National Roundup

Colorado
Police investigate incidents involving justices after Trump removed from state’s ballot
DENVER (AP) — Police said Tuesday they are investigating incidents directed at Colorado Supreme Court justices and providing extra patrols around their homes in Denver following the court’s decision to remove former President Donald Trump from the state’s presidential primary ballot.

The Denver Police Department declined in an email to provide details about its investigations, citing safety and privacy considerations and because they are ongoing.

The department “is currently investigating incidents directed at Colorado Supreme Court justices and will continue working with our local, state and federal law enforcement partners to thoroughly investigate any reports of threats or harassment,” the email said.

Officers responded to the home of one justice on Thursday evening, but police said it appeared to be a “hoax report.” That case is also still being investigated police said.

The FBI said it is working with local law enforcement on the matter.

“We will vigorously pursue investigations of any threat or use of violence committed by someone who uses extremist views to justify their actions regardless of motivation,” a spokesperson for the Denver’s FBI office, Vikki Migoya, said in a statement.

In a 4-3 decision last week, Colorado’s highest court overturned a ruling from a district court judge who found that Trump incited an insurrection for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, but had said he could not be barred from the ballot because it
was unclear that U.S. Constitution’s insurrection clause was intended to cover the presidency.


The state’s highest court didn’t agree, siding with attorneys for six Colorado Republican and unaffiliated voters who argued that it was nonsensical to imagine that the framers of the amendment, fearful of former confederates returning to power, would bar them
from low-level offices but not the highest one in the land.

The court stayed its decision until Jan. 4, or until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the case. Colorado officials say the issue must be settled by Jan. 5, the deadline for the state to print its presidential primary ballots.


Alabama
Agency completes review of fatal police shooting
DECATUR, Ala. (AP) — The Alabama Law Enforcement Agency said Tuesday that it has completed an investigation into a fatal police shooting where a man was killed in his front yard during a dispute with a tow truck driver.

The state agency did not announce any findings but said its investigative file has been turned over to the Morgan County district attorney. A telephone message left with the district attorney’s office was not immediately returned.

Steve Perkins, 39, was shot and killed by police on Sept. 29 when Decatur police officers accompanied a tow truck driver, who told police he had been threatened by the homeowner when trying to repossess a vehicle, back to the home. The Alabama Law Enforcement Agency said in a September news release that Perkins was armed with a handgun equipped with a light and “brandished the weapon towards an officer with the Decatur Police Department, causing the officer to fire at Perkins.”

An attorney for the Perkins’ family said officers immediately opened fire on Perkins, who did not appear aware of their presence before he was shot. The family of Perkins, a Black man, issued a statement saying the truck payments were up to date, which is why he was disputing the attempt to tow it.

Video from a neighbor’s home surveillance camera published by WAFF-TV captured the shooting. An officer or officers appear to run out from beside the house. One is heard shouting, “Police, get on the ground,” and a large number of shots are immediately fired in rapid succession.

Perkins’ family has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the city and others. The city fired three police officers in response to the shooting. News outlets report that the officers are appealing their dismissal.

The fatal shooting has drawn regular protests in the north Alabama city. Protesters carried signs reading, “You could have knocked” and “We need answers.”

New York
Prosecutors oppose Sen. Bob Menendez’s effort to delay May bribery trial
NEW YORK (AP) — Federal prosecutors on Tuesday urged a judge to reject U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez’s request to delay his bribery trial scheduled for next spring by two months, until July.

Prosecutors argued against the postponement a week after defense lawyers offered multiple reasons why they say a trial of the Democrat and codefendants, including his wife, should be delayed.

The senator gave up his position as chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee after his September arrest.

Prosecutors said the original May 6 trial date was appropriate and drew no objections when it was announced even though circumstances were the same.

“The schedule was and remains reasonable, and in accord with the strong public interest in a speedy trial,” prosecutors wrote.


Defense lawyers cited over 6.7 million documents to be reviewed, an “unprecedented” foreign-agent charge and complex legal questions to be addressed as they asked for a delay of a trial now scheduled for May 6. They said a two-month adjournment would
still bring defendants to trial within 10 months of their arrests.

Four defendants, including Menendez, have pleaded not guilty to a bribery conspiracy charge that alleges that Menendez and his wife accepted bribes of cash, gold bars and a luxury car from three New Jersey businessmen who wanted the senator’s help and influence over foreign affairs.

The senator, his wife and a third defendant have also pleaded not guilty to a charge that they conspired to utilize the senator as an agent of the Egyptian government even though he was prohibited from doing so as a member of Congress.

In asking for a delay, defense lawyers wrote, “Given the complexity of this case and the seriousness of the charges at issue, the speed with which this case is proceeding is extraordinary.”

They said they plan to ask Judge Sidney H. Stein in Manhattan to dismiss the indictment on multiple grounds, including for constitutional and sufficiency reasons and because New York federal court is the wrong venue.

Prosecutors said in their letter to the judge that the voluminous amount of evidence turned over to the defense should not delay the trial because it was consistent with what the government promised at the first conference in October.
“In short, if there were a right to have multiple months to digest discovery prior to filing motions, as the defendants appear to suggest, practice in this district would look quite different. The current schedule set by the Court is expedited, but reasonable,”
prosecutors said.