New York
Court papers show luxury real estate brothers hope to prove witnesses lie in sex trafficking case
NEW YORK (AP) — Defense lawyers for two luxury real estate brokers and their brother say the men hope to prove at trial that many of the witnesses who will testify against them are lying.
The lawyers made the claim in papers filed in Manhattan federal court, saying they plan to use photographs and text messages, in part, to prove witnesses are lying.
Judge Valerie E. Caproni, who will preside over the trial, conducted a hearing on Thursday to decide some ground rules in advance of the trial, which is scheduled to begin on Jan. 5. She said she might delay the trial until May to give herself adequate time to decide legal issues.
Prosecutors said they might need as long as six weeks to present their case, while defense lawyers said they could take up to a week.
The three brothers — Oren, Tal and Alon Alexander — remain held without bail. Prosecutors say over 60 people allege they were raped by at least one of the brothers. Lawyers for the men deny it.
Oren Alexander and Tal Alexander sold high-end properties in New York City, Miami and Los Angeles before the charges were filed alleging that they used their wealth and influence to attack women from 2002 to 2021.
In court papers filed Thursday, defense lawyers said that among witnesses they had identified, they’d been able to locate evidence “that undermines nearly every aspect of the alleged victims’ narratives.”
They said they believed “that many witnesses are going to testify untruthfully on direct examination — whether it be because of their own current situation, their motive to lie for monetary gain, or their situation at the time.”
The witnesses “do not want to admit to the world that they consensually engaged in sexual activity with any of the Alexander brothers,” the lawyers said.
The lawyers asked the judge to allow them to reveal some evidence that they plan to use on cross examination to prosecutors only at the least minute.
“Defendants have a right to confront witnesses with the element of surprise,” the lawyers wrote.
The judge did not immediately rule on the request.
Wisconsin
Immigrant who a judge allegedly helped avoid arrest gets time served, and will soon be deported
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — An immigrant who was arrested after a judge in Wisconsin allegedly helped him dodge federal agents has been sentenced to time served for illegally reentering the United States and will soon be deported, according to his attorney.
Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, 31, has spent nearly seven months in jail since he was arrested outside the Milwaukee County Courthouse. He pleaded guilty in September to illegally reentering the country after he reached a deal with prosecutors to not fight deportation. Prosecutors in exchange agreed to recommend a time-served sentence.
U.S. District Judge Pamela Pepper handed down the sentence during a hearing Wednesday in Milwaukee, warning him that he would face harsher penalties if he ever returns.
“I very much hope you can find a way to make a living back home rather than coming back here,” she told Flores-Ruiz.
Martin Pruhs, Flores-Ruiz’s attorney, said in an email to The Associated Press on Thursday that Flores-Ruiz is currently in custody at the Dodge County Jail in Juneau, Wisconsin, awaiting deportation in “the near future.” The attorney declined further comment.
Speaking through a translator during the sentencing hearing, Flores-Ruiz apologized for entering the United States, said he was grateful that he had a chance to work in the country and promised never to return.
Flores-Ruiz is at the center of allegations that could send Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan to prison. Prosecutors allege Dugan helped Flores-Ruiz evade immigration agents looking to apprehend him as he appeared for a hearing on unrelated state charges in her courtroom in April.
Dugan’s ensuing indictment on obstruction and concealment charges has intensified the clash between President Donald Trump and his administration and local authorities over the Republican’s sweeping immigration crackdown. Democrats have accused the Trump administration of trying to make an example of Dugan to blunt judicial opposition to the crackdown.
Flores-Ruiz grew up near Michoacan, Mexico, and worked as a fisherman and frog catcher with his father, according to a pre-sentencing memo. Frog legs are a delicacy in the region, according to the memo.
He decided to make a better life for himself and crossed into the U.S. from Nogales, Mexico, in 2013 at age 18. The group of migrants he had joined was apprehended and deported immediately after crossing the border.
A few days later, he reentered the country and got lost in the Arizona desert for a month before finding a ride to Milwaukee to join relatives there. He spent about 12 years working at a series of restaurants and food trucks.
State prosecutors charged him in March with three counts of misdemeanor battery after he allegedly got into a fight with his roommate. U.S. immigration agents learned he was in the country illegally after the Milwaukee County Jail submitted his fingerprints to federal databases, according to court documents.
Agents traveled to the county courthouse on April 18, planning to arrest Flores-Ruiz when he appeared for a hearing. Dugan was the presiding judge in that case and, according to an FBI affidavit, learned that agents were in the building looking for Flores-Ruiz and showed him out of her courtroom through a door typically used only by deputies, jurors, court staff and in-custody defendants.
He made his way outside but agents captured him following a foot chase.
