or weeks can cost people their homes or jobs or damage their personal relationships, said Matt Alsdorf, an associate director with the Center for Effective Public Policy and the co-director of the group’s Advancing Pretrial Policy and Research project.

“The use of unnecessary detention has negative impacts, even if you’re just looking at it through a public safety or crime prevention lens,” he said.

Pretrial recidivism has long been studied by criminal justice experts: A 2013 study of more than 150,000 people who were jailed in Kentucky found that longer detention periods increased the likelihood that people would be rearrested both during the pretrial period and within the first two years following the closure of their case. The study also found that people who were held for two or three days had a 9% greater likelihood of failing to appear in court than people who were held for one day.

Furthermore, a study published in the Criminology & Public Policy journal last year found that Black defendants were 34% more likely than white defendants to be recommended to be held behind bars until their cases were resolved.

“The money bond system is a very regressive system that effectively ends up acting as a means of incarcerating populations that are typically already disadvantaged,” Alsdorf said.

In places that have relaxed their bail practices, audits show that pretrial jail populations usually drop following the changes. In some jurisdictions, there also are fewer arrests for certain types of offenses.

In Houston, a lawsuit claiming misdemeanor bail practices in Harris County were unconstitutional led to a settlement and consent decree in 2019. The county is required to release most people charged with misdemeanors on a personal bond, meaning defendants simply promise to attend their next court date.

In the latest independent monitoring report on the system, from 2023, observers wrote that the changes “have saved Harris County and residents many millions of dollars, improved the lives of tens of thousands of persons,” and resulted in “no increase in new offenses by persons arrested for misdemeanors.”

Brandon Garrett, the lead monitor and a Duke University School of Law professor, said in an interview that racial disparities “vanished overnight” after bail practices were relaxed. The monitors have also found an overall decline of about 8% in misdemeanor arrests between 2019 and 2022.

“There were real concerns about the racial disparities of the old cash bail system, and it was pretty remarkable just how quickly those disparities — in terms of who ended up in jail and who didn’t — vanished,” Garrett said.

‘Intentional and deliberate’

In 2017, New Jersey moved away from the use of cash bail in favor of the Public Safety Assessment, an algorithm tool that uses nine factors from an individual’s criminal history to predict their likelihood of returning to court for future hearings and remaining crime-free while on pretrial release.

The changes encouraged more “intentional and deliberate” detention hearings, recalled now-retired trial court Judge Martin Cronin, who sat on the committee that unanimously recommended the switch to a more risk-based bail system.

Cronin, now a consultant with Pretrial Justice Solutions, LLC, said the state’s new system offers more accountability and transparency.

“You’re focused on what are the permissible reasons for detention and how does the record tie into that, individualized to that defendant who’s in front of you,” Cronin told Stateline. “There is real accountability there. … It’s a fundamentally different process.”

Between 2015 and 2023, New Jersey’s pretrial jail population decreased by 27.2%, according to the state judiciary’s Criminal Justice Reform Statistics report last year.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org. Follow Stateline on Facebook and Twitter.

Torch Electronics games and a redemption kiosk displaying advertisements for the Unclaimed Property Program operated by State Treasurer Vivek Malek (photo submitted).

A southwest Missouri lawmaker blasted state Treasurer Vivek Malek Wednesday for refusing to answer questions about new ads for the state Unclaimed Property Program appearing on unregulated games that offer cash prizes.

Malek declined to appear at a hearing of the House Subcommittee on Appropriations – General Administration, angering Chairman Scott Cupps. 

Cupps said he refused an offer to meet privately with Malek, and vowed to schedule a committee hearing every day until Malek appears.

At issue are gaming machines operated by Torch Electronics. The machines have been controversial for years, with some Republican lawmakers and state gaming officials arguing they are illegal gambling devices. 

Cupps took photos of several machines in southwest Missouri that were adorned with advertisements for Missouri’s unclaimed property program, which is run by Malek.

Torch is the largest purveyor of the games offering cash prizes that have proliferated in Missouri convenience stores, truck stops and other locations since 2018. The company has been sued, charged criminally with promoting gambling, and it even sued the Missouri State Highway Patrol to block enforcement actions, but no final court decision on the legality of Torch’s machines has come from any court.

The company  has also spent heavily on lobbying to prevent any legislative action to define its games as illegal and donated more than $1 million since 2018 to politicians in both political parties.

Cupps, who called the Torch devices “illegal gambling machines” during Wednesday’s hearing, said Malek has to answer for his office’s partnership with the company.

 “If you are trying to hide something or you are not willing to talk about something funded with taxpayer dollars, openly and publicly, then that right there is the red flag that there’s something nefarious taking place,” Cupps, a Republican from Shell Knob, told other members of the committee.

On the games themselves, the advertisement is a small sticker that promotes searching the unclaimed property for lost cash, with an image of the state seal, a website and QR code and Malek’s name. On a redemption machine placed near the games in some locations, the advertisement fills the screen.

“This is the state seal bigger than Dallas on these machines and it says, Vivek Malek,” Cupps said. “If there’s anyone that should be able to answer every single question as to how all of this takes place, it is him.”

Cupps said the only explanation given by Malek’s office was that he had another commitment. But just minutes before Cupps explained to committee members why he wanted Malek to appear, the treasurer was in another House committee hearing testifying in favor of a bill requiring state and local governments to divest any investments in countries labeled “foreign adversaries.” 

Cupps even went to that hearing room to request Malek’s appearance.

“I don’t think there’s one of 6.3 million people that shouldn’t have a pretty extreme problem with one of our highest level elected officials saying no, I’m not going to go talk about this to the Appropriations Committee,” Cupps said.

The Unclaimed Property program currently holds more than $1.2 billion in unclaimed assets, collected from financial institutions, businesses, government agencies, and other organizations unable to locate a person owed money or property. Entities required to turn over assets to Unclaimed Property do so after there has been no document transaction or contact with the owner for five years.

Every state treasurer regularly promotes the program to get the assets returned. 

“The Treasurer’s Office is happy to work with small business owners to help raise awareness for Missouri’s unclaimed property, so that more folks can get their money back,” Malek said in a statement to The Independent. “Promotions for Unclaimed Property at retail outlets cost the state nothing.”

Malek’s office declined to answer questions about how the advertising platform was chosen or whether the legal questions surrounding the games was considered before the decision was made.

Gregg Keller, a spokesman for Torch, said in a statement that Malek approached the company in an effort to expand that outreach. Torch is not being paid for the advertising.

“Torch Electronics has been happy to make our No-Chance Game Machines available in a volunteer effort to assist Missourians in locating unclaimed property,” Keller said. “This is a new effort, initiated at the request of Treasurer Vivek Malek’s office and is an awareness-raising practice in which Torch has no financial stake.”

Torch has argued in court that its games are legal because every player has a chance to see whether they have won a prize before playing. 

In the legislative halls, efforts to legalize sports wagering have been derailed by lawmakers who want to also allow the Missouri Lottery to offer video gaming. Torch, through its lobbyist Steve Tilley, works to defeat any bill that would declare its games illegal.

In 2021, Torch and convenience store operator Warrenton Oil sued the Missouri State Highway Patrol, claiming that the law enforcement agency was engaged in a campaign of “harassment and intimidation” against its games and retailers. The lawsuit was dismissed in October, a decision that is now under appeal.

Despite those patrol enforcement efforts, a review by The Independent in 2021 showed that of 190 cases the patrol submitted to local prosecutors in 2019 and 2020 requesting charges for illegal gambling, only a handful of cases were actually filed. 

Local governments are trying to crack down on the machines as stand-alone gambling parlors proliferate. 

Springfield recently passed an ordinance banning “any entertainment device that offers a monetary prize to any person regardless of the frequency with which a monetary prize is conferred or the odds of any individual user realizing a monetary prize.”

The ordinance effectively shut down stand-alone gambling parlors in the city but Torch is arguing its devices do not violate the ordinance and refusing to remove them from retail locations, KY3 television reported.

Torch’s questionable legal status makes state advertising on the games upsetting, Cupps said. It creates an impression that the games are legal and have a state permit, he said, or are even operated by the state. And Malek, he added, needs to explain what he did.

“I will not accept,” Cupps said, “a statewide elected official telling this appropriations committee that they will not make themselves available for questions to this committee about how the money is being spent out of their advertising budget.”

(Getty Images)

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.

The Missouri House chamber during debate on March 12, 2023 (Tim Bommel/Missouri House Communications).

Republicans and Democrats joined together Monday night to sink a wide-ranging judicial bill that managed to stir up enough policy concerns and internal grudges to keep it from winning anywhere near enough votes to clear the Missouri House.

The legislation, sponsored by Republican state Rep. Rudy Veit and backed by the chamber’s GOP leadership, including a litany of provisions that have found success in the House in the past.  But on Monday, the bill ran into a buzzsaw of opposition that resulted in only 57 of 111 Republicans and one Democrat voting in support. 

The vote was a rare defeat for GOP leadership in the Missouri House, where the party has super majorities and typically won’t bring a bill up for debate unless votes have been whipped and victory is assured.

For Republicans, there were myriad reasons for voting no, said state Rep. Ben Baker, a GOP lawmaker from Neosho who opposed the bill Monday. 

There was confusion about language in the bill that some felt was too ambiguous, he said, and others had heartburn about a few of the provisions that they felt hadn’t been vetted thoroughly enough. 

The bill, or some version of it, will likely return later in the session, Baker said. 

Democrats, meanwhile, keyed in on a provision that would exclude grandparents from a required background check when seeking guardianship of a child with a developmental disability.

State Rep. Keri Ingle, a Lee’s Summit Democrat who previously worked as an adoption specialist for the Jackson County Children’s Division, said she’s fought off similar proposals “for six years” out of concern that children could be taken from their parents and put into the custody of someone who might abuse them. 

“There are cycles of abuse and trauma, and it goes by generations,” she said. “The reason why, when I worked at the children’s division, we did background checks on grandparents and relatives was not because we assumed the worst about them. But imagine taking a child out of a parents’ home and putting them with someone who was then going to abuse and neglect them. And no, that’s not most grandparents. But it is some. I have seen it.”

Veit pushed back, noting that the bill would still require background checks if requested by the guardian ad litem for the child or is otherwise ordered by the court.

“The attorney for the child has a right to ask for a background check,” he said. 

There was also some leftover frustration among Democrats with how quickly Republicans forced the 40-page bill through the process the week before, said state Rep. Peter Merideth, a St. Louis Democrat. 

The bill won initial passage after only 10 minutes of debate. 

Meridith said he was denied a chance to ask questions about the bill last week because he had filed an amendment seeking to implement a “red flag law,” which allows for temporary firearm removal from individuals believed to be at risk of harming themselves or others.

“Part of my opposition was them not letting me offer my red flag amendment or even talk about the bill itself,” Meridith said. “That was the day before the Kansas City shooting, and then we come back and they say ‘now’s not the time to talk about this while emotions are running high.’ Well, we tried to talk about this last week and you wouldn’t let us.”

Merideth also raised concerns about a piece of the bill targeting strategic lawsuits against public participation, more commonly referred to as “SLAPP.” 

Anti-SLAPP laws provide defendants a way to quickly dismiss meritless lawsuits, often filed by big companies or wealthy individuals seeking to suppress speech they don’t like. 

Merideth brought up public statements and social media posts by the Missouri Senate Freedom Caucus accusing without evidence an Olathe man of being an undocumented immigrant behind the mass shooting last week in Kansas City. 

“They said defamatory things,” Merideth said. “And here we are debating a provision that would give an extra out for people sued for defamation if it’s a matter of public importance. No, that needs to be vetted.”

There has been a lot of “Republican propaganda of late that has defamed people,” Meredith said, pointing to huge payouts in defamation cases against Fox News and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. 

“I don’t want to be protecting them with this change,” he said, adding that he isn’t positive the bill would apply in those instances but he couldn’t be sure since he couldn’t debate the issue last week. 

Jean Maneke, an attorney for the Missouri Press Association, said the anti-SLAPP law has been a priority of her organization for years.

News organizations and individual journalists, she said, can face financial threat from a groundless defamation case brought by a subject of an enterprise or investigative story.

But Maneke said she has also represented individuals who were not members of the media and were forced to settle frivolous defamation lawsuits simply because they couldn’t afford to take the issue to court. 

Anti-SLAPP laws, she said, provide a quicker process for filing motions to get a timely dismissal. 

According to the conservative nonprofit Institute for Free Speech, there are 15 states with a comprehensive anti-SLAPP law on the books.

“The benefit of an anti-SLAPP statute is you can file this motion,” she said, “and everything stops and the judge has to make a decision about your First Amendment rights.”

