Minnesota
Man is free after 16 years in prison for murder that prosecutors say he didn’t commit
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A Minnesota man was released from prison after serving 16 years for a murder he did not commit, a local prosecutor announced on Tuesday.
Jurors in 2009 found Edgar Barrientos-Quintana guilty of killing 18-year-old Jesse Mickelson in a drive-by shooting. He was sentenced to life in prison without parole. But after a three-year investigation, Attorney General Keith
Ellison’s Conviction Review Unit in August released a damning report of Minneapolis police’s original investigation that also cited evidence supporting Barrientos-Quintana’s alibi.
A judge approved Barrientos-Quintana’s release last week.
“Nothing can give Mr. Barrientos-Quintana back those 16 years, and for that, we are so sorry,” Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said in a statement on Tuesday. “Our hearts are also with the family of Jesse Mickelson over their irreparable loss. When the criminal legal system does not function ethically, it causes significant harm.”
In a Wednesday ruling vacating Barrientos-Quintana’s convictions and ordering his release, state court Judge John McBride found that Barrientos-Quintana did not receive a fair trial.
Barrientos-Quintana’s attorney failed to effectively represent him and prosecutors didn’t disclose favorable evidence, Moriarty said. Investigators also used coercive lineup tactics and interrogation tactics, resulting in unreliable eyewitness identifications, she added.
Security footage captured Barrientos-Quintana at a grocery story shortly before the shooting, and the attorney general’s office pointed to phone records not presented at trial that placed him at his girlfriend’s suburban apartment shortly after the shooting. The Conviction Review Unit determined that he could not have traveled to and from the crime scene in that time.
The reviewers also cast blame on police, who showed an old photo of Barrientos-Quintana with a shaved head to eyewitnesses who had described the suspect as being bald. Security footage showed Barrientos-Quintana had short, dark hair at the time of the shooting.
Barrientos-Quintana last month asked McBride to vacate his conviction based on Ellison’s report. In September, Moriarty revealed that Mickelson’s sisters believed Barrientos-Quintana to be innocent and supported his release.
New York
DOJ sues to block UnitedHealth Group’s $3.3 billion purchase of Amedisys
NEW YORK (AP) — The Justice Department is suing to block UnitedHealth Group’s $3.3 billion purchase of Amedisys, citing concerns the combination would hinder access to home health and hospice services in the U.S.
The antitrust complaint, filed in Maryland by the Justice Department and four states’ attorneys general Tuesday, argues that a potential merger is illegal because the two companies are “such large competitors” already — and the deal would give UnitedHealth too much control in many local markets.
That would mean less choice for patients looking for affordable care, the suit alleges, as well as fewer employment options for nurses seeking competitive pay and benefits.
“American healthcare is unwell,” Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter of the Justice Department’s antitrust division, said in a prepared statement. “Unless this $3.3 billion transaction is stopped, UnitedHealth Group will further extend its grip to home health and hospice care, threatening seniors, their families and nurses.”
Tuesday’s lawsuit follows UnitedHealth’s acquisition of LHC Group Inc., another home health and hospice provider. Since that transaction’s completion last year, the Justice Department said, UnitedHealth and Amedisys have emerged as two of the largest providers of home health and hospice care in the country.
The complaint alleges that UnitedHealth’s plan to acquire Amedisys is the result of “an intentional, sustained strategy of acquiring, rather than beating, competition.” After completing the LHC acquisition, the suit says UnitedHealth prevented Amedisys’ 2023 plans to merge with infusion provider OptionCare by paying a “breakup fee” — and then separately made its own acquisition offer, which Amedisys eventually accepted.
UnitedHealth is seeking to add Amedisys to Optum, its subsidiary that provides care as well as pharmacy and technology services. In a response Tuesday to the antitrust suit, Optum said the transaction “would be pro-competitive and further innovation.” It said it plans to “vigorously defend (itself) against the DOJ’s overreaching interpretation of the antitrust laws.”