She was arrested at the courthouse a week later and a federal grand jury indicted her in May on charges of obstruction and concealing an individual to prevent arrest. She’s set to stand trial beginning Dec. 15.
Dugan has denied any wrong-doing. Her attorneys have argued that she has the authority conduct her courtroom as she sees fit.
State prosecutors dropped two of the three battery charges against Flores-Ruiz in October after he agreed to plead no contest to the third. He was sentenced to time served in that case as well.
Ohio
Appeals court sides with parent group in fight over school district’s pronoun policy
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — A divided federal appeals court in Ohio ruled against the state’s fourth largest school district on Thursday in a case that pitted its gender pronoun policies against the rights of students who believe there are only two genders.
The full Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the suburban Olentangy Local School District cannot prohibit students from using gender-related language deemed offensive by others, siding with Parents Defending Education, which had argued the policies were unconstitutional.
The national membership organization first filed suit against Olentangy in 2023, saying the district’s policies requiring the use of peers’ “preferred pronouns” were a violation of students’ rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The district argued the rules were aimed to prevent bullying and discrimination.
The lawsuit had captured broad national attention, with a number of conservative policy groups, the American Civil Liberties Union and Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Hindu rights organizations lining up against the policy and leading LGBTQ+ rights and schools groups lining up generally in defense of it.
The court found the district “has fallen far short” of meeting the standard that allowing such speech would “materially and substantially disrupt” school activities or infringe the legal “rights of others” in the school community.
“Our society continues to debate whether biological pronouns are appropriate or offensive — just as it continues to debate many other issues surrounding transgender rights,” Circuit Judge Eric Murphy wrote for the majority. “The school district may not skew this debate by forcing one side to change the way it conveys its message or by compelling it to express a different view.”
Circuit Judge Jane Stranch retorted in a dissent written entirely without the use of gendered, third-person pronouns for individuals.
While “it may be a new phenomenon for many to use new pronouns or to avoid using pronouns, it is certainly possible,” Stranch wrote, adding that “social mores around pronouns have shifted over the course of American history, and these shifting mores have not suddenly rendered people unable to speak.”
It is not clear how far-reaching the impacts of the ruling might be. One Ohio teachers’ union had told the court that Olentangy’s policies are substantially similar to those used by districts around the state.
A three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit had found against the organization in July 2024, ruling that the school district had sufficiently shown that the speech it sought to prohibit would disrupt classroom instruction. That earlier decision also held that those policies did not compel students and families represented by the parents’ group to use any certain pronouns to address LGBTQ+ students nor suppress alternative viewpoints.
Thursday’s ruling reversed that decision and sent the case back to U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley in Columbus to issue a preliminary injunction against Olentangy enforcing the pronoun policies.
At issue in the case were overlapping district policies that prohibited the use of gender-related language that other students might deem insulting, dehumanizing, unwanted or offensive and call for the use of peers’ “preferred pronouns.”
The district’s electronic devices policy — which applies both on and off school time — prohibits transmitting “disruptive” material or material that could be seen as harassing or disparaging other students based on their gender identity or sexual orientation, among other categories.
A separate antidiscrimination policy prohibits students from saying or writing “discriminatory language” when they’re under the school’s authority. The policy bans derogatory comments, jokes or slurs based on a range of factors, including gender identity.
The district’s code of conduct echoes many of the same themes a third time.
Michigan
Man, 22, pleads guilty to sexual assault of minor
A 22-year-old man from Northville pleaded guilty to charges in connection with having sexual encounters with a 14-year-old girl in Roseville in 2023.
On Thursday, Nov. 6, 2025, Charles Laurence Willis pleaded guilty to two counts of Criminal Sexual Conduct – Third Degree (person Thirteen to Fifteen), a 15-year felony, before Judge Joseph Toia at the Macomb County Circuit Court in Mt. Clemens. He will be sentenced by Judge Toia on Monday, January 22, 2026. Pursuant to his plea, Willis is required to register as a Tier III Sex Offender, which is lifetime registration. He is also subject to registration under Wyatt’s Law, which is a database of individuals who are convicted of criminal offenses related to children. He must also submit to HIV testing and have no contact with the minor.
It is alleged that in 2023, Charles Laurence Willis began dating a 14-year-old Roseville teenager. Willis purported to be 16 years old to the victim and her mother. It was soon discovered that Willis was 21 years old at the time, and he allegedly had sexual relations with the 14-year-old victim several times.
After being arraigned on charges in the Macomb County case, Willis picked up new charges in Wayne County. The Macomb County Prosecutor’s Office filed and successfully argued an emergency motion to increase the 22-year-old man’s bond to keep him in custody.
Willis is scheduled for trial in the Wayne County Circuit Court on Monday, March 30, 2025, on charges related to the alleged sexual assault of another 14-year-old girl.