Former U.S. President Donald Trump attends a pre-trial hearing at Manhattan Criminal Court on Feb. 15, 2024, in New York City. Trump was charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records last year, which prosecutors say was an effort to hide a potential sex scandal, both before and after the 2016 presidential election (Brendan McDermid-Pool/Getty Images).

WASHINGTON — Former President Donald Trump’s days fighting criminal charges in two courts could be arriving soon.

Special Counsel Jack Smith urged the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday not to pause federal election interference proceedings and a New York state judge on Thursday set a late March trial date on charges related to hush money allegations.

If the New York trial date holds, it will mark the first time a former U.S. president has been put on trial, even as he campaigns to be returned to office.

In the District of Columbia, Smith in a brief to the Supreme Court on Wednesday asked justices to deny Trump’s request to further delay proceedings in the case that alleges he tried to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.

A speedy trial is in the public’s interest and the 2024 Republican presidential front-runner’s claims of absolute immunity and protection under the impeachment clause lack the merit needed for the justices to grant a stay, Smith said.

“The charged crimes strike at the heart of our democracy. A President’s alleged criminal scheme to overturn an election and thwart the peaceful transfer of power to his successor should be the last place to recognize a novel form of absolute immunity from federal criminal law,” Smith wrote in the 40-page filing.

The Trump indictments: A seven-year timeline of key developments

Rather, the Supreme Court should treat Trump’s application for delay as a petition for the justices to speedily review and resolve the questions presented in the singular case, Smith said.

“Delay in the resolution of these charges threatens to frustrate the public interest in a speedy and fair verdict — a compelling interest in every criminal case and one that has unique national importance here, as it involves federal criminal charges against a former President for alleged criminal efforts to overturn the results of the Presidential election, including through the use of official power,” Smith wrote.

If the justices decide to grant Trump’s request to stay trial proceedings, they should also immediately move to hear the immunity appeal and expedite that schedule, Smith said. He added that the court should set oral arguments in the case for March, “consistent with the Court’s expedition of other cases meriting such treatment.”

Case proceedings have been delayed for months as Trump’s request for criminal immunity has wound through the lower courts.

Smith underlined his own arguments for speed by filing his brief six days ahead of a deadline set by the Supreme Court.

New York trial to start March 25

That delay has not affected a separate criminal proceeding against Trump on New York state charges he falsified business records by paying hush money to adult film star Stormy Daniels during his 2016 White House campaign.

That case is set to proceed to jury selection on March 25 under an order Judge Juan M. Merchan signed Thursday.

The judge overseeing the federal election interference case in the District of Columbia, U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, had originally set March 4 as the start date for that trial. The charges stem from a four-count criminal indictment brought by a federal grand jury in August.

When Chutkan denied Trump’s immunity petition in early December, the former president appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Smith cites a ‘radical claim’

The three-judge federal appeals panel unanimously denied Trump’s request in a Feb. 6 opinion that found the former president’s arguments “unsupported by precedent, history or the text and structure of the Constitution.”

On Monday, Trump asked the Supreme Court to pause all proceedings in district court while he petitions the appeals court to escalate his case to a full-judge panel — a move that Smith says holds no merit.

The unanimous appeals ruling, issued by the three judges who were appointed by both Democratic and Republican administrations, clearly signals that Trump’s “radical claim” will not be successful before a full appeals court, Smith argued.

“That position finds no support in constitutional text, separation-of-powers principles, history, or logic,” Smith wrote. “And if that radical claim were accepted, it would upend understandings about Presidential accountability that have prevailed throughout history while undermining democracy and the rule of law.”

Former presidents have long understood themselves to be subject to criminal prosecution following their terms, Smith said, meaning Trump’s argument that anything short of full immunity would cause untold damage to the power of the presidency should be rejected.

Even after President Richard Nixon’s Watergate scandal “removed any doubt” of a former president’s criminal liability, no president until Trump has claimed that fear of post-presidency prosecution had any impact on Oval Office decision-making, Smith said.

Watergate, which also dealt with a president’s unlawful attempts to remain in power, led to a criminal investigation and Nixon accepting a pardon for criminal activities arising from his conduct, Smith said.

“The Nation’s tradition is therefore clear: Presidential conduct that violates the criminal law to achieve the end of remaining in power may be subject to a prosecution.”

New York case 

A trial on the federal election interference charges — one of four criminal trials pending against Trump — has been delayed from its initial start date following a months-long detour on the immunity issue.

That delay has allowed another trial to likely be the first to open against the former president, the one in New York state court.

Following the Thursday hearing in the case, Trump posted to his social media platform, Truth Social, to deny the charges and claim the state charges — as he says about all the criminal allegations he faces — are politically motivated.

“Just left the Courthouse in Manhattan,” Trump wrote. “Biden’s DOJ people have taken control of the case. There was NO CRIME, and almost all legal scholars are saying that. It’s Election Interference, the Dems 2024 way of cheating!”

Trump has denied having an affair with Daniels.

Trump also faces federal charges in South Florida that he improperly handled classified documents and refused to turn them over to authorities after he left office and state election interference charges in Georgia making similar allegations as the federal election interference case.

The Supreme Court heard another Trump case last week related to Colorado’s decision to remove him from the state’s presidential primary ballot. The state’s Supreme Court ruled in December that Trump should be disqualified from the race under a provision of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment that bars insurrectionists from holding office.

A decision is expected soon.

Legislation progressing in the House and Senate transfer control of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department to a Board of Police Commissioners (Scott Olson/Getty Images).

Missourians voted in 2013 to return control of the St. Louis police department to local officials, ending more than 150 years of state oversight.

And almost immediately, state lawmakers began pushing to get control back.

That effort is back again this year, with proponents arguing the experiment with local control has failed, leaving the city a more dangerous place — a situation with statewide implications.

A Senate committee approved legislation last month sponsored by GOP state Sen. Nick Schroer of Defiance, that would transfer control of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department to a Board of Police Commissioners. Under the proposed legislation, the board would be comprised of the president of the St. Louis Board of Aldermen and four members appointed by Missouri Gov. Mike Parson.

A similar board controls the Kansas City Police Department. It is currently the only major city in the United States without control of its police force.

The legislation, noting the board would “appoint and employ a permanent police force consisting of not less than 1,313 members,” says the city of St. Louis cannot pass ordinances “interfering with the powers of the state board.”

Attempts to interfere with the board’s authority by the mayor or any city official could result in a $1,000 fine and a ban from holding office.

Schroer argued during last month’s hearing that control should return to the state in order to correct what he called “mismanagement,” including a serious shortage of police officers and inadequate pay for police. Returning to state control, Schroer said, would boost the city’s police department and help St. Louis “rebuild the city as the vibrant gateway to the West.”

Black leaders rally to speak out against bills to take away local control from St. Louis

At a House hearing on similar legislation Thursday, Republican state Rep.Brad Christ of St. Louis said his bill is “not a crime plan.” He said that after the change from state to local control, the city “has seen some of its bloodiest years in its history.”

Opponents counter that crime in the city is in fact at the lowest levels in a decade, and recruitment and retention of St. Louis police is improved, due to more training and significant pay raises for officers.

Jared Boyd, chief of staff for St. Louis Mayor Tishaura Jones, and St. Louis Pollice Commissioner Robert Tracy, testified last month in opposition to the bill, telling a Missouri Senate committee that crime prevention is up, crime is down and efforts to recruit and retain police are underway.

In an interview for The Independent, Boyd argued that the legislature’s rationale for returning control to the state are not based on fact.

“Things were not perfect when the state controlled the police department,” Boyd said, adding that Kansas City, which remains under control of the state of Missouri, “is the only city in the country that is not under local control. It has experienced historic high homicide rates.”

Kansas City reported 180 homicides at the end of December 2023

St. Louis police reported 158 homicides in 2023, 200 in 2022, 200 in 2021, and 263 in 2020. As of Feb. 7, the police reported 23 homicides.

Tracy, who assumed the commissioner position in 2022, said last year’s data show a 22% reduction overall for murder, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, felony theft and auto theft. Aiding the crime reduction, city officials have said, are work with other law enforcement agencies and prosecutors, the creation of an Office of Violence Prevention, and strategies such as assigning the same officers to the same areas each time they report for duty.

The Missouri NAACP has publicly supported St. Louis retaining local control of its police department, according to Adolphus Pruitt, president of the St. Louis city branch of the NAACP.

Pruitt said the latest data “speak to crime prevention and a reduction in crime.”

He added: “The state has enough departments to run. It needs to concentrate on them.”

The city of St. Louis employs about 900 police officers. Schroer’s office argued in an email to The Independent that the city lacks adequate manpower to solve crime.

“Sen. Schroer’s constituents recognize this as a failed experiment,” the senator’s office said, “and are very vocal in wanting to end the idea that St. Louis is a sanctuary city for crime.”

Downtown Cape Girardeau on May 6, 2020 (Getty Images).

The coroner of Cape Girardeau County — who admitted to journalists in 2021 that his office simply “doesn’t do COVID deaths” and that he didn’t personally investigate deaths himself, despite being legally required to do so — was charged Thursday with stealing from a dead person and lying on multiple death certificates.

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey filed the charges — three felonies and a misdemeanor — along with a legal petition to remove the coroner, Wavis Jordan, from office. By late Thursday, a judge had barred Jordan from any official actions, turning his duties over to the Cape Girardeau County Sheriff.

“As Attorney General, I will always work to hold accountable those who refuse to do their job as required by Missouri statute,” Bailey said in a statement. “My heart goes out to the victims in this case, whose lives have been upended. To that end, I am moving for the immediate removal of the Cape Girardeau Coroner.”

In a brief interview, Jordan, who is Black, said the charges were unjust.

“This is a racial issue,” he said.

Jordan declined to answer additional questions. 

Missouri coroner training commission can’t convene due to lack of action by governor

If convicted in the criminal case, Jordan faces up to 12 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. If he is removed in the quo warranto proceeding, Gov. Mike Parson would appoint a replacement until a new coroner is selected in this year’s election.

Jordan, a Republican elected in November 2020 as coroner of 80,000-person Cape Girardeau County. Previously, he worked as a school security guard, hearse driver and funeral florist but had no prior training or experience handling the dead.

In the stealing count of the criminal case, Jordan responded to an April 2023 death. A police officer noted that the deceased person’s wallet, keys and other items were on a shelf, only to find them missing. Jordan had them, and returned the wallet without the cash.

“I  did not see anything, I promise you,” Jordan told the officer, according to court filings.

The petition to remove him from office includes before and after pictures of the wallet, one with cash in it and another with no cash after being returned by Jordan.

In the other counts, filing false information to state vital records, Jordan listed a natural cause of death when investigating officers believed the cause was suicide or a drug overdose.

In one case, Jordan named the cause of death as acute cardiac arrest and acute myocardial infarction for a woman with a history of substance abuse who was found dead in her home. Investigators found a recently used syringe, pills and new track marks on her arm.

In another, Jordan listed a “probable myocardial infarction” as the cause of death for a man found dead with a sodium nitrate solution in a nearby glass, paperwork naming an executor and whose computer showed a “guide for peaceful ways to pass on.”

Bailey’s office was named as special prosecutor in the case. The charges come after months of complaints about Jordan’s work.

State Rep. Barry Hovis, a Cape Girardeau Republican and former police lieutenant, said he considers Jordan a friend.

“I’m shocked, because No. 1, I don’t want to see any person, especially an elected official, doing things that are criminal in nature, and No. 2,  not doing what I would call the proper job that they’re supposed to do,” Hovis said.

The charges follow a rising number of complaints about his work, the Cape Girardeau County Commission considered, but ultimately rejected, replacing his office with a contracted medical examiner.

Jordan is being sued to change a death certificate where he listed the cause of death as “acute cardiac arrest,” “probable myocardial infarction” and hypertension.

The death of Karen Keene “was not natural and was not a result of acute cardiac arrest, probably myocardial infarction and hypertension,” attorney J. Patrick O’Loughlin wrote in a court filing. The case has not been disposed.

In another case, Cheryl Reinagel of Cape Girardeau complained that Jordan wanted to list diabetes as the cause of death for her brother, then refused to issue any death certificate when objections were raised.

Misinformation fuels false belief that Missouri COVID death figures are being inflated

Reinagel said she filed complaints with Bailey’s office and the Missouri Coroners & Medical Examiners Association. A death certificate filed by her brother’s pulmonologist, listing pulmonary hemorrhage, heart disease and renal failure as the cause of death was eventually issued, she said.

“I just want to make sure that no one else has to go through and what other families had to go through,” she said in an interview Thursday afternoon.

The Cape Girardeau County Commission issued a request for proposals for the medical examiner contract but received no good responses, Associate County Commissioner Paul Koeper said 

“We didn’t get any proposals,” Koeper said in an interview. “We couldn’t go out on a limb and say, ‘yeah, we’re gonna do this regardless’ when we don’t have anybody interested in doing it.”