Amedisys added that it also remains committed to the deal, which it believes “will create more opportunities to deliver quality, compassionate and value-based care to patients and their families.”
In details about the deal published on Optum’s website, the company maintained Optum and Amedisys “would operate just a fraction” of all home health and hospice care markets nationwide when combined. Optum also noted plans to divest some of its care centers to home health provider VitalCaring upon the deal’s completion. It said the divestments would aid competition but the Justice Department said that the proposal is inadequate.
Beyond its Optum unit, UnitedHealth Group also runs one of the nation’s largest health insurers, UnitedHealthcare. The Minnesota-based healthcare giant reported third-quarter net income of $6.06 billion on revenue of $100.82 billion.
Louisiana-based Amedisys reported third-quarter earnings of $16.9 million and a revenue of $587.7 million for the period.
Tuesday’s lawsuit arrives in the final months of the Biden administration, which has been particularly aggressive in antitrust enforcement. In recent years, the Justice Department has also targeted companies accused of engaging in illegal monopolies and driving up prices across industries like entertainment, travel and tech.
The four states’ attorneys general joining Tuesday’s suit against UnitedHealth and Amedisys are from Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey and New York.
New York
Judge sets April trial date for Sarah Palin’s libel claim against The New York Times
NEW YORK (AP) — A federal judge set an April retrial date on Tuesday for Sarah Palin’s libel case against The New York Times, even as lawyers on both sides for the first time said they hope to engage in talks to settle the case.
Judge Jed S. Rakoff said during a telephone conference that the trial can begin April 14 if a deal can’t be made before then.
The lawsuit by the onetime Republican vice presidential candidate and ex-governor of Alaska stemmed from a 2017 Times’ editorial. Rakoff had dismissed the case in February 2022 as a jury was deliberating, but the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan restored her claim in August.
David L. Axelrod, a lawyer for the Times, told Rakoff that lawyers had spoken about exploring how to resolve the case, particularly since it has become harder to locate witnesses because so much time has passed.
“It may be that we don’t need a trial at all,” he said.
Kenneth G. Turkel, a lawyer for Palin, agreed, noting that the two sides had never tried mediation.
He said lawyers wanted “to give it a shot.”
Rakoff seemed eager for a settlement.
“I’m all for that if you’re seriously interested in settling. You can settle it in a matter of days,” the judge said, adding that he could probably line up a magistrate judge within a day to meet with them and aid settlement talks.
Axelrod said the lawyers were interested in getting a third party to mediate. Turkel said they wanted “some type of discussion; we’ve had none.”
Palin sued the newspaper after an editorial falsely linked her campaign rhetoric to a mass shooting. Palin said it damaged her reputation and career.
The Times acknowledged its editorial was inaccurate but said it quickly corrected errors it described as an “honest mistake.” It also said there was no intent to harm Palin.
After Rakoff dismissed the case, he let the jurors finish deliberating and announce their verdict, which went against Palin.
In reversing Rakoff’s ruling and opening the way for a new trial, the 2nd Circuit concluded that Rakoff made credibility determinations, weighed evidence, and ignored facts or inferences that a reasonable juror could plausibly find supported Palin’s case.
The appeals court also noted that Rakoff’s mid-deliberations ruling might have reached jurors through alerts delivered to cellphones and thus could “impugn the reliability of that verdict.”
New Hampshire
Judge moves to slash $38 million verdict in youth center abuse case
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — The judge who oversaw a landmark civil trial over abuse at New Hampshire’s youth detention center has issued a preliminary order slashing the $38 million verdict against the state to $475,000. Rockingham County Superior Court Judge Andrew Schulman previously said reducing the amount awarded to plaintiff David Meehan by nearly 99% would be an “unconscionable miscarriage of justice,” He reiterated that belief in a Nov. 4 order, but “reluctantly” granted the state’s request to the cap the award and said he would enter a final judgement to that effect on Friday barring any last-minute requests from attorneys.
