Elon Musk’s company, X (formerly Twitter), has agreed in principle to a $500 million class-action settlement with thousands of former employees who claimed they were denied severance pay after Musk’s acquisition of the platform in 2022. The settlement, disclosed in a recent court filing, is still pending final approval from a federal appeals court.

Background of the Dispute

When Musk bought Twitter for approximately $44 billion in 2022, he swiftly eliminated more than half of its workforce—affecting nearly 6,000 employees—during a dramatic organizational overhaul. Former staffers Courtney McMillian and Ronald Cooper spearheaded this class-action lawsuit, alleging the company failed to honor a 2019 severance plan. Under that blueprint, most employees were entitled to at least two months of base pay plus one additional week for each full year of service, while senior employees were entitled to six months’ base pay.

However, plaintiffs contend that many laid-off workers received nothing or at best one month’s pay—far less than what the policy guaranteed.

Legal Proceedings and Settlement Steps

In July 2024, a federal judge in San Francisco dismissed the lawsuit under provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), ruling in Musk’s favor. McMillian and Cooper appealed the dismissal, moving the case to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The latest court filing reveals that both sides have reached an agreement in principle and have jointly asked that a hearing scheduled for September 17 be postponed while they iron out the final settlement details. The appeals court has granted the delay to allow time for that process.

What Remains Unclear

The settlement’s financial specifics, including the breakdown of payouts per employee, remain undisclosed. Should the district court approve the finalized agreement, the settlement is expected to resolve this lawsuit fully and halt the appeals process.

Notably, other lawsuits stemming from Musk’s Twitter takeover—such as one filed by former CEO Parag Agrawal and other executives over $128 million in alleged unpaid severance—are still pending.

Additionally, legal observers have noted parallels between Musk’s aggressive restructuring approach at Twitter and similar downsizing measures he later influenced within the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency.

Want deeper insights on high-profile lawsuits? Subscribe to JDJournal’s newsletter today.

The post Elon Musk’s X Corp. Reaches Tentative $500 Million Settlement Over Severance Lawsuit first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Identifying the Victim

While the court documents discreetly refer to the aggrieved party as a prominent electric vehicle manufacturer, additional details align unmistakably with Tesla. This identification was further confirmed by an informed source, underlining the gravity of the allegations against the accused for pilfering proprietary technology related to battery assembly lines.

The Accused and Their Actions

The narrative unfolds with the accused exploiting Tesla’s confidential battery production technology to kickstart their venture in China. Among the indicted is Klaus Pflugbeil, a Canadian national, apprehended in Nassau County, New York. His arrest followed an attempted transaction of the stolen technology to undercover operatives posing as businessmen from Long Island, as disclosed by the Justice Department.

Pflugbeil’s counterpart, Yilong Shao, a Chinese citizen, is currently evading capture.

Government’s Stance on Intellectual Property Theft

Matthew Olsen, the head of the DOJ’s national security division, condemned the unauthorized extraction of advanced trade secrets, emphasizing the repercussions on America’s technological forefront and its economic and national security interests. This case is part of broader efforts by a DOJ and Commerce Department initiative aimed at safeguarding critical US technology from foreign adversaries, further highlighted by the recent apprehension of a former engineer accused of stealing Google’s AI trade secrets.

Legal Proceedings and Implications

During his initial court appearance, Pflugbeil was ordered detained by US Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo, pending a follow-up hearing. The lack of a plea from Pflugbeil at this juncture adds to the case’s complexity. Representing the government in this legal battle was Assistant US Attorney Ellen Sise, who, alongside her team, refrained from commenting on the ongoing case.

The backdrop to Pflugbeil’s involvement includes his tenure as president of a Canadian battery manufacturer, subsequently acquired by the electric vehicle giant in question in October 2019, the same month Tesla acquired Hibar Systems, a specialist in high-speed EV battery production.

The Undercover Operation

The unfolding of this espionage saga saw undercover agents engaging with Mr. Shao at a Las Vegas trade show, laying the groundwork for the sting operation that culminated in Pflugbeil’s arrest in New York. This proactive approach by US law enforcement underscores the determination to protect domestic innovation and competitiveness on the global stage, as articulated by Breon Peace, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York.

The post Allegations of Trade Secret Theft Involving Tesla Technology Emerges first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Vice President Kamala Harris played a pivotal role in breaking a deadlock in the U.S. Senate, confirming Natasha Merle, a civil rights lawyer nominated for a federal judge position in New York. Merle, who currently serves as a litigator for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, has been confirmed to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, which is located in Brooklyn.

The final vote on Merle’s confirmation stood at 50-49, with Harris’s tie-breaking vote being the deciding factor. However, it should be noted that the procedural vote preceding the confirmation resulted in a 50-50 tie, requiring Harris’s intervention to break it. Notably, Democratic Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia joined all Republicans in opposing Merle’s nomination. This marks the fourth occasion in recent weeks where Manchin has opposed President Joe Biden’s judicial picks.

Merle’s confirmation marks a significant milestone, as she becomes the 100th district court nominee selected by President Biden to secure Senate confirmation. Moreover, she joins a series of civil rights lawyers who have been confirmed to federal bench positions in the past month, reflecting the administration’s emphasis on diversifying the judiciary and promoting equal representation.

Prior to the crucial vote, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a Democrat from New York who recommended Merle, spoke highly of her qualifications. Gillibrand described Merle as a “deeply experienced litigator” who would bring a “crucial and unique perspective” to the federal bench. These remarks highlight Merle’s extensive legal background and the value she would bring to her judicial role.