The charges come just weeks before filing opens for state and county offices to be filled this year. Jordan was preparing to run for another term, Koeper said.

“There’s nothing to keep him from filing now,” Koeper said. “That’s between him and himself.”

The attorney general’s petition to remove Jordan from office describes him as “a failed coroner.” It goes into detail about repeated incidents where Jordan failed to investigate true causes of death, including three suspected suicides, where investigators found sodium nitrate liquid, medications and suicide notes near the dead.

In all three cases, Jordan determined that deaths were  “probable myocardial infarction – etiology unknown,” or heart attacks.

In one of the cases, Jordan allegedly told a police officer and a family member that he would officially log it as a “‘heart attack’ just for paperwork purposes” because “suicide is a sensitive subject.”

The criminal charges, removal petition and complaints about Jordan echo the findings of a 2021 investigation by MuckRock, the Independent and the Documenting COVID-19 Project. The investigation found that Cape Girardeau County was among the 10 counties nationwide with the greatest spike in deaths not attributed to COVID-19. 

Jordan had a long-running policy of requiring families provide proof of a recent, positive PCR test of COVID-19 to his office before labeling a death COVID, which goes against guidance from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

“You know, I have to go by what the family says,” Jordan said in a 2021 interview. “The family can tell me all they want that this person had COVID, but I just can’t put it on there unless I have some type of proof.”

Many likely COVID-19 deaths didn’t get counted as such. The result was a badly skewed picture of mortality in Cape Girardeau County, MuckRock, the Missouri Independent, the Documenting COVID-19 project and the USA TODAY network found for its series on death certificate inaccuracies called “Uncounted.”

The impact of Jordan’s death certificate errors is far-reaching.

Not a single person was pronounced dead of COVID-19 in Cape Girardeau County in 2021. Meanwhile, deaths at home attributed to conditions with symptoms that look a lot like COVID-19 — heart attacks, Alzheimer’s and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease — increased dramatically.

Other Missouri counties with coroners described a very different process than the one in Cape Girardeau. Across the state in Buchanan County, a review of a patient’s medical file, or a chart review, is performed for every death. If the death is unattended – such as a death at home with no one else around – and it’s unclear why they died, the body is sent to a forensic pathologist in Kansas City for a full autopsy.

Death certificates have long been prone to error. There is a lack of training, certification, job requirements and accreditation in many states. There is a lack of funding for rural, elected coroners for salaries and personnel, equipment and autopsies. And there is an increasing number of cases many coroners and medical examiners see each year.

There is also a measure of clinical judgment — the idea of assigning one specific cause of death as the ultimate single reason for someone’s demise — that allows for a level of nuance and subjectivity on the part of the coroner. Up to 20 contributing causes of death can be listed on the document but there can be just one final cause.

That can lead to an all-too-common incorrect cause of “cardiac arrest” listed on death certificates, which Cape Girardeau has assigned to 35 deaths in 2020 and 2021.

As part of its “Uncounted” projects, experts described the antiquated, decentralized system of investigating and recording deaths across the U.S. Short-staffed, undertrained and overworked coroners and medical examiners took families at their word when they called to report the death of a relative at home. Coroners and medical examiners didn’t review medical histories or order tests to look for COVID-19.

They, and even some physicians, attributed deaths to inaccurate and nonspecific causes that are meaningless to pathologists. In some cases, stringent rules for attributing a death to COVID-19 created obstacles for relatives of the deceased and contradicted CDC guidance.

These trends were clear in small cities and rural areas with less access to healthcare and fewer physicians. They’re especially pronounced in rural areas of the South and Western United States, areas that heavily voted for former President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election. 

This story has been updated to correct which organization Reinagel submitted her complaint.

Christopher Dunn was convicted for a 1990 deadly shooting of a teen in St. Louis. Others involved in the case later admitted they lied about Dunn’s involvement. No DNA ever tied Dunn to the murder. A judge also admitted that the lack of evidence is enough to prove Dunn is innocent (photo submitted).

St. Louis Circuit Attorney Gabe Gore says the evidence shows Christopher Dunn, a 54-year-old St. Louis native serving a life sentence without parole, is innocent of the murder for which he has served more than 30 years.

And in a statement released to the media Wednesday, Gore announced he’d filed a motion with the 22^nd Judicial Circuit Court seeking to vacate Dunn’s murder conviction in 1991 fatal shooting of 15-year-old Ricco Rogers.

“The eyewitness recantations alone are enough to show clear and convincing evidence of actual innocence in this case,” Gore said. “Justice requires that Christopher Dunn’s murder conviction be vacated.”

Dunn was convicted in 1991 of first-degree murder, first-degree assault, and armed criminal action and received a life sentence without the possibility of parole. The case against Dunn rested on the testimony of two eyewitnesses – a 12-year-old boy and a 14-year-old boy – both of whom later recanted.

Last year, Gore appointed Booker Shaw as a special assistant circuit attorney working on a pro-bono basis to assist him in the review of court transcripts, case exhibits and rulings,and advise him whether the filing of a motion to vacate the conviction was appropriate.

Shaw, a partner in the St. Louis law firm of Thompson Coburn, is the former chief judge of the Missouri Court of Appeals and served as a judge in the 22^nd Judicial Circuit Court from 1983 to 2002,

Circuit Judge William Hickle said in 2020 that while he believed a current jury would not find Dunn guilty, he could not set him free because of Missouri law that restricts innocence claims to death penalty inmates. In 2021, a new Missouri law took effect that allows prosecutors to file petitions when they believe an innocent person is imprisoned.

The next step, Gore’s office said Wednesday, is “for the court to order a hearing before a judge to “consider the evidence presented at Dunn’s original trial, additional evidence presented in Dunn’s direct appeals and post-conviction proceedings, and additional information.”

Gore was appointed St. Louis circuit attorney in May 2023 by Gov. Mike Parson, following the resignation of Kim Gardner.

Not long after being appointed, Gore withdrew a motion Gardner had filed calling on Dunn’s conviction to be vacated. He said, in part, of that decision, “I, on the day I was sworn in, had never undertaken such a review. I could not make those representations to the court. It was necessary and required that we withdraw the motion to vacate and that I conduct my own review.”

Deputies in the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department carry an actor playing a gunshot victim to an ambulance during a January mass casualty simulation (Matt Vasilogambros/Stateline).

SAN DIEGO, Calif. — The pop-pop-pop of gunfire cracked just as the rain started to fall in grisly synchronicity. Then the screams began.

Within moments, civilians lay strewn across the ground, some lifeless, others writhing in pain. Blood flowed in streams that pooled with the rainwater on the muddying ground littered with shell casings.

Three gunmen quickly opened fire on a San Diego County Sheriff’s Department armored BearCat truck arriving in response. It crawled along an alleyway. Half a dozen SWAT members pointed rifles into open doorways or fired back from behind corners.

One assailant, wearing black gloves and a graying black beard, stood on a third-floor apartment balcony and, as deputies came closer, threw a Molotov cocktail at two white cars parked below. The explosion sent a blast of heat and sound, its boom punctuated by the gunman’s AK-47.

“Help me!” bellowed a man rolling on the ground, blood shooting from his severed leg. Another man groaned next to him, hidden by smoke billowing around the cars.

It seemed like something out of an action movie. And, in a way, it was.

The rounds were blanks, the Molotov cocktail wasn’t lit, the smoke came from a machine. The explosion was controlled, the victims and gunmen were actors, and the blood was fake. However, the deputies, firefighters and doctors from across the region were real.

They were in the middle of a simulation on a Saturday afternoon in mid-January in a commercial lot on the north end of San Diego, conducted by Strategic Operations, a local company run by former Hollywood producers and military combat veterans.

First responders and law enforcement agents have for decades used simulations to train for mass casualty events such as shootings or natural disasters, especially after the Columbine school shooting in 1999. But in recent years, as mass shootings have become increasingly common in the United States, the simulations have become more and more realistic. Now they feature visceral sound effects, trained actors, pyrotechnics and even virtual reality. The trainings also have become more and more expensive for public agencies.

But hyper-realistic simulations are essential for learning how to respond to an active shooter, triage mass casualties and coordinate among departments in a chaotic environment, said Sgt. Colin Hebeler, who works in the Infrastructure Security Group within the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department. The department has two facilities where deputies go through similar simulation training.

“If we can provide these trainings that are as close to the real-life event as possible, you will actually induce that same kind of stress and the reaction that you might have during a real-life incident,” he told Stateline.

Stop the killing, stop the dying

Training has evolved in Hebeler’s 16 years in the department, expanding well beyond both the classroom and limited simulations that involved plastic pieces that looked like guns and shouts of “Bang, bang.” Although expensive, simulated mass shootings are far more intense, realistic and frequent now, he said.

“If it does happen, we’re going to be prepared,” Hebeler added. “We don’t want this to be one of those catastrophic events that comes out on the news, and everyone says, ‘Well, the law enforcement messed up.’”

Law enforcement agencies continue to face public scrutiny over how they respond to mass shooting events — highlighted by last month’s scathing report from the U.S. Department of Justice on the response to the 2022 school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, that left 21 people dead, all but two of them elementary school children.

First responders are trained to focus on two things in a mass shooting event: Stop the killing and stop the dying. By waiting 77 minutes outside the fourth grade classrooms where the active shooter was before confronting and killing him, Uvalde law enforcement failed to follow protocols and that cost lives, the federal report found.

Uvalde showed “layer upon layer upon layer of failures,” said Jaclyn Schildkraut, executive director of the Regional Gun Violence Research Consortium at New York’s Rockefeller Institute of Government. Simulations highlight the sights, sounds and smells of an active shooter event in a controlled environment so the failures seen in Uvalde don’t occur, she said.

“It doesn’t matter if you’re the first officer or by yourself or there’s 20 of you, you go in and you stop the shooter, and then you start trying to help the people who’ve been injured,” she said.

“Simulations are really about acclimating you to what you might encounter on that given day, so that you are able to maintain that focus and subsequently your safety as best as possible.”

But she wanted to be clear about one point: This kind of training should never be used in schools among children. It is far too traumatic.

Simulation’s increased use

Seventeen miles east of downtown Raleigh, North Carolina, Wake Technical Community College is building a 60,000-square-foot facility with an 8-acre driving pad that is dedicated to reality-based simulation training for police, fire and emergency medical workers.

From the outside, observers wouldn’t realize the massive gray complex is full of buildings and streets, with spaces designed to mimic the commercial, jail, residential and school spaces first responders would experience in their communities. Trainees can drive into the facility, pull up to a specific location inside and respond to the simulated event — a school shooting, for example, or a fire inside a supermarket.

During mass shooting simulations, trainees will experience the disaster through all their senses: It could smell like smoke, there might be flashing lights and sirens, role players may act as screaming victims or use simulated munitions filled with paint. The $60 million facility, which is slated to open this spring, was funded by a bond that Wake County voters approved in 2018.

For officers, simulation training is much more effective than shooting at a line of paper targets, or simply going over shoot/don’t-shoot scenarios, said Jamie Wicker, provost of public safety education at Wake Tech. Training for mass shooting events has developed over many years with the help of veterans who served in Afghanistan and Iraq, she added.

“It’s one thing to describe chaos. It’s completely different to experience chaos,” said Wicker, who has been in law enforcement for more than 20 years, in part as a trainer. “This is managed chaos.”

This approach has been backed up by researchers who have studied the effectiveness of simulation training for first responders.

One driving factor of that effectiveness is re-creating the high-stress physiological effects, such as an increased heart rate, said Colby Dolly, the director of science and innovation at the National Policing Institute, a Virginia-based research nonprofit.

When officers respond to a mass shooting, they’re running, maybe up a flight of stairs or while carrying people. They will see victims who are injured or dead. They will be worried about the shooter’s location. Meanwhile, parents may be rushing to the scene, along with additional first responders from agencies across the region who might not have interacted with one another before.

While an increased heart rate can produce positive reactions such as adrenaline and sharpened senses, it can quickly turn negative, leading to tunnel vision, auditory exclusion or impaired judgment, Dolly said.

“You want to, at some level, induce that in a training environment,” he said. “It conditions the officer to inoculate them from being overwhelmed by all that when the time comes.”

For the past decade, federal law enforcement has viewed the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center, known commonly as the ALERRT Center, as the national standard for active shooting simulation training. Hundreds of thousands of police officers have received training from the center, which was formed in the wake of Columbine and has been housed at Texas State University since 2002.

Funded by a line item in the Texas state budget and federal grants, ALERRT is mandated to train 80,000 Texas officers every two years at its facility in San Marcos — a city between Austin and San Antonio. But center experts also go to all 50 states to spread their training, going to schools during breaks and to businesses, at no cost to trainees or their agencies.