Meehan’s allegations of horrific sexual and physical abuse at the Youth Development Center in 1990s led to a broad criminal investigation resulting in multiple arrests. His civil lawsuit seeking to hold the state accountable was the first of more than 1,100 to go to trial. Although jurors sided with him in May after a monthlong trial, confusion arose over how much money they could award in damages.
The dispute involves part of the verdict form that asked jurors “How many incidents does the jury unanimously find the plaintiff has proven by a preponderance of the evidence?” Jurors were not informed that state law caps claims against the state at $475,000 per “incident.”
Some jurors later said they wrote “one” on the verdict form to reflect that they believed Meehan suffered a single case of post-traumatic stress disorder resulting from more than 100 episodes of physical, sexual and emotional abuse. The state has interpreted the verdict to mean that jurors found it liable for only one “incident” of abuse at the Manchester facility, now called the Sununu Youth Services Center.
The judge has denied Meehan’s motions for a new trial focused only on determining the number of incidents or to set aside just the portion of the verdict in which jurors wrote one incident. He said an entirely new trial remains an option, but Meehan’s attorneys have not requested one.
“This is one more skirmish in a long war for David Meehan and all the victims of state child abuse,” attorneys Rus Rilee and David Vicinanzo said in a statement Tuesday. “This stain on the reputation of New Hampshire will remain until the state resolves these case fairly and apologizes.”
The pair said they have new motions to file this week and more trials coming next year.
Assistant Attorney General Brandon Chase, representing the state, declined to comment on the rulings other than to answer a procedural question.
Meehan, 42, went to police in 2017 and sued the state three years later. Since then, 11 former state workers have been arrested, though one has since died and charges against another were dropped after the man, now in his early 80s, was found incompetent to stand trial.
The only criminal case to go to trial so far ended in a mistrial in September after jurors deadlocked on whether the defendant, Victor Malavet, raped a girl at a separate state-run facility in Concord.
Bradley Asbury, who has pleaded not guilty to holding down a teenage boy while other staffers sexually assaulted him in Manchester, goes on trial next week.
Man is free after 16 years in prison for murder that prosecutors say he didn’t commit
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A Minnesota man was released from prison after serving 16 years for a murder he did not commit, a local prosecutor announced on Tuesday.
Jurors in 2009 found Edgar Barrientos-Quintana guilty of killing 18-year-old Jesse Mickelson in a drive-by shooting. He was sentenced to life in prison without parole. But after a three-year investigation, Attorney General Keith
Ellison’s Conviction Review Unit in August released a damning report of Minneapolis police’s original investigation that also cited evidence supporting Barrientos-Quintana’s alibi.
A judge approved Barrientos-Quintana’s release last week.
“Nothing can give Mr. Barrientos-Quintana back those 16 years, and for that, we are so sorry,” Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said in a statement on Tuesday. “Our hearts are also with the family of Jesse Mickelson over their irreparable loss. When the criminal legal system does not function ethically, it causes significant harm.”
In a Wednesday ruling vacating Barrientos-Quintana’s convictions and ordering his release, state court Judge John McBride found that Barrientos-Quintana did not receive a fair trial.
Barrientos-Quintana’s attorney failed to effectively represent him and prosecutors didn’t disclose favorable evidence, Moriarty said. Investigators also used coercive lineup tactics and interrogation tactics, resulting in unreliable eyewitness identifications, she added.
Security footage captured Barrientos-Quintana at a grocery story shortly before the shooting, and the attorney general’s office pointed to phone records not presented at trial that placed him at his girlfriend’s suburban apartment shortly after the shooting. The Conviction Review Unit determined that he could not have traveled to and from the crime scene in that time.
The reviewers also cast blame on police, who showed an old photo of Barrientos-Quintana with a shaved head to eyewitnesses who had described the suspect as being bald. Security footage showed Barrientos-Quintana had short, dark hair at the time of the shooting.
Barrientos-Quintana last month asked McBride to vacate his conviction based on Ellison’s report. In September, Moriarty revealed that Mickelson’s sisters believed Barrientos-Quintana to be innocent and supported his release.