Court papers show luxury real estate brothers hope to prove witnesses lie in sex trafficking case
NEW YORK (AP) — Defense lawyers for two luxury real estate brokers and their brother say the men hope to prove at trial that many of the witnesses who will testify against them are lying.
The lawyers made the claim in papers filed in Manhattan federal court, saying they plan to use photographs and text messages, in part, to prove witnesses are lying.
Judge Valerie E. Caproni, who will preside over the trial, conducted a hearing on Thursday to decide some ground rules in advance of the trial, which is scheduled to begin on Jan. 5. She said she might delay the trial until May to give herself adequate time to decide legal issues.
Prosecutors said they might need as long as six weeks to present their case, while defense lawyers said they could take up to a week.
The three brothers — Oren, Tal and Alon Alexander — remain held without bail. Prosecutors say over 60 people allege they were raped by at least one of the brothers. Lawyers for the men deny it.
Oren Alexander and Tal Alexander sold high-end properties in New York City, Miami and Los Angeles before the charges were filed alleging that they used their wealth and influence to attack women from 2002 to 2021.
In court papers filed Thursday, defense lawyers said that among witnesses they had identified, they’d been able to locate evidence “that undermines nearly every aspect of the alleged victims’ narratives.”
They said they believed “that many witnesses are going to testify untruthfully on direct examination — whether it be because of their own current situation, their motive to lie for monetary gain, or their situation at the time.”
The witnesses “do not want to admit to the world that they consensually engaged in sexual activity with any of the Alexander brothers,” the lawyers said.
The lawyers asked the judge to allow them to reveal some evidence that they plan to use on cross examination to prosecutors only at the least minute.
“Defendants have a right to confront witnesses with the element of surprise,” the lawyers wrote.
The judge did not immediately rule on the request.
Wisconsin
Immigrant who a judge allegedly helped avoid arrest gets time served, and will soon be deported
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — An immigrant who was arrested after a judge in Wisconsin allegedly helped him dodge federal agents has been sentenced to time served for illegally reentering the United States and will soon be deported, according to his attorney.
Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, 31, has spent nearly seven months in jail since he was arrested outside the Milwaukee County Courthouse. He pleaded guilty in September to illegally reentering the country after he reached a deal with prosecutors to not fight deportation. Prosecutors in exchange agreed to recommend a time-served sentence.
U.S. District Judge Pamela Pepper handed down the sentence during a hearing Wednesday in Milwaukee, warning him that he would face harsher penalties if he ever returns.
“I very much hope you can find a way to make a living back home rather than coming back here,” she told Flores-Ruiz.
Martin Pruhs, Flores-Ruiz’s attorney, said in an email to The Associated Press on Thursday that Flores-Ruiz is currently in custody at the Dodge County Jail in Juneau, Wisconsin, awaiting deportation in “the near future.” The attorney declined further comment.
Speaking through a translator during the sentencing hearing, Flores-Ruiz apologized for entering the United States, said he was grateful that he had a chance to work in the country and promised never to return.
Flores-Ruiz is at the center of allegations that could send Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan to prison. Prosecutors allege Dugan helped Flores-Ruiz evade immigration agents looking to apprehend him as he appeared for a hearing on unrelated state charges in her courtroom in April.
Dugan’s ensuing indictment on obstruction and concealment charges has intensified the clash between President Donald Trump and his administration and local authorities over the Republican’s sweeping immigration crackdown. Democrats have accused the Trump administration of trying to make an example of Dugan to blunt judicial opposition to the crackdown.
Flores-Ruiz grew up near Michoacan, Mexico, and worked as a fisherman and frog catcher with his father, according to a pre-sentencing memo. Frog legs are a delicacy in the region, according to the memo.
He decided to make a better life for himself and crossed into the U.S. from Nogales, Mexico, in 2013 at age 18. The group of migrants he had joined was apprehended and deported immediately after crossing the border.
A few days later, he reentered the country and got lost in the Arizona desert for a month before finding a ride to Milwaukee to join relatives there. He spent about 12 years working at a series of restaurants and food trucks.
State prosecutors charged him in March with three counts of misdemeanor battery after he allegedly got into a fight with his roommate. U.S. immigration agents learned he was in the country illegally after the Milwaukee County Jail submitted his fingerprints to federal databases, according to court documents.
Agents traveled to the county courthouse on April 18, planning to arrest Flores-Ruiz when he appeared for a hearing. Dugan was the presiding judge in that case and, according to an FBI affidavit, learned that agents were in the building looking for Flores-Ruiz and showed him out of her courtroom through a door typically used only by deputies, jurors, court staff and in-custody defendants.
He made his way outside but agents captured him following a foot chase.