Sometimes they use local drama students to play victims, wearing makeup and moulage, simulating a wound. “They love it,” said Larry Balding, external resources director with the center.

For the training, ALERRT likes long hallways and T intersections — stress points for law enforcement responding to an active shooter. Beyond learning how to stop the shooter, trainees focus on getting victims to an operating table. Gunshot victims only have around 30 minutes before it’s too late, said Balding, who used to be in the fire service.

“Nobody will ever be 100% ready,” he said. “But if you can get a new officer, get him trained, trying to get the mindset right, that’s what we want to do.”

When asked where simulation training is heading in the field of first responders, Balding didn’t hesitate: virtual reality.

Training in the virtual world

The floor of the San Diego Convention Center was filled with lifelike mannequins — bleeding, blinking, moving and able to be poked and prodded and to respond to questions. Some were even pregnant, with a baby ready to squirm out when prompted.

Among the 140 health care presenters last month at a conference organized by the Society for Simulation in Healthcare, a membership nonprofit that seeks to promote simulation training to reduce errors in medical care, were companies that want to take the industry in a whole new direction with virtual reality.

Whether first responders use Oculus headsets to learn how to interact with patients in an emergency room or use lifesaving tools at the scene of a shooting, localities are turning more to virtual reality training for first responders, said Dr. Barry Issenberg, president of the society.

“It’s the reduction of errors, safer care, safer way of training,” said Issenberg, who is also the director of the Gordon Center for Simulation and Innovation in Medical Education at the University of Miami. “What we’re doing is not just a cool idea, but ultimately going to make an impact for their constituents.”

The society worked with the Hollywood-style facility, which organized the simulation for the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department and other local first responders who participated the day before. Around 100 visiting academics and health care workers in town for a conference were among the onlookers.

While researchers have found in several studies that virtual reality can add some benefits to health care training, there is still some skepticism.

Dolly, at the National Policing Institute, sees “some promise” with virtual reality for training police officers. It can be a cost-effective alternative to in-person simulations and can help officers train in shoot/don’t-shoot scenarios.

However, he does see limitations with not being able to run around and experience viscerally the confusion of a mass shooting, which can be fully felt with an in-person simulation.

Back at the San Diego shooting simulation, screams still pierced the air.

Gunfire continued for another minute, as the seven deputies dashed from room to room in the complex of buildings. They killed the shooters, then carried some of the wounded down flights of stairs.

After the shots finally stopped, the screams of victims were nearly drowned out by the wail of ambulance sirens.

Firefighters and emergency medical technicians rushed bloodied victims in stretchers to nearby pop-up emergency and operating rooms, where Navy doctors tried to keep their footing on floors slippery with blood and worked to close victims’ wounds.

Wearing blue scrubs and shoe coverings, doctors turned victims on their side and searched for exit wounds. One demanded O negative blood.

An hour after the first shots rang out, the simulation ended. The first responders gathered in the ER in a semicircle. An instructor quieted the room, asked for the beeping heart monitors to be shut off and turned to the participants.

“So, what did we learn?”

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org. Follow Stateline on Facebook and Twitter.

Chiefs fans gather in the Power & Light District after the Super Bowl win in 2020. A Kansas City lawmaker wants the Chiefs to make a statement about celebratory gunfire after major wins (Zach Bauman/The Beacon).

As the Kansas City Chiefs get ready for a Super Bowl appearance with the San Francisco 49ers on Feb. 11, Missouri lawmakers advanced a measure to raise the penalty for shooting a gun skyward in celebration.

Kansas City saw more celebratory gunfire on Sunday — an increase from when the Chiefs won the AFC championship a year earlier.

One Kansas City lawmaker who is sponsoring a version of the bill has called on the Chiefs to urge fans to refrain from firing their guns into the sky. Democratic Rep. Mark Sharp said his request has gone unanswered by the team.

Celebratory gunfire poses a problem for law enforcement and communities after big events, especially major holidays like New Year’s Eve or July 4. But in recent years as the Chiefs have consistently had playoff successes, Kansas Citians increasingly point their firearms at the sky and shoot.

The Kansas City Police Department says the gunshot detection service ShotSpotter shows the problem getting worse.

In 2023, when the Chiefs won the divisional round playoff game, ShotSpotter recorded 33 rounds. This year, the detection system recorded 147 rounds. When the Chiefs won the AFC championship in 2023, it recorded 102 rounds. This week, that number rose to 130 rounds.

In 2023, Kansas City broke its homicide record with 182 homicides recorded across the city. But homicides aren’t the only measure of consequences from gunfire, celebratory or not, said Tom Chittum, the current senior vice president at SoundThinking, the company that runs the ShotSpotter system.

“We often use homicide as a measure of violent crime, but it is a very imprecise measure,” Chittum said. “Murders don’t often go undiscovered and they’re very easy to count. But the fact of the matter is the consequences of gun violence go so far beyond homicides.”

Is it possible to deter celebratory gunfire?

It can be difficult for law enforcement and city officials to convince people not to participate in celebratory gunfire if residents don’t truly understand the consequences, said Chittum, who was the chief operating officer for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

A theory called deterrence is helpful in understanding how to reduce celebratory gunfire. The certainty and speed of punishment have been shown the strongest ways to deter crime. The severity of the punishment, on the other hand, is less influential.

“Some distant severe punishment doesn’t have the same effect,” Chittum told The Beacon.

On July 4, 2011, an 11-year-old Kansas City girl, Blair Shanahan Lane, was killed by celebratory gunfire. Since then, lawmakers have been attempting to pass a bill called Blair’s Law, which would raise the penalty for shooting a gun into the sky.

A version of the bill advanced out of a Missouri Senate committee last week.

Shannon Cooper, a lobbyist for Kansas City, testified in support of the legislation.

“You’ve all heard this before, but what I would say is the first day of January, if you looked on social media,” Cooper said, “it was amazing the number of individuals, residents of this state, in our metropolitan area who took it upon themselves to video themselves participating in celebratory gunfire.”

This article first appeared on The Beacon and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

U.S. Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO) speaks during a news conference to advocate for ending the Senate filibuster, outside the U.S. Capitol on April 22, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images).

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Justice is investigating how Missouri Democratic Rep. Cori Bush spends campaign funds, according to a statement the congresswoman released Tuesday.

“Since before I was sworn into office, I have endured relentless threats to my physical safety and life,” Bush said. “As a rank-and-file member of Congress I am not entitled to personal protection by the House, and instead have used campaign funds as permissible to retain security services.” 

“I have not used any federal tax dollars for personal security services,” Bush added. “Any reporting that I have used federal funds for personal security is simply false.”

The Justice Department declined to comment. 

Punchbowl News first reported the investigation Tuesday morning, less than a day after the U.S. House Clerk read a statement on the floor that the Justice Department had served the Sergeant at Arms with a grand jury subpoena for documents. The statement did not disclose the nature of the documents or the name of the member of Congress associated with them. 

Punchbowl reported that several unnamed sources said the investigation related to how Bush used her Member Representation Allowance, an account that members of Congress use to pay for office expenses. 

The funding for an MRA comes from taxpayer dollars and is approved annually in the Legislative Branch appropriations bill, whereas campaign spending comes from donations political supporters make to individual candidates.

Bush, who was sworn in as a member of Congress in 2021, represents Missouri’s 1st Congressional District, which currently includes St. Louis and most of northern St. Louis County.

Bush said in her written statement that she is “fully cooperating” with the Justice Department’s investigation as well as the Federal Election Commission and U.S. House Committee on Ethics, both of which are “reviewing the matter.”

The allegations stem from right-wing organizations, according to Bush. 

“In particular, the nature of these allegations have been around my husband’s role on the campaign,” Bush said. “In accordance with all applicable rules, I retained my husband as part of my security team to provide security services because he has had extensive experience in this area, and is able to provide the necessary services at or below a fair market rate.”

Bush said the allegations made against her are “frivolous” and intended to distract her from her work in Congress. 

“I am under no illusion that these right-wing organizations will stop politicizing and pursuing efforts to attack me and the work that the people of St. Louis sent me to Congress to do: to lead boldly, to legislate change my constituents can feel, and to save lives.”

State Rep. Aaron McMullen, R-Independence, presents a bill in committee on Jan. 16, 2024 (Tim Bommel/Missouri House Communications).

Republican lawmakers are once again pushing legislation that would require Missouri to conduct a clinical study on using psilocybin, more commonly referred to  as “magic mushrooms,” to treat depression, substance use or as part end-of-life care. 

Last year, the House overwhelmingly approved the measure. But it never made it to a final House vote.

Hearings on versions of the bill will take place in both the House and Senate this week.

In the House Veterans Committee on Tuesday, Republican Rep. Aaron McMullen of Independence plans to present an amended version of the bill that would limit its scope to only veterans.

The suicide rate among veterans in Missouri is nearly double the state rate and one of the highest in the country.

“Substance abuse and suicide are escalating in the veterans community,” McMullen, a veteran who served in a combat unit in Afghanistan, told The Independent. “While psilocybin is not a panacea for every issue, it represents a first true scientifically-validated hope that we have to address this crisis.”

A day later, Republican Sen. Holly Thompson Rehder will present an identically amended bill to that chamber’s Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee.

“Many of our veterans experience high amounts of ptsd due to serving their country – due to protecting us,” she said. “There should be no limits for them when it comes to access to mental health treatment, including non-pharmacological treatments.” 

Missouri Republican pushes to legalize ‘magic mushrooms’ to treat depression, PTSD

Both bills would require the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services to provide grants totaling $2 million for the research, subject to lawmakers approving the appropriation. The state would collaborate on the study with a Missouri university hospital or medical center operated by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs in Missouri. The focus of the treatment is on patients suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, substance use disorders or for those who require end-of-life care. 

Veterans have already had much success recovering from struggles that some of them have dealt with for decades, said veteran William Wisner, executive director of the Grunt Style Foundation, a nonprofit organization that assists veterans.

Some veterans, he said, have experienced “dreadful” side effects to prescription antidepressants that they haven’t with psilocybin.

“My experience with these types of modalities has been that the side effects make you more empathetic,” he said. “They make you kinder. They make you more open to kindness. It gives you a psychological and spiritual component to which you can engage in your own recovery.”

If he hadn’t seen the great strides his fellow veterans had experienced, Wisner said he probably would have never tried it, especially as someone who grew up during the 80s watching the “This is your brain on drugs” commercials.

Committee Chairman Dave Griffith, a Republican from Jefferson City, said he understands the measure may be outside some legislators’ “comfort zones.” 

“If you would have told me 10 years ago that I would be chairing a committee and listening to psychedelics, I would have told you, ‘You’re crazy,’” he told The Independent on Friday. “But I really have a passion for the struggles that my veteran brothers and sisters are going through, and I think we’ve got to look at the big picture.”

The committee members who will hear the bill Tuesday are the same members who voted unanimously to pass the bill out of committee last year, he said, “so they’re up to speed.” 

Griffith encourages people to look at the “extensive” research coming out of the Johns Hopkins Center for Psychedelic and Consciousness Research.

“I’ve probably spent, I don’t know, 20 hours reading materials that came out of Johns Hopkins,” he said. “The data that comes out of these studies that they’ve done is remarkable.”

In a 2022 study, Johns Hopkins Medicine researchers showed that psychedelic treatment with psilocybin relieved major depressive disorder symptoms in some adults for up to a year. 

Psychiatry researchers at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis were the first in Missouri to give a legal dose of psilocybin in 2019. 

They have been using a brain-imaging technique to learn how psilocybin affects certain networks in the brain. And their initial findings will be published in a couple months. 

Psilocybin helps people break harmful habits and ways of thinking, which applies to PTSD and psychosis as well, said researcher Joshua Siegel, an instructor of psychiatry at Washington University. 

“Habits are extremely hard to break,” Siegel said. “The reason that people who have one depressive disorder are prone to have more is because their brain is more likely to fall into these self-perpetuating kinds of states, that I think of like habits.”

All antidepressants make the brain’s emotion circuits more “plastic and adaptable,” he said, which makes them more open to change.

“Psilocybin just happens to do that very rapidly,” he said. 

Combined with preparation and help from therapists processing the experience afterwards, he said psilocybin successfully helps people choose new patterns of behavior and thinking.

“At this point, there’s a critical mass of studies of clinical trials that have shown positive responses,” Siegel said. “So I think that’s hard to deny.”

Bob Arthur, pictured in November 2022, returns to the Metairie apartment complex where his son, Shawn, died in 2017. Police and the parish prosecutor have refused to treat the case as a homicide, although two people have convicted in federal court in connection with the incident (Greg LaRose/Louisiana Illuminator).

A Missouri man investigating his son’s death filed a lawsuit this week against a Louisiana district attorney who’s demanding more than $18,000 for copies of investigation records related to the case.