New York
DOJ sues to block UnitedHealth Group’s $3.3 billion purchase of Amedisys
NEW YORK (AP) — The Justice Department is suing to block UnitedHealth Group’s $3.3 billion purchase of Amedisys, citing concerns the combination would hinder access to home health and hospice services in the U.S.
The antitrust complaint, filed in Maryland by the Justice Department and four states’ attorneys general Tuesday, argues that a potential merger is illegal because the two companies are “such large competitors” already — and the deal would give UnitedHealth too much control in many local markets.
That would mean less choice for patients looking for affordable care, the suit alleges, as well as fewer employment options for nurses seeking competitive pay and benefits.
“American healthcare is unwell,” Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter of the Justice Department’s antitrust division, said in a prepared statement. “Unless this $3.3 billion transaction is stopped, UnitedHealth Group will further extend its grip to home health and hospice care, threatening seniors, their families and nurses.”
Tuesday’s lawsuit follows UnitedHealth’s acquisition of LHC Group Inc., another home health and hospice provider. Since that transaction’s completion last year, the Justice Department said, UnitedHealth and Amedisys have emerged as two of the largest providers of home health and hospice care in the country.
The complaint alleges that UnitedHealth’s plan to acquire Amedisys is the result of “an intentional, sustained strategy of acquiring, rather than beating, competition.” After completing the LHC acquisition, the suit says UnitedHealth prevented Amedisys’ 2023 plans to merge with infusion provider OptionCare by paying a “breakup fee” — and then separately made its own acquisition offer, which Amedisys eventually accepted.
UnitedHealth is seeking to add Amedisys to Optum, its subsidiary that provides care as well as pharmacy and technology services. In a response Tuesday to the antitrust suit, Optum said the transaction “would be pro-competitive and further innovation.” It said it plans to “vigorously defend (itself) against the DOJ’s overreaching interpretation of the antitrust laws.”
Amedisys added that it also remains committed to the deal, which it believes “will create more opportunities to deliver quality, compassionate and value-based care to patients and their families.”
In details about the deal published on Optum’s website, the company maintained Optum and Amedisys “would operate just a fraction” of all home health and hospice care markets nationwide when combined. Optum also noted plans to divest some of its care centers to home health provider VitalCaring upon the deal’s completion. It said the divestments would aid competition but the Justice Department said that the proposal is inadequate.
Beyond its Optum unit, UnitedHealth Group also runs one of the nation’s largest health insurers, UnitedHealthcare. The Minnesota-based healthcare giant reported third-quarter net income of $6.06 billion on revenue of $100.82 billion.
Louisiana-based Amedisys reported third-quarter earnings of $16.9 million and a revenue of $587.7 million for the period.
Tuesday’s lawsuit arrives in the final months of the Biden administration, which has been particularly aggressive in antitrust enforcement. In recent years, the Justice Department has also targeted companies accused of engaging in illegal monopolies and driving up prices across industries like entertainment, travel and tech.
The four states’ attorneys general joining Tuesday’s suit against UnitedHealth and Amedisys are from Maryland, Illinois, New Jersey and New York.
New York
Judge sets April trial date for Sarah Palin’s libel claim against The New York Times
NEW YORK (AP) — A federal judge set an April retrial date on Tuesday for Sarah Palin’s libel case against The New York Times, even as lawyers on both sides for the first time said they hope to engage in talks to settle the case.
Judge Jed S. Rakoff said during a telephone conference that the trial can begin April 14 if a deal can’t be made before then.
The lawsuit by the onetime Republican vice presidential candidate and ex-governor of Alaska stemmed from a 2017 Times’ editorial. Rakoff had dismissed the case in February 2022 as a jury was deliberating, but the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan restored her claim in August.
David L. Axelrod, a lawyer for the Times, told Rakoff that lawyers had spoken about exploring how to resolve the case, particularly since it has become harder to locate witnesses because so much time has passed.
“It may be that we don’t need a trial at all,” he said.