She was arrested at the courthouse a week later and a federal grand jury indicted her in May on charges of obstruction and concealing an individual to prevent arrest. She’s set to stand trial beginning Dec. 15.
Dugan has denied any wrong-doing. Her attorneys have argued that she has the authority conduct her courtroom as she sees fit.
State prosecutors dropped two of the three battery charges against Flores-Ruiz in October after he agreed to plead no contest to the third. He was sentenced to time served in that case as well.
Ohio
Appeals court sides with parent group in fight over school district’s pronoun policy
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — A divided federal appeals court in Ohio ruled against the state’s fourth largest school district on Thursday in a case that pitted its gender pronoun policies against the rights of students who believe there are only two genders.
The full Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the suburban Olentangy Local School District cannot prohibit students from using gender-related language deemed offensive by others, siding with Parents Defending Education, which had argued the policies were unconstitutional.
The national membership organization first filed suit against Olentangy in 2023, saying the district’s policies requiring the use of peers’ “preferred pronouns” were a violation of students’ rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The district argued the rules were aimed to prevent bullying and discrimination.
The lawsuit had captured broad national attention, with a number of conservative policy groups, the American Civil Liberties Union and Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Hindu rights organizations lining up against the policy and leading LGBTQ+ rights and schools groups lining up generally in defense of it.
The court found the district “has fallen far short” of meeting the standard that allowing such speech would “materially and substantially disrupt” school activities or infringe the legal “rights of others” in the school community.
“Our society continues to debate whether biological pronouns are appropriate or offensive — just as it continues to debate many other issues surrounding transgender rights,” Circuit Judge Eric Murphy wrote for the majority. “The school district may not skew this debate by forcing one side to change the way it conveys its message or by compelling it to express a different view.”
Circuit Judge Jane Stranch retorted in a dissent written entirely without the use of gendered, third-person pronouns for individuals.
While “it may be a new phenomenon for many to use new pronouns or to avoid using pronouns, it is certainly possible,” Stranch wrote, adding that “social mores around pronouns have shifted over the course of American history, and these shifting mores have not suddenly rendered people unable to speak.”
It is not clear how far-reaching the impacts of the ruling might be. One Ohio teachers’ union had told the court that Olentangy’s policies are substantially similar to those used by districts around the state.
A three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit had found against the organization in July 2024, ruling that the school district had sufficiently shown that the speech it sought to prohibit would disrupt classroom instruction. That earlier decision also held that those policies did not compel students and families represented by the parents’ group to use any certain pronouns to address LGBTQ+ students nor suppress alternative viewpoints.
Thursday’s ruling reversed that decision and sent the case back to U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley in Columbus to issue a preliminary injunction against Olentangy enforcing the pronoun policies.
At issue in the case were overlapping district policies that prohibited the use of gender-related language that other students might deem insulting, dehumanizing, unwanted or offensive and call for the use of peers’ “preferred pronouns.”
The district’s electronic devices policy — which applies both on and off school time — prohibits transmitting “disruptive” material or material that could be seen as harassing or disparaging other students based on their gender identity or sexual orientation, among other categories.
A separate antidiscrimination policy prohibits students from saying or writing “discriminatory language” when they’re under the school’s authority. The policy bans derogatory comments, jokes or slurs based on a range of factors, including gender identity.
The district’s code of conduct echoes many of the same themes a third time.
Michigan
Man, 22, pleads guilty to sexual assault of minor
A 22-year-old man from Northville pleaded guilty to charges in connection with having sexual encounters with a 14-year-old girl in Roseville in 2023.
On Thursday, Nov. 6, 2025, Charles Laurence Willis pleaded guilty to two counts of Criminal Sexual Conduct – Third Degree (person Thirteen to Fifteen), a 15-year felony, before Judge Joseph Toia at the Macomb County Circuit Court in Mt. Clemens. He will be sentenced by Judge Toia on Monday, January 22, 2026. Pursuant to his plea, Willis is required to register as a Tier III Sex Offender, which is lifetime registration. He is also subject to registration under Wyatt’s Law, which is a database of individuals who are convicted of criminal offenses related to children. He must also submit to HIV testing and have no contact with the minor.
It is alleged that in 2023, Charles Laurence Willis began dating a 14-year-old Roseville teenager. Willis purported to be 16 years old to the victim and her mother. It was soon discovered that Willis was 21 years old at the time, and he allegedly had sexual relations with the 14-year-old victim several times.
After being arraigned on charges in the Macomb County case, Willis picked up new charges in Wayne County. The Macomb County Prosecutor’s Office filed and successfully argued an emergency motion to increase the 22-year-old man’s bond to keep him in custody.
Willis is scheduled for trial in the Wayne County Circuit Court on Monday, March 30, 2025, on charges related to the alleged sexual assault of another 14-year-old girl.