Since his son’s death nearly seven years ago, Bob Arthur has pursued justice with little to no help from police or prosecutors.

He has insisted there was foul play ever since his 40-year-old son, Shawn Arthur, was found dead at his Metairie, La., apartment in February 2017. The Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office concluded Shawn’s death was accidental, the result of drinking too much alcohol. The coroner’s office would later revise the cause as “undetermined,” but investigators refused to budge on treating the fatal incident as a crime.

Their inaction prompted Arthur, a retired insurance investigator who lives near Kansas City, to launch his own probe into what led to his son’s death. With the help of a private detective and a journalist, Arthur started with a fingerprint found on a bottle of liquor found in Shawn’s bathroom. Together they traced the paths of the woman who police said met Shawn at his home the night he died and the man who brought her to the apartment.

Federal prosecutors built a case around Arthur’s findings, which included a tape-recorded jailhouse interview in Georgia that investigative reporter David Lohr with Huffington Post obtained with Dominique Berry. In the recording, Berry admitted she drugged Shawn’s drink that night in his apartment. She denied knowing that he died.

Berry and Randy Schenck had been arrested in Cobb County, Georgia, in September 2017. Police said they used an online dating ad to meet a man who woke up the next morning to report his wallet, phone and car missing.

“That was their whole modus operandi,” Arthur told WDSU-TV in 2020. “…They would lure their victim in, they would drug their victim, unbeknownst to the person. Then they would get the person to drink, and then they would rob them.”

Shawn’s wallet, television and cellphone were taken from his apartment, and security video shows two men leaving complex in a truck resembling Shawn’s, according to a police report.

Lohr and Arthur discovered on their own that Berry and Schenck used a similar scheme elsewhere. Court records say they lured at least 11 men across seven states, incapacitating their victims and then robbing them. Lohr was able to reach some of their alleged victims.

“They’d say the last thing they would remember (Berry) massaging them and they were out,” Lohr said.

Berry and Schenck were indicted in federal court in New Orleans, with details of Shawn’s death prominent in the prosecution’s case. Schenck was found guilty of human trafficking and identity theft in 2019, and he was sentenced to 25 years in prison. Berry, claiming she was a trafficking victim, testified against Schenck and was given a 45-month sentence later that year.

Despite the federal convictions, Arthur has been unable to convince Jefferson Parish DA Paul Connick to pursue a homicide case against Schenck or Berry or turn the matter over to a grand jury. The father has blasted the work of sheriff’s investigators, who he says fumbled their work from the very start.

“Let the citizens of Jefferson Parish use their common sense and look at the facts and make up their mind if murder charges should or should not be filed,” Arthur told WWL-TV’s David Hammer last February. “I mean, I can live with that.”

When asked about the lawsuit, a spokesperson for Jefferson Parish district attorney provided the following statement:

“The DA’s Office has not been formally served with the lawsuit, but it is aware that one was filed. With that, the office does not comment on pending litigation. The office follows Louisiana’s public records law when responding to the public’s requests for documents that are in its custody. The law additionally allows the office to set reasonable fees for providing these documents.

“The fee schedule, which includes provisions set forth in state law for indigency among Louisiana residents, is published on the District Attorney’s Office website: https://www.jpda.us/public-records/.”

Arthur said his persistence in seeking justice for Shawn’s death has embarrassed the sheriff’s office, which has consistently stood by how the investigation was handled.

After being told the DA’s office would not pursue charges against Berry or Schenck, he requested all documents, emails, messages, phone logs, photos, reports and conversations related to Shawn’s death investigation. The agency responded that it had more than 37,000 pages of records that would cost Arthur $18,535 to receive on paper or $5,560 in a digital format.

“The lack of transparency and excessive, unjustified pricing of public records of a closed case from the DA’s office has made a difficult situation even harder. No family should have to fight this hard for transparency and justice, especially while grieving the loss of a family member,” Arthur said in a statement from the Tulane First Amendment Clinic, which filed a lawsuit on his behalf in Jefferson Parish last week.

The petition asks the court to compel the DA’s office to provide the records free or at a reasonable fee. It also calls for the parish prosecutor to pay for Arthur’s legal expenses and any penalties, and it seeks a ruling on whether the office’s policy violates state public records law.

“These charges are egregious because the Public Records Act is clear that public bodies cannot charge for labor in providing public documents to taxpayers,” Tulane Clinic attorney Melia Cerrato said. “Making public records accessible is a core function of government offices. Low-cost or reasonable fees promote transparency and ensure equal access to information, empowering individuals to hold elected officials accountable.”

This story was originally published by the Louisiana Illuminator, a States Newsroom affiliate. 

School protection officers have the authority to carry a weapon on school grounds if the officer has obtained a concealed carry endorsement permit (Aristide Economopoulos for New Jersey Monitor).

Chiefs fans gather in the Power & Light District after the Super Bowl win in 2020. A Kansas City lawmaker wants the Chiefs to make a statement about celebratory gunfire after major wins (Zach Bauman/The Beacon).

Every year — on New Year’s Eve, July 4, when a sports team wins a championship — police and politicians practically beg people not to fire their guns into the air in celebration.

In Kansas City, reports of shots fired go up when the NFL playoffs roll around.

Meanwhile, a proposal to slightly strengthen the misdemeanor penalties for celebratory gunfire in Missouri can’t find its way into statute.

Democratic state Rep. Mark Sharp of Kansas City has tried for years to make the change with Blair’s Law, named for a Kansas City girl who lost her life from a bullet fired randomly skyward.

So he went to the team to tell its fans to leave weapons out of their celebrations.

“The Chiefs — whether they like it or not — they need to have a voice in this,” Sharp told The Beacon. “Two words: ‘Celebrate safely.’ That would go a long way to those same folks shooting their guns off after a Chiefs victory.”

Kansas City set a new record for homicides in 2023. Sharp contends a message from the team could play a role in reducing that number.

Sharp said his requests to the Chiefs have so far gone unanswered. Other lawmakers also think a word or two from the team might save a life.

Missouri House Majority Leader Jon Patterson, a Republican from Lee’s Summit, said it could be helpful for the team to weigh in.

Should the Chiefs join conversations about social issues?

The Kansas City Police Department’s ShotSpotter data says the number of shots fired was higher than the average evening when the Chiefs won playoff games last year. On Jan. 22, 2023, a Sunday night when the Chiefs did not play, the system recorded 15 rounds of gunfire.

The next Sunday, Jan. 29, 2023, when the Chiefs won the AFC Championship, the system counted 102 rounds. Two weeks later, when the team won the Super Bowl, the number went to 476 rounds.

In the past, KCPD and Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas have urged residents to refrain from celebratory gunfire during holidays and events.

“When you shoot your gun in the air, you don’t get to decide where that round goes,” said Sgt. Jake Becchina said during a 2021 press conference ahead of New Year’s Eve. “It will travel, sometimes as many as, if not over, a thousand yards.”

Sports teams and corporations have faced mounting pressures to weigh in on social issues over the past few years, according to Virginia Harrison, a communications professor and researcher at Clemson University.

“The NFL really have been ramping up their corporate social responsibility,” Harrison said. “So things like ‘don’t drink and drive’ that are not necessarily controversial, things they’re not going to get backlash on.”

Still, teams aren’t likely to go out on a limb with messages that could be seen as polarizing, especially when sports are seen as a form of entertainment that should avoid politicized topics.

“There is kind of a balance where we need to address things that are relevant to our fan base in Missouri and Kansas City,” Harrison said of how the Chiefs may view sensitive messaging. “But we can’t go too far in the sense that we’re going rogue almost, and then the NFL is going to take away our ownership or take away our team.”

Sharp said although the team tries to avoid political topics, it’s weighing in on things like sports betting, by backing an initiative petition to legalize it in Missouri and the politicking of their stadium location.

The Chiefs “really need to have a responsibility when it comes to the community,” Sharp said. “Folks spend their entire paycheck to go to these games. We have a dog in the fight. We want the city to be better. Having less crime only helps them in the long run.”

A Chiefs spokesperson declined to comment on whether the team planned to issue a statement on the lawmaker’s request for a statement on celebratory gunfire.

Could a message from the Kansas City Chiefs even make an impact?

Harrison’s research has shown that fans tend to respond more positively to social messages from players than from a team or a sports league. Messages that are authentic to a player’s brand are also more likely to be well-received by fans.

One of Harrison’s studies also showed that fans who are politically neutral or liberal-leaning tend to respond more favorably to messages concerning social issues. In contrast, the study found conservative-leaning fans viewed social activism by the NBA negatively.

A paper assessing fans’ responses to the NFL’s response during 2020 and the aftermath of George Floyd’s killing had similar conclusions.

“Perhaps the use of official team sources exacerbated negative responses because it violated fan’s identities and did not allow for easy dissociation from specific athletes,” the paper concluded.

Another forthcoming study from Evan Brody, a communications professor at the University of Nevada, found that when fans were presented with an NFL collaboration with an LGBTQ+ organization, some fans were initially angered by the collaboration, but not enough to renounce their teams.

“When we then ask them, ‘Is this going to change whether or not you support the NFL, purchasing tickets, watching games or purchasing gear?’ it did not have any effect on people’s willingness to continue to support the NFL,” Brody said.

There is also less risk for teams because fans are unlikely to start supporting a competitor based on these messages, unlike in the corporate world where issuing potentially polarizing messages could drive one’s consumers to the competition.

“You’re not gonna become a Raiders fan or a Broncos fan just because you’re mad at the team,” Brody said.

How would Blair’s Law impact celebratory gunfire?

The issue of celebratory gunfire itself is particularly difficult to pin down, according to Kelly Drane, the research director at Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. The way a bullet travels and the often crowded public settings where celebratory gunfire occurs make it hard to track.

“We know anecdotally that it’s a problem because we see these cases,” Drane said. “But it’s hard to know just the full extent of the problem because of the difficulties and tracking this type of violence.”

. Under existing law, firing a gun within city limits with “criminal negligence” — that would include celebratory gunfire — is a misdemeanor with punishment of up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine. Blair’s Law would double the fine.

Parson has said he supports the change, but he vetoed the legislation last year because it was teamed with another bill he opposed.

Sharp acknowledged that using Blair’s Law to address celebratory gunfire was like “killing an ant with a sledgehammer.”

“I wish we didn’t have to legislate our way out of this,” he said. “But you have to go that far because of how much it hasn’t been policed.”

Drane said laws prohibiting guns from being carried in certain public locations can help with reducing rates of celebratory gunfire.

“If you think about large crowded areas, if people are firing bullets into the air, there’s an even higher risk that people could get hit,” she said.

She said laws that restrict access to guns for younger people or promote safe gun storage could also help reduce the rate of celebratory gunfire.

Drane said the most effective way to prevent crime is for residents to understand that they’ll inevitably be caught for doing so.

“One of the biggest deterrents to crime is knowing that punishment is swift and certain,” she said. “If people don’t think that there’s a high likelihood of being caught, there could be some benefits of just enforcement.”

This article first appeared on The Beacon and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Two bills would add marijuana to Missouri’s workers’ compensation law, which outlines a drug-free workplace rule (Rebecca Rivas/Missouri Independent).

If Missouri employees ask for workers’ compensation after an on-the-job injury, employers can require them to take a drug test for marijuana. 

If they test positive — even if they hadn’t consumed marijuana for days — their compensation and death benefit may be reduced by 50%. 

That didn’t change when Missouri legalized recreational marijuana because it’s still a controlled substance on a federal level, two Republican state lawmakers told a House committee Wednesday. 

But if the federal government legalizes marijuana, “then people could literally smoke pot on the job in Missouri and there would be no prohibition against that,” attorney Bradley Young, a workers’ compensation attorney from Chesterfield, told The Independent Thursday morning. 

Republican Reps. John Voss of Cape Girardeau and Sherri Gallick of Belton are trying to etch the current policy into state statute so it can remain in place if federal law changes. 

They both said their legislation, drafted by Young, is meant to address intoxication on the job.

“I have some people that live close to me who are in this business,” Gallick said, referring to owners of a marijuana facility. “And as a business owner, they want to make sure that everything is done correctly. They want to make sure their businesses are protected.”

Both of the bills add marijuana to Missouri’s workers’ compensation law, which outlines a drug-free workplace rule. Currently the law states employees will lose 50% of compensation “if the injury was sustained in conjunction with the use of alcohol or non-prescribed controlled drugs.”

Under the state constitution, marijuana is no longer a “non-prescribed controlled drug,” Young said, but it’s still a federally controlled substance. 

Gallick’s bill makes an exemption for medical marijuana patients who are following a doctor’s prescription, but Voss’ bill does not. Sen. Mike Bernskoetter, a Republican from Jefferson City, has also introduced a bill that mirrors the language in Voss’ legislation.