Kenneth G. Turkel, a lawyer for Palin, agreed, noting that the two sides had never tried mediation.
He said lawyers wanted “to give it a shot.”
Rakoff seemed eager for a settlement.
“I’m all for that if you’re seriously interested in settling. You can settle it in a matter of days,” the judge said, adding that he could probably line up a magistrate judge within a day to meet with them and aid settlement talks.
Axelrod said the lawyers were interested in getting a third party to mediate. Turkel said they wanted “some type of discussion; we’ve had none.”
Palin sued the newspaper after an editorial falsely linked her campaign rhetoric to a mass shooting. Palin said it damaged her reputation and career.
The Times acknowledged its editorial was inaccurate but said it quickly corrected errors it described as an “honest mistake.” It also said there was no intent to harm Palin.
After Rakoff dismissed the case, he let the jurors finish deliberating and announce their verdict, which went against Palin.
In reversing Rakoff’s ruling and opening the way for a new trial, the 2nd Circuit concluded that Rakoff made credibility determinations, weighed evidence, and ignored facts or inferences that a reasonable juror could plausibly find supported Palin’s case.
The appeals court also noted that Rakoff’s mid-deliberations ruling might have reached jurors through alerts delivered to cellphones and thus could “impugn the reliability of that verdict.”
New Hampshire
Judge moves to slash $38 million verdict in youth center abuse case
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — The judge who oversaw a landmark civil trial over abuse at New Hampshire’s youth detention center has issued a preliminary order slashing the $38 million verdict against the state to $475,000. Rockingham County Superior Court Judge Andrew Schulman previously said reducing the amount awarded to plaintiff David Meehan by nearly 99% would be an “unconscionable miscarriage of justice,” He reiterated that belief in a Nov. 4 order, but “reluctantly” granted the state’s request to the cap the award and said he would enter a final judgement to that effect on Friday barring any last-minute requests from attorneys.
Meehan’s allegations of horrific sexual and physical abuse at the Youth Development Center in 1990s led to a broad criminal investigation resulting in multiple arrests. His civil lawsuit seeking to hold the state accountable was the first of more than 1,100 to go to trial. Although jurors sided with him in May after a monthlong trial, confusion arose over how much money they could award in damages.
The dispute involves part of the verdict form that asked jurors “How many incidents does the jury unanimously find the plaintiff has proven by a preponderance of the evidence?” Jurors were not informed that state law caps claims against the state at $475,000 per “incident.”
Some jurors later said they wrote “one” on the verdict form to reflect that they believed Meehan suffered a single case of post-traumatic stress disorder resulting from more than 100 episodes of physical, sexual and emotional abuse. The state has interpreted the verdict to mean that jurors found it liable for only one “incident” of abuse at the Manchester facility, now called the Sununu Youth Services Center.
The judge has denied Meehan’s motions for a new trial focused only on determining the number of incidents or to set aside just the portion of the verdict in which jurors wrote one incident. He said an entirely new trial remains an option, but Meehan’s attorneys have not requested one.
“This is one more skirmish in a long war for David Meehan and all the victims of state child abuse,” attorneys Rus Rilee and David Vicinanzo said in a statement Tuesday. “This stain on the reputation of New Hampshire will remain until the state resolves these case fairly and apologizes.”
The pair said they have new motions to file this week and more trials coming next year.
Assistant Attorney General Brandon Chase, representing the state, declined to comment on the rulings other than to answer a procedural question.
Meehan, 42, went to police in 2017 and sued the state three years later. Since then, 11 former state workers have been arrested, though one has since died and charges against another were dropped after the man, now in his early 80s, was found incompetent to stand trial.
The only criminal case to go to trial so far ended in a mistrial in September after jurors deadlocked on whether the defendant, Victor Malavet, raped a girl at a separate state-run facility in Concord.
Bradley Asbury, who has pleaded not guilty to holding down a teenage boy while other staffers sexually assaulted him in Manchester, goes on trial next week.
