|
|
|
Pakistan court adjourns case of British woman's murder
Headline Legal News |
2016/09/19 20:48
|
A Pakistani court on Saturday adjourned the case of a British-Pakistani woman's murder until Sept. 23 to give police more time to finalize charges against her father and ex-husband, who are accused of slaying her in the name of honor, police and lawyers said.
Police brought both men before the court in Jhelum as they covered their faces. They avoided most questions from journalists. However, when pressed, the woman's father, Mohammad Shahid, told reporters that the accusations are "all lies."
"The police arrested me, police charged me, you go to police station and check my report, check my statement," Shahid said.
The death of 28-year-old Samia Shahid has shocked the nation as the latest alleged case of so-called "honor killings" in Pakistan. The Bradford native's death while visiting Pakistan in July was originally declared to be from natural causes.
But Shahid's second husband, Mukhtar Kazim, publicly accused her family of killing her. The case was reopened and a police probe quickly concluded that Shahid's death was a "premeditated, cold-blooded murder," according to a police statement.
Police allege that Mohammed Shahid stood guard while his daughter's ex-husband, Mohammed Shakeel, raped her. The men then both strangled her, according to police.
Defense lawyer Mohammed Arif dismissed the police allegations as a baseless, saying his clients have been wrongly accused. He said he will appeal another court's recent rejection of bail for Mohammed Shahid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court considers Kansas rule that voters prove citizenship
Headline Legal News |
2016/08/24 09:59
|
A federal appeals court will decide whether Kansas has the right to ask people who register to vote when they get their driver's licenses for proof that they're citizens, a decision which could affect whether thousands have their ballots counted in November's election.
Three judges from the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in the case Tuesday from Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach and the American Civil Liberties Union but didn't indicate how soon they could rule.
Kansas wants the court to overturn a ruling by a federal judge in May that temporarily blocked the state from disenfranchising people who registered at motor vehicle offices but didn't provide documents such as birth certificates or naturalization papers. That was about 18,000 people at the time. If the order is allowed to stand, the state says up to an estimated 50,000 people who haven't proven they're citizens could have their votes counted in the fall.
Since 1993, states have had to allow people to register to vote when they apply for or renew their driver's licenses. The so-called motor-voter law says that people can only be asked for "minimal information" when registering to vote, allowing them to simply affirm they are citizens.
The ACLU claims the law intended to increase registration doesn't allow states to ask applicants for extra documents. It also says that motor vehicle clerks don't tell people renewing existing licenses that they need to provide the documents, leaving them under the mistaken impression that their registration is complete when they leave the office.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court rejects request to postpone voter ID decision
Headline Legal News |
2016/08/07 18:23
|
An appeals court has quickly decided it won't delay enforcement of its ruling striking down North Carolina's photo identification requirement and other election restrictions, including reducing early in-person voting by seven days.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the stay Thursday, one day after state leaders' attorneys requested that last week's ruling be set aside as they prepare to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the case.
A 4th Circuit panel had determined a 2013 law Republicans approved amounted to intentional discrimination of black voters.
Thursday's order says the harm to disenfranchised voters outweighs granting a delay. Last week's injunction means no voter ID mandate and 17 days of early voting with same-day registration. The state has other options to seek a delay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Missouri Appeals Court to decide fight over frozen embryos
Headline Legal News |
2016/06/04 10:33
|
The Missouri Court of Appeals is being asked to decide whether a divorced St. Louis County couple's two frozen embryos are property or human beings with constitutional rights.
Jalesia McQueen, 44, is suing to be able to use the embryos, which have been stored for six years, to have more children. Her ex-husband, Justin Gadberry, 34, doesn't want to have any more children with McQueen and doesn't believe he should be required to reproduce.
The two signed an agreement in 2010 that would give McQueen the embryos if they divorced, but Gadberry sought to prevent that from happening when the pair did split. St. Louis County Family Court Commissioner Victoria McKee ruled in 2015 that the embryos were "marital property" and gave joint custody to the estranged couple, which required McQueen and Gadberry to agree on the embryos' future use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NY court: Case against ex-AIG execs can continue
Headline Legal News |
2016/06/02 10:32
|
New York's attorney general can continue his legal effort to bar two former American International Group Inc. executives from the securities industry and forfeit any improperly gained profits, the state's highest court ruled Thursday.
The Court of Appeals for the second time refused to dismiss the lawsuit originally filed in 2005 by then-Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, ruling it should go to trial.
The suit claims ex-AIG chief executive Maurice "Hank" Greenberg and ex-chief financial officer Howard Smith had engaged in fraudulent reinsurance transactions to conceal from investors a deteriorating financial condition.
AIG itself resolved state charges as part of a $1.64 billion agreement with regulators in 2006. The insurance giant was bailed out by the federal government in the 2008 financial crisis.
Greenberg and Smith settled related federal Securities and Exchange Commission complaints without admitting wrongdoing in 2009.
Their attorneys challenged the state lawsuit, arguing that New York's Martin Act against securities fraud authorizes neither a permanent industry ban nor disgorgement of profits, and that releases from other settlements barred further financial forfeit.
"As we have previously stated, in an appropriate case, disgorgement may be an available 'equitable remedy distinct from restitution' under the state's anti-fraud legislation," Judge Leslie Stein wrote. "Moreover, as with the attorney general's claim for an injunction, issues of fact exist which prevent us from concluding, as a matter of law that disgorgement is unwarranted."
The court rejected another dismissal motion two years ago, concluding there was sufficient fraud evidence for trial. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