Both bills faced pushback from Republicans and Democrats on the House Insurance Policy Committee Wednesday.

Rep. Richard West, a Republican from Wentzville, said he understands the need to test everyone involved in an accident, as a former police officer for 20 years.

“My biggest problem with this bill, though, is the non-impairment part of it, meaning we really don’t have the science to say at what point you are impaired,” West said, when it comes to marijuana.

West gave the scenario of taking a marijuana-infused gummy on Saturday night to help him sleep. He doesn’t take it Sunday night, and then goes into work on Monday completely unimpaired. 

“The ceiling falls in on me, and I get tested as a result of it,” West said. “Now I have it in my system, and they’re going to cut my benefits by 50%. That is possible under this bill, correct?” 

Ray McCarty, president and CEO of the Associated Industries of Missouri who was speaking in favor of the bill, said that’s the current policy and marijuana would continue to be treated the same as alcohol. 

Currently, if employees test below the intoxication level of alcohol of .08%, they still could have their benefits reduced.

West countered that it’s different because a person wouldn’t test positive on Monday if they consumed alcohol on Saturday, but they would with marijuana.

McCarty replied: “There’s no medical evidence that if you have it in your bloodstream that you are not somehow affected.”

Rep. Jeff Coleman, a Republican from Grain Valley, said he didn’t realize the current law reduced workers’ benefits, even if they were not at fault in an accident.

“This is new to me,” he said. “I have a little issue with that part of it…. If it’s determined to be no fault, I don’t think that there should be a reduction in their benefit.” 

In his 30 years as a workers’ compensation defense attorney, Young said he’s never once seen a situation where a judge reduced benefits because someone smoked pot days or weeks ahead.

“There is no example of that,” Young said. “We know that people are using drugs in conjunction with their work activities. That is a far greater problem than the hypothetical problem that exists regarding the person who smokes pot a week before he is injured on the job.”

Several legislators criticized the current testing methods for determining marijuana impairment.

“I just know it tests positive in your system for infinitely longer than alcohol,” said Rep. Steve Butz, a Democrat from St. Louis. “There’s a big difference. It could be three weeks ago that anybody did anything.”

West agreed.

“If we don’t have a threshold set at what impairment actually is, are we going to tell people they can’t partake in a totally legal entity within our state in their private time?” West said. 

Committee members asked when more efficient testing will be available. 

Young told The Independent he represents a construction company in St. Louis that purchased expensive technology to determine if THC is active in a person’s body, as opposed to testing a person’s metabolites. 

“The technology is there,” he said. “I’ve seen it. Next year it will be half the size and half the cost.”

Dyllan Davault, a harvester at Robust Cannabis facility in Cuba, Mo., tends to greenhouse plants on May 2, 2023 (Rebecca Rivas/Missouri Independent).

Missouri circuit courts have cleared more than 100,000 marijuana charges from people’s criminal records so far — a mandate that was a big selling point for those who voted to pass the constitutional amendment that legalized recreational marijuana in 2022.

However, court officials said it’s hard to determine how many more charges are left because many court records are not digitized. 

The state initially identified digital cases that could potentially be eligible for expungement and gave that information to the circuit courts.

“We’ve had about 100,000 cases expunged,” said Betsy AuBuchon, clerk of the Missouri Supreme Court, during a House appropriations committee meeting Wednesday, “but I can’t tell you of that how many more there are to go.”

She said the current rate of cases reviewed and deemed eligible is about 10%.

AuBuchon requested another $3.7 million in the coming budget year for Missouri courts to complete marijuana expungements.

By law, any revenue the state collects from taxes on recreational marijuana sales, along with fees the businesses pay, must first go towards the state’s costs of regulating the program. Then it goes to expenses incurred by the court system for expunging certain marijuana offenses from people’s criminal records.

Last year lawmakers signed off on $4.5 million for state courts to pay their employees overtime or to hire temp workers to complete the massive number of expungements required by law. They approved an additional $2.5 million in a supplemental budget on May 5. 

Circuit courts must request funds to reimburse their expenses for completing expungements from the Circuit Court Budget Committee, which oversees the special assistance program. 

So far, the committee has given $4.2 million to the county courts, said Beth Riggert, communications counsel of the Missouri Supreme Court. And the committee has allocated the funds to any circuit court that has requested it, she said. 

“Some circuit courts have advised they have not requested special assistance funds because they did not have current court clerks willing or able to work overtime,” Riggert said, “and/or have been unable to find qualified individuals to provide special assistance because the analysis required is complicated and better done by experienced personnel, such as retired clerks.”

As of Jan. 2, Missouri courts have granted 103,558 expungements. Out of all the counties, Greene County has received the most funding, nearly $940,000, and has completed the most expungements at 4,306. 

After Greene, the counties that have completed the most expungements are not necessarily the largest counties or the ones that have received the most money. 

The second highest number is 3,515 from Laclede County, which has a population of 36,000. The county has received a little more than $35,000 from the special assistance program.

In third place is St. Louis County, the state’s largest county with more than a million people, where court officials have processed 3,479 expungements. The county has received just over $135,000. The court has reviewed 11,300 files, a spokesman for the 21st Circuit Court said. 

Franklin County, which has a population of 104,000, is fourth, completing 3,200 expungements and receiving about $53,000. Franklin is just ahead of Jackson County, which has a population of 717,000. Jackson has completed 2,900 and received nearly $195,000.

The constitution mandates the courts to expunge all marijuana-related misdemeanors by June 8 and felonies by Dec. 8. State Rep. Maggie Nurrenbern, a Democrat from Kansas City, asked AuBuchon how long it will take the courts to work through the backlog. AuBuchon, like circuit clerks statewide, couldn’t give an estimate.

“We are doing our best,” AuBuchon said. 

How far along are the courts?

Greene County Circuit Clerk Bryan Feemster told The Independent last week that he brought on four experienced retired clerks in February to work part-time on expungements and, “they hit the ground running.” Their work has been guided by a list of pre-screened cases, compiled by the Office of State Court Administrator. 

The office searched for several criminal charge codes that potentially could involve marijuana and provided that list to the courts. The clerks must read through each case on the list thoroughly, he said.

“You have to look at every count in the case and see whether it actually had to do with marijuana or not,” he said.

Feemster submits timesheets and supporting documentation to the office, which then provides payment to employees on their paychecks for the expungement work. 

He’s hired additional two people to embark on the heavy lifting of paper boxes and going through thousands of paper files that can’t be pre-screened by the state. Those six clerks are dedicated to expungements. 

“They don’t do anything else,” he said.

During the 2022 campaign in support of the recreational marijuana ballot measure, supporters touted “automatic expungements” — meaning people who have already served their sentences for past charges don’t have to petition the court and go through a hearing to expunge those charges from their records. 

The courts must locate their records and make it as if their past marijuana charges never existed. 

“Let me be the first to tell you there is nothing automatic about that,” AuBuchon told legislators Wednesday. 

It’s a labor-intensive process, she said, that requires someone with legal experience to look through court files. That’s why most courts are relying on retired clerks. 

“It’s heavily frontloaded and probably not worth bringing in brand new full-time employees on the state dollar,” she said. “We really need people who know how to do that work. We are getting through those as quickly as we can.”

And that’s particularly the case with paper records, Feemster said, because it’s all manual.

“From 1989 back, we’re going through every single criminal record to find out whether there’s something in there that might qualify,” he said. “And it is, as you might imagine, very slow and tedious.”

While Greene County has a team of retired clerks who Feemster was able to recruit, other county clerks say they have one or two extra people helping complete the task. 

Marcy Anderson was appointed to serve as Johnson County’s circuit clerk in July, and she inherited the expungement task. She said she has a judge and a retired clerk who come to help out as often as they can, in addition to what her regular team can accomplish. 

“I have not done any kind of research to see how far along we are,” Anderson said. “We just continue to do it every day.”

Johnson County has a population of 54,000, and her team has completed 529 expungements, as of Jan. 2, receiving nearly $18,000 from the special assistance program. 

However her office, like every other county statewide, is simultaneously working on a large redacting project that’s required now that people can access court records on CaseNet. 

Both the redacting and expungement processes require extra help that she currently doesn’t have, but “more funds and more people” would be helpful.

In Jackson County, court clerks have reviewed more than 20,000 files that include both felony and misdemeanor drug charges, said Valerie Hartman, spokeswoman for the 16th Judicial Circuit Court. The court has expunged nearly 3,000 charges.

Some of those cases reviewed were related to marijuana, but many were not, she said. 

The court reviewed cases from 1989 through 2022 using data provided by the Office of State Courts Administrator, the Missouri Corrections Department and the Missouri State Highway Patrol, she said. All files that contained drug charges were included in the review.

Now the court is researching how to access old criminal databases, in order to identify and review additional paper case files, Hartman said. 

“We have no information,” she said, “nor an estimate on how many additional drug cases await our review.”

This story has been updated to reflect the discussion during Wednesday’s hearing.

(Getty Images)

A Missouri law passed in 2022 deletes the names of victims and witnesses in court documents, which experts say has made Missouri courts the least transparent in the nation.

Among the witness names deleted are police officers.

Eugene Volokh, a nationally known libertarian legal commentator, called the law “a very serious problem” under the headline “Missouri ‘Stealth Statute’ Requires Redaction of All Witness and Victim Names” in Court Records.”

Paul Cassell, a former federal judge and victims rights advocate, said he didn’t know of any law like it in the nation.

“I am not aware of any jurisdiction mandating such a broad prohibition on use of names,” he said in an email. “It does seem difficult to justify application of such a rule without narrowing it to circumstances where good reason may well exist for privacy (such as juveniles and sex assault cases).”

Charles Mahoney, president and CEO of the Missouri Broadcasters, said he also doesn’t know of another state with such a broad redaction law. His organization is concerned the law could impede journalists’ ability to “report the full truth.”

In August, the Missouri Press-Bar Commission sent a detailed letter to the Missouri Supreme Court stating it “has serious concerns about the legality, constitutionality, and practicality of this law, and… requests that the Supreme Court stay its implementation, pending study of those issues.”

The court did not issue a stay or respond to the letter. The redaction regime is being implemented not only in court pleadings but also in opinions and court orders.

Missouri has become the “State of Unnamed Persons,” wrote Mark Sableman, a partner at Thompson Coburn and media lawyer who has pressed the Missouri Supreme Court to hold back on implementing the law.

He pointed out that opinions from the state’s appeals court are filled with status words (e.g., “victim”), relationships (“victim’s sister”; “girlfriend”; “uncle”), initials, professions (“nurse”) and office (“state attorney” and “trial counsel”).

“This is so even for the names of public officials, like prosecutors, and other people who expect to be in the public eye, like trial lawyers,” Sableman said. “Some recent court opinions mention scores of witnesses—but none of them, except the parties, is named.

“The same is true of the names of victims, he said.

“They are secret, and do not appear in court decisions” Sableman said. “This applies even to murder victims, who are deceased and under the common law have no right of privacy, since that right is confined to the living.”

Nameless court decisions

Redactions sometimes result in confusing accounts in court opinions, making them hard for the public or outsiders to follow.

One recent example is Jolley v. State, handed down by the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Western District on Oct. 31.

Gary Jolley, serving a 30-year sentence for physically abusing members of his large family, was claiming he didn’t get adequate legal representation.

One paragraph of the decision reads: “On April 29, 2022, an evidentiary hearing was held. S.W., A.B., and C.F. testified. S.W. and A.B., Jolley’s daughters, testified that while Jolley was in jail some of Jolley’s family members who testified against him at trial, including C.D., sold items of Jolley’s property and kept the proceeds. S.W. and A.B. testified that C.D. used up to three years’ worth of Jolley’s social security disability payments for her own use. S.W. and A.B. stated they were never contacted by Jolley’s attorney, but they both would have testified at trial if they were contacted.”

Jolley lost the appeal.

Police officers are nameless because they are witnesses. A police officer accused of changing his account of a St. Louis shooting is “Officer P” throughout Kurtis C. Watkins v. State of Missouri, a Nov. 28 decision by the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Eastern District.

Watkins’ conviction rested almost entirely on “Officer P’s” testimony. The appeals court decision states, “Officer P’s testimony changed between the first and second trials from saying he was not sure that the initial shooter he saw in the alley was (Watkins), to later saying he was sure.”

The first trial ended in a mistrial and Watkins was convicted in the second.

Watkins alleged “ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to call Witness Friend, Witness J, and CoDefendant as witnesses at trial.” The trial counsel, Witness Friend, Witness J and CoDefendant are not named. Witness Friend apparently said he was with Watkins at the time of the shooting and the co-defendant said Watkins wasn’t present for the shooting.

Watkins lost his appeal.