BCG Attorney Search is your one-stop-shop for the most comprehensive legal job listings.

However, Merle faced opposition from Republicans due to remarks she made during a podcast in 2017. In those remarks, she expressed her belief that politicians denouncing white supremacy while supporting Republican-backed policies, such as stricter voter identification requirements, seemed inconsistent. This stance drew criticism from Republicans, who viewed it as an attack on common-sense election integrity measures.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican, took to the Senate floor on Tuesday to express his concerns about Merle’s nomination. He described her as an “activist lawyer” with a penchant for taking extreme and inflammatory positions. McConnell specifically referenced Merle’s comments on voter ID laws, which he defended as necessary for preserving the integrity of elections, but which have faced criticism for disproportionately affecting minority voters.

Merle’s professional background includes serving at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund since 2016. Prior to that, she worked as a federal public defender in New York and participated in a fellowship with a prominent law firm in the state. These experiences have provided Merle with a comprehensive understanding of civil rights issues and legal intricacies, shaping her into a qualified candidate for the federal judiciary.

With Merle’s confirmation, President Biden continues to make progress in his efforts to reshape the federal judiciary by appointing diverse and highly qualified individuals to key positions. By bringing in civil rights lawyers like Merle, the administration aims to ensure that the judiciary reflects the values of equality, fairness, and justice.

Vice President Kamala Harris’s decisive vote broke the deadlock in the Senate and secured the confirmation of Natasha Merle as a federal judge. Merle’s extensive legal background and commitment to civil rights make her a valuable addition to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. As the Biden administration continues to prioritize judicial nominations, this confirmation represents a significant step towards diversifying the judiciary and promoting equality within the legal system.

The post Biden Judicial Nominee Confirmed as Harris Breaks Deadlock in Senate Vote first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul has nominated Rowan Wilson, an associate judge on the Court of Appeals, as chief judge of the same court after lawmakers from her party rejected her previous pick. If confirmed, Wilson would be the first Black judge in the post, replacing Janet DiFiore, who stepped down in August.

Hochul’s first nominee, appellate Judge Hector LaSalle, was voted down by the state Senate in February. The unprecedented rebuke of the governor by members of her party was due to LaSalle’s record being viewed as too conservative on abortion rights and unions. LaSalle, however, maintained that previous rulings were mischaracterized.

A New York state panel recommended Wilson and Halligan as candidates for the chief judge post. Hochul then nominated Caitlin Halligan, a former New York solicitor general and current partner at Selendy Gay Elsberg, to fill Wilson’s current role.

“Judge Wilson’s sterling record of upholding justice and fairness makes him well-suited to lead the court at this critical time,” Hochul said in a statement. Wilson, nominated to the Court of Appeals by former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo in 2017, said in a statement that “protecting the rights of New Yorkers is my top priority.”

Don’t miss out on exciting job opportunities – submit your resume to BCG Attorney Search today.

In a recent past case, Wilson dissented from a 5-2 ruling last year holding that animals do not have the same legal rights as humans in a case involving an elephant named Happy at the Bronx Zoo.

The Court of Appeals chief judge oversees the state’s sprawling state judicial system. Wilson’s nomination comes at a critical time as the state’s highest court will likely play a pivotal role in upcoming legal battles, including redistricting and police reform.

Hochul’s decision to nominate Wilson, a Black judge, to lead the state’s highest court is being hailed as a step towards diversifying the judiciary. The state’s judiciary has long been criticized for lacking diversity, with only a small percentage of judges being people of color.

In a statement, New York Attorney General Letitia James said that Wilson’s nomination “sends a powerful message that diversity and inclusion must be central to our justice system.” James also noted that “with his wealth of experience and commitment to justice, Judge Wilson is an exceptional choice to lead the Court of Appeals.”

The nomination of Wilson and Halligan will now be sent to the New York State Senate for confirmation. The state Senate is expected to vote on the nominations in the coming weeks.

The post New York Governor Selects Second Chief Judge Nominee After First Choice is Unsuccessful first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

James “Jeb” Boasberg, an appointee of Democratic President Barack Obama, has taken over as chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, replacing Judge Beryl Howell. As chief judge, Boasberg will have sole discretion over sealed federal grand jury proceedings, including those involving special counsel criminal investigations into former President Donald Trump’s retention of classified documents and efforts by him and his allies to undo his 2020 election loss. Special Counsel Jack Smith, appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland in November, presents evidence to multiple grand juries regarding Trump’s retention of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida and attempts to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power following his loss to President Joe Biden.

Boasberg’s responsibilities include assuming the same oversight duties if a grand jury is formed in a separate special counsel investigation into Biden’s handling of classified documents after leaving the vice presidency. Biden is expected to seek re-election in 2024.

Grand jury proceedings are kept from public view. Still, as chief judge, Boasberg will rule on specific legal arguments raised in the grand jury probes, including efforts to restrict witnesses from testifying. In an interview, Boasberg declined to comment on his impending grand jury oversight duties. Still, he praised his predecessor, saying the court was fortunate to have had Howell as its leader “in this very fraught period.” Boasberg has served on the court since 2011 and was picked in 2002 by Republican President George W. Bush for the local D.C. Superior Court. Both times he was quickly confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

Fellow judges and former law clerks believe that Boasberg, a tall and deep-voiced former member of Yale’s basketball team, is well-prepared to handle the cases and lead the court through the intense scrutiny