Another example of the redaction of police officer names is the September 2023 decision of Foltz v. City of St. Louis.

Foltz is Officer Zachariah Foltz, a former St. Louis Police Officer fired for refusing to talk to criminal investigators about what he saw in his squad car where he was present when a fellow officer allegedly had a “sexual relationship” with a 12-year-old girl.

The officer accused of having the relationship is referred to as Officer SK because of the new redaction law. The names of other police officers who questioned Foltz also were redacted.

One passage reads: “Officer Foltz also sent Lieutenant WB an email accusing Lieutenant WB of attempting to push him out of the department because he would not ‘lick your boot’ and sabotaging his attempts to get another job…Major MS terminated Officer Foltz…(stating) failure to cooperate in the criminal investigation violated the Code of Ethics, was contrary to the Department’s purpose of investigating crime and holding people accountable for criminal acts, and suggested to the public that the police department holds its officers to different standards than other citizens.”

Critics of the redaction law say that scrubbing court decisions of police officers’ names will make it hard to hold police accountable for wrongdoing.

Uncertain origins of law

The new redaction law grew out of the January 2017 State of the Judiciary address by then-Chief Justice Patricia Breckenridge, who expressed concern that the expansion of the number of court documents available on Case.net, the online repository for court records, would lead to exponentially broader access to information that had existed in the “practical obscurity” of documents being available only at the local courthouse.

She noted many statutes governing confidentiality were enacted at a time when “public” meant available in paper form at a clerk’s office, not instantly available to anyone anywhere. She said the court wanted the legislature to have the opportunity to reexamine statutes governing public case documents to determine if they reflect the will of the legislature and the people.

The reference to the “practical obscurity” of public records in courthouses comes from language in a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court decision involving the federal Freedom of Information Act. First Amendment lawyers regard the language as inconsistent with a line of First Amendment decisions opening courts and court records to the public.

Breckenridge’s call for legislative action was followed by a host of proposals, most of which did not pass immediately.

At the end of its 2023 session, the Missouri Legislature passed an omnibus bill covering many issues and including the redaction language, some of which was taken from bills introduced by state Sen. Bill Eigel of Weldon Spring and state Rep. Adam Schnelting of St. Charles.

Eigel and Schnelting were responding to a constituent, Kara Elms, who testified at a Feb. 13 hearing of the House Judiciary Committee that a young person’s name should not be in Case.net. Her son had been injured at a summer camp and the family had sued to get his medical expenses covered. She didn’t want her son’s name to be permanently entered in court records because of the mishap.

There was no testimony at the hearing relating to the much broader redaction language eventually passed in May that removes the names of adult witnesses and victims.

A spokeswoman for Eigel said he was responding to Elms’ concerns about children’s names in court records, but she didn’t know the origins of the broader redaction language. Schnelting refused to respond to repeated requests for comment.

The original language of the legislation said nothing about redactions.

Sableman writes that it appears the law was “never directly discussed or debated at committee or on the floor of either chamber.” Legislative reference services were not able to provide any record of detailed legislative consideration of the final language.

One of the main legal defects in the law, says the Press-Bar Commission, is that it is part of an omnibus bill covering all sorts of subjects. Under the Missouri Constitution, the legislature can only change court rules with “a law limited to the purpose.” An omnibus bill is not a law of limited purpose.

Before the law was passed and signed by the governor, redactions were limited to confidential matters relating to family law and juvenile proceedings. But the new law extends “redaction requirements into practically all cases, criminal and civil,” the Press-Bar Commission writes, “multiplying them dramatically, because all criminal cases involve victims whose names would have to be redacted, and practically all cases involve witnesses, whose names and identifying information would have to be redacted.”

Among those witnesses whose names are redacted: law enforcement officials, public officials, corporate officers, expert witnesses, doctors, nurses, social workers, pharmacists, attorneys, engineers and prisoners.

“The ordinary witness in the ordinary case understands that lawsuits and trials are public proceedings,” wrote the Press-Bar Commission. “Indeed, it is a basic rule of civics, taught when civics education is taught, that our judicial system may command ‘every person’s evidence’ and that it is a civic duty and responsibility for a citizen to testify when needed. Most people consider their actions in satisfying this obligation as a matter of duty and pride, not one of shame.”

The Press-Bar Commission also points out that the language of the law specifically states: “The Missouri Supreme Court shall promulgate rules to administer this section.”

But it hasn’t promulgated any rules.

Support for redaction

Republican state Rep. Justin Hicks of Lake St. Louis has spoken out in favor of the redaction requirement, telling Missouri Lawyers Media that his concern overall is “there is an overabundance of too much personal, identifiable information out there.

“This is where we’re trying to claw back on that area,” he said. “However, the new requirements also can mean a lot more work. And, with two sets of regulations that might apply to a given case, exactly what should and should not be included isn’t always clear.”

Hicks, though, was recently criticized by an opponent in the Republican primary who posted records of a 2010 complaint against Hicks by a woman who said he choked her when he was 17. Hicks is a rising political figure in the Republican Party who received the Freshman of the Year Awards from House Speaker Dean Plocher in May.

Hicks’ opponent posted the 2010 restraining order against Hicks. Court orders are among the court documents covered by the 2023 redaction law he supported. Hicks did not mention the 2010 court order when explaining his support for redaction. He could not be reached for comment.

Jean Maneke, attorney for the Missouri Press Association, told Missouri Lawyers Media that the increased restrictions will make it more difficult for reporters to confirm the identity of criminal suspects, particularly those with common last names.

“I won’t know if the rapist in my neighborhood is 18 or 58,” she said. “And if his name is John Smith, I’m going to have a tough time figuring out who it is.”

Court closures

The objections that the Press-Bar Commission filed against the redaction law come in the context of a growing number of closed court proceedings to which the Missouri Broadcasters and Missouri Press Association have objected.

In a Dec. 13, 2022, letter to the Missouri Supreme Court, the two media groups proposed a new rule that would allow court proceedings to be closed only for “compelling” reasons and after a court hearing where the media have a chance to challenge closure.

The Missouri Supreme Court has not responded to the year-old letter and proposal.

The letter, written by Sableman and Maneke, lays out the legal basis for open court proceedings. The Missouri Constitution provides: “Missouri courts of justice shall be open to every person.” Missouri state law provides, “the sitting of every court shall be public and every person may freely attend same” and “all trials upon the merits shall be conducted in open court.”

In addition there is a string of U.S. Supreme Court decisions recognizing First Amendment protection for open courts and court records.

Yet the media lawyers cited numerous Missouri cases in which proceedings have been kept from the public:

1. In the case of Spear v. Quinn, Volokh, the libertarian law professor from UCLA who criticized the redaction statute, was denied access to a Missouri case file where a constitutionally questionable order was issued to Google to take down material from the internet.

2. In another case, a family was frustrated when the case of their sister’s murder was sealed for more than a year before trial, and they were prohibited from speaking about the case in which the killer received what they thought was a meager 20-year sentence.

3. A case claiming police assaulted a customer outside a St. Louis bar, an incident widely publicized, was closed to the public.

4. A St. Louis County judge sealed a lawsuit filed in February 2017 by a former Hazelwood Central High student’s mother who alleged her daughter was sexually assaulted by another student during school. A month after it was filed it vanished from Case.net.

5. A former law partner’s lawsuit against prominent attorney Jerry Schlichter and his law firm was sealed from public view by Judge Jason Sengheiser after Schlichter and his firm argued it contained highly confidential material.

The Missouri Supreme Court would not comment on the new redaction law or on correspondence regarding it. Nor would it comment on last year’s letter asking for new protections for open court proceedings.

Beth Riggert, the court spokesperson, said the Court welcomes “thoughtful suggestions regarding its rules of practice and procedure.

“Such communications are best directed to the clerk,” she said, “who then can ensure the information is directed appropriately and can be considered by the court. Any actions the court may take are expressed through its orders, typically without additional comment.”

This story originally appeared in the Gateway Journalism Review. It is being republished with permission. 

State Rep. Chad Perkins speaking during House debate on March 1, 2023 (Tim Bommel/Missouri House Communications).

A group of Republican lawmakers raised concerns about the death penalty and advocated for legislation that  would abolish it in Missouri during a Tuesday press conference at the state Capitol — characterizing it as an issue of restraining government overreach and protecting life. 

Rep. Chad Perkins, a Republican from Bowling Green, has filed legislation to abolish the death penalty and sentence those on death row instead to life in prison without parole.

“I think morally, I feel obligated,” Perkins said. “Anyone who says they’re pro-life should feel a little conflicted on this topic — because if you’re pro-life then I think you’ve got to look at it and say you’re that way from the beginning to the very end. And I don’t think that the government should have a monopoly on violence.”

Joining Perkins at Tuesday’s Capitol rally were Republican Reps. Tony Lovasco of O’Fallon, Jim Murphy of St. Louis and Travis Smith of Douglas.

Missouri was one of only five states to carry out death sentences last year, along with Texas, Florida, Oklahoma and Alabama.

Missouri executed four people in 2023 and two in 2022.

Between 1989 and 2021, the state executed 91 people, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

Four people on death row in the state have been exonerated in Missouri since 1989.

“If we are truly at a 100% pro-life state, and being 100% pro-life,” Murphy said, “I believe that the death penalty is something that we really need to examine and put an end to because there’s just too many errors to be made and it’s just too big an error to make.”

Demetrius Minor, national manager for that national advocacy group Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty, said Missouri could look to other states like Ohio, where there is a Republican trifecta and momentum against the death penalty, with legislative hearings over a bill to abolish it.

“The trend is beyond dispute,” Minor said, “An increasing number of conservative Republican state lawmakers nationwide are taking the lead because they believe in limited government, they demand fiscal responsibility and most importantly, they value life.”

Lovasco, who filed the bill in previous years seeking to abolish the death penalty in Missouri, said he’s seen increased momentum on the issue from his fellow Republicans. 

“We’re seeing, finally, willingness to have a discussion about this within the Republican Party,” he said, “both behind the scenes and now finally in public.” 

Last year, after Lovasco introduced an amendment during the budget process to defund the death penalty, he said, “almost double the number of people in the Republican Party voted in favor of defunding the death penalty than when it had happened previously, when roll call votes had been done in the past by Democrats.”

Perkins is hopeful the issue gains traction this session, but it hasn’t been referred to a House committee yet. 

“Oftentimes an idea comes about and starts to get a bit of traction, and it doesn’t quite make it across the finish line,” Perkins said. “But you can feel that there’s a direction that people are going and so maybe it’s an idea whose time hasn’t quite come about, but I think that the time is coming.” 

Another bill, filed by Republican state Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman of Arnold, would limit but not abolish the death penalty. Her legislation would repeal a state law allowing a judge to decide on a death sentence when a jury is not in unanimous agreement.

Most of the states with active death penalty laws  require unanimous jury decision. In only Indiana and Missouri, a judge is allowed to impose a death sentence when a jury decision can’t be reached on sentencing. 

CORRECTION: This story has been updated to reflect that the state executed 91 people between 1989 and 2021. In total, there have been 97 executions to date.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer says he believes talks on immigration have made progress and “we’re going to be persistent” (Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom).

WASHINGTON —  A deal on changes to immigration policy remained elusive on Tuesday for top U.S. Senate negotiators.

Those leading the talks — Sens. James Lankford, Republican of Oklahoma, Chris Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut and Kyrsten Sinema, independent of Arizona — have worked for weeks to strike a deal between the White House and Senate Republicans on immigration policy changes at the U.S. Southern border.

Congress was on a break for the holidays but returned this week.

“Everybody’s still at the table talking, so that’s a good thing,” Lankford said, adding that he’s hoping there can be bill text later this week.

Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said that negotiations on an immigration deal have made progress.

“We’re going to be persistent,” Schumer said. “We’re closer today to an agreement than we have ever been.”

For the past month, the Biden administration has been negotiating with that group of bipartisan senators to strike a deal that would tighten immigration restrictions in exchange for passage of a more than $100 billion in emergency supplemental aid for Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan and U.S. border security.

“There needs to be a strong border provision (as) part of (the supplemental),” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said during a Tuesday press conference.

A major demand by Republicans is to make changes to asylum law to set a higher bar for migrants to claim asylum and to curb the Biden administration’s use of its parole authority.

Republican Whip Sen. John Thune of South Dakota said that the White House and Democrats “are now finally starting to address (parole), and if they can get that addressed, we’ll see how it goes this week.”

Thune added that it’s unlikely that there will be an agreement on immigration and the supplemental before Congress’ first funding deadline on Jan. 19. If it is not met, there could be a partial government shutdown.

Mayorkas impeachment

The talks in the Senate come as House Republicans are moving forward with a Wednesday hearing beginning impeachment proceedings against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas over the Biden administration’s immigration policy at the Southern border.

Mayorkas, who visited the Southern border on Monday, defended his agency’s policies and called on Congress to pass immigration reform.

“Some have accused DHS of not enforcing our nation’s laws,” Mayorkas said during his trip to the border. “This could not be further from the truth.”

Mayorkas said that Border Patrol agents and officers dealt with a high number of migrants at the Southern border in December.

Since fiscal year 2024 began on Oct. 1, there have been more than 483,000 encounters with noncitizens at the Southwest land border, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection data.  

House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana also led a delegation of House Republicans to the Southern border recently, criticizing the White House’s immigration policy, and advocating for Trump-era immigration policies.

Debate over parole

Democrats and immigration advocates have pushed back against changes to asylum and parole authority.

Nicole Melaku, executive director of the National Partnership for New Americans, a coalition of more than 60 immigrant and refugee rights organizations, said proposals to change asylum and parole will “only worsen existing challenges at the border.

“We urge you to hold the line and bring forward solutions that improve our immigration system, fully resource welcoming infrastructure, and honor our nation’s long-standing responsibility to offer refuge to those in need of safety,” Melaku said.

There are two ways the Biden administration has used parole authority. The first is for certain nationals such as Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans to temporarily work and live in the U.S.

The administration has also used parole authority on a case-by-case basis for migrants.

Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, the U.S secretary of Homeland Security has the authority to “parole into the United States temporarily under such conditions as he may prescribe only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit any [noncitizen] applying for admission to the United States.”

Lankford has stated multiple times that he wants to curb the Biden administration’s broad use of parole authority for migrant releases at the border.

Murphy said he thinks it’s important to preserve the presidential authority to use parole, but did not specify the potential changes to the White House’s use of parole authority under discussion.

“The president uses parole to help better manage the border and to make sure that people are vetted before they arrive,” Murphy said. “My worry is that many Republicans who are asking for parole reforms are actually trying to increase, not decrease, the chaos at the border.”

D. John Sauer, former solicitor general of Missouri, represented Donald Trump before an appeals court panel on Jan. 9, 2024. Sauer is pictured here testifying during a hearing of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government on July 20, 2023 in Washington, DC. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images).

WASHINGTON — Former President Donald Trump appeared in federal court Tuesday seeking immunity from charges that he schemed to overturn the 2020 presidential election results and knowingly fed lies to supporters who turned violent on Jan. 6, 2021.

Trump, who is leading polls in the 2024 Republican presidential primary field, watched while his attorney D. John Sauer was grilled by a panel of judges as he argued that the former president is shielded from criminal prosecution because he acted in an official capacity. Trump in a brief press conference later suggested a ruling against his immunity claim would spur “bedlam” from his supporters.

The former president arrived at the courtroom minutes before the proceedings with his team of lawyers and sat mostly expressionless, taking no notes, while Sauer answered questions from a three-judge all-female panel, according to reporters inside the courtroom. Dozens of other journalists watched a live feed from a media room for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in the E. Barrett Prettyman Courthouse.

Presiding Judges Karen LeCraft Henderson, Florence Y. Pan and J. Michelle Childs fired question after question to Sauer for roughly 40 minutes as he argued that Trump’s acts leading up to and on Jan. 6 were “official” and that his eventual acquittal by the U.S. Senate protects him from double jeopardy.

Trump was impeached by the U.S. House for inciting an insurrection on Jan. 6.

The decision by the appeals judges — Henderson, appointed under President George H. W. Bush, and the others recent President Joe Biden appointees — is likely to land in the U.S. Supreme Court, where a ruling could have significant implications for presidential liability.

Under questioning, Sauer — who previously served as Missouri’s solicitor general under Attorneys General Josh Hawley and Eric Schmitt — told the appeals panel that “to authorize the prosecution of a president for his official acts would open a Pandora’s box (from) which this nation may never recover.”

The judges questioned whether a president’s actions while in office, no matter the legality, would be immune from criminal prosecution.

“You’re saying a president could sell pardons, could sell military secrets, could order SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival,” Pan said to Sauer.

Sauer conceded that selling military secrets “strikes me as something that might not be held to be an official act.”

Pan replied that Sauer’s concession undermines the Trump team’s argument that the government’s separation of powers guarantees the judiciary cannot hold the executive branch accountable.

“Given that you’re conceding that presidents can be criminally prosecuted under certain circumstances, doesn’t that narrow the issues before us to ‘Can a president be prosecuted without first being impeached and convicted?’” Pan said.

“Your separation of powers argument falls away, your policy arguments fall away if you concede that a president can be criminally prosecuted under some circumstances,” Pan said.

Henderson, questioning whether Trump’s actions can be defended as official acts, said, “I think it’s paradoxical to say that his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed allows him to violate (federal law).”

Government’s case

Arguing for the U.S. Department of Justice, Assistant Special Counsel James Pearce described the potential for an “awfully scary” and “frightening” future if presidents could be completely immune from criminal prosecution.

Pearce rebuffed the notion that “floodgates” would open for cases against presidents.

“This investigation doesn’t reflect that we are going to see a sea change of vindictive tit for tat prosecutions in the future. I think it reflects the fundamentally unprecedented nature of the criminal charges here,” Pearce said.

Trump could be seen shaking his head in disagreement at the comment, according to reporters in the room.

“If as I understood my friend on the other side is to say here, a president orders his SEAL team to assassinate a political rival and resigns, for example, before an impeachment, (it’s) not a criminal act. I think that’s an extraordinarily frightening future,” Pearce said during his roughly 20 minutes of questioning.

In his five-minute rebuttal, Sauer said a United States in which a president is “very, very, very seldom prosecuted because they have to be impeached and convicted first is the one we’ve lived under for 235 years. That’s not a frightening future, that’s our republic.”

Sauer said the criminal charges against Trump are now creating “a situation where we have the prosecution of the political opponent who’s leading in every poll in the presidential election next year and is being prosecuted by the administration that he’s seeking to replace.”

The three-judge panel concluded oral arguments after an hour and 15 minutes and did not indicate when judges would release a decision.

Trump calls for immunity, warns of ‘bedlam‘

In brief remarks following the hearing at the Waldorf Astoria hotel in Washington, which was a Trump-branded property until his business sold the lease in 2022, Trump said presidents should have legal immunity, proclaimed his innocence and hinted his supporters would create more unrest if he were prosecuted.

Biden was using federal prosecutions to damage his chief rival politically, Trump said.

“This is the way they’re going to try to win,” he said. “And that’s not the way it goes. There’ll be bedlam in the country. It’s a very bad thing, it’s a very bad precedent. As we’ve said, it’s the opening of a Pandora’s box. It’s a very sad thing that’s happened with this whole situation.

“When they talk about threat to democracy, that’s your real threat to democracy and I feel that as a president, you have to have immunity,” Trump added.

The remarks drew on a strategy the Trump campaign has employed for months to use the former president’s myriad legal troubles to boost his electoral standing by framing him as a victim of political persecution.

Trump suggested that he was being prosecuted for official acts related to curbing voter fraud and repeated debunked claims that the 2020 election was decided by fraudulent votes.

“I did nothing wrong, absolutely nothing wrong,” he added. “I’m working for the country.”

Trump spoke for just more than seven minutes and did not take questions.

Trump indictment

U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan in December denied Trump’s motion to dismiss his case based on presidential immunity.

U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith asked the Supreme Court to immediately take the case, bypassing the appeals level, but the justices declined.

A federal grand jury indicted Trump in August for interfering in election results following the November 2020 presidential contest.

The indictment accuses Trump of conspiring with attorneys, a U.S. Department of Justice official and a political consultant, all unnamed, to organize fake electors for Trump from seven key states that Biden in fact won. Those states included Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The indictment also outlined Trump’s pressure campaign on former Vice President Mike Pence to reject electors from those states during his ceremonial role of certifying the election results on Jan. 6, 2021.

Leading up to that date, the indictment recounts, Trump knowingly fed a stream of lies to his supporters that he won the election, igniting a rally during which he spoke on Jan. 6, 2021 and culminating in a violent attack on the U.S. Capitol. The official four charges against Trump include conspiracy to defraud the United States; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; obstruction of, and attempt to obstruct, an official proceeding; and conspiracy against rights.

Protesters enter the Senate Chamber on Jan. 6, 2021 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The union representing U.S. Capitol Police is warning that the federal law enforcement agency doesn’t have enough manpower to address threats to members of Congress and is criticizing the Architect of the Capitol for not implementing some of the changes proposed following the Jan. 6, 2021 attack.

“We’ve never seen a threat environment like this,” union Chairman Gus Papathanasiou said in a written statement. “Given the profound divisions in this country and this year’s elections, people ask me if I’m concerned and I tell them I am worried — very worried.”

“There may be another contested election and we still haven’t addressed the manpower and security vulnerabilities that have been identified,” he added.

The two most significant issues facing Capitol security are that USCP leaders aren’t close to hiring all the officers they are authorized to and the “failure” of the Architect of the Capitol to implement certain changes to the buildings and surrounding campus, he wrote.

As the number of threats against lawmakers and their staff continues to increase each year, Papathanasiou said the USCP needs to hire more people to account for the number of officers who have left or are eligible for retirement.

“Putting aside the need to increase hiring, we urgently need to address the pending loss of officers who are due for retirement — over 500 officers are eligible to retire at any time,” Papathanasiou said.

“Many of the younger officers who were hired post-January 6th have resigned due to the conditions and hours we’re asked to work,” he said. “We lack the manpower to fill mission requirements, so officers are forced to work enormous amounts of overtime.”

As a result, USCP officers often work six days a week and double shifts, he said.

A USCP spokesperson said in a written statement that the agency has “more sworn employees than at any other point in this Department’s history — not to mention all of the new civilian positions to better support them.”

“Still, we agree that we all have to continue that progress as our mission to protect the Members of Congress during a heightened threat environment continues to expand,” the USCP spokesperson said. “Luckily, our recruiting team is working around the clock to bring us nearly 1,000 officer applications a month. The toughest task for us is to find the right women and men out of those applicants to join our growing Department.”

The USCP is authorized to hire 2,126 officers and currently has more than 2,000, according to the spokesperson. The department had about 1,800 on Jan. 6, 2021.

Police funding

Congress is currently debating how much funding to allocate for USCP as part of the annual government funding process that was supposed to wrap up Oct. 1.

House Republicans’ bill proposed $780.9 million for USCP during the current fiscal year, a $46.3 million increase compared to current funding levels. That total includes $588.1 million for salaries and benefits, a boost of $46.3 million.

The report that accompanied the House bill noted “that, while the Department has aggressively sought qualified civilian applicants, it has had difficulty finding candidates that meet the Department’s rigorous standards.”

“The Department’s projections for fiscal year 2023 civilian hiring are below the authorized and appropriated levels and the Committee believes it will be difficult to hire the requested civilians for fiscal year 2024,” the House report states. “While the authorized number of civilians is supported, the Committee’s recommendation includes a reduction to the account due to historical under execution for civilian personnel.”

The Senate spending bill, which garnered bipartisan support, proposed $792 million for USCP, nearly $58 million more than its current budget. Almost $589 million would go toward salaries, benefits and overtime.

The Senate panel’s report said that lawmakers recognized “the expanding mission requirements for the United States Capitol Police in the area of Member protection.”

The report also calls on USCP to submit a report “that outlines the on-board strength of the USCP broken down by officials, officers, sworn recruits and civilians” as well as a  “multi-year strategy to remediate staffing shortages and incentivize sworn hiring and retention in future fiscal years.”

“The Committee expects this report to be thorough and timely from the Department,” the report says. “The USCP shall provide quarterly updates to the Committee thereafter on its staffing efforts.”

The House and Senate are supposed to pass a final version of that Legislative Branch funding bill before the Feb. 2 deadline.

The Architect of the Capitol didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft speaks to reporters Dec. 20 about the Colorado Supreme Court's decision to bar former president Donald Trump from the Colorado ballot (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).

Jefferson City police are investigating a false emergency call that on Sunday evening sent more than half a dozen armed officers to the home of Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft.

Ashcroft said in an interview with The Independent that shortly after 9 p.m. he received a call from police saying they were at his home and instructing him to come outside. His children were writing Christmas thank you notes and watching football, he said, while he was in his basement preparing to exercise.

“I ended up having my wife take the kids upstairs to the back bedroom,” Ashcroft said. “I ended up walking out of my house with nothing in my hands, my hands way up, very slowly, to meet several police officers that were well armed because they received a report that at this address the husband had shot and killed his wife and had at least several other shots fired if not several other people shot.”

Ashcroft said officers told him the report was anonymous. 

Lt. David Williams, a spokesman for the Jefferson City Police Department, told The Independent he had very little information he could share. He declined to say whether police had identified the source of the call, or whether it came from within the state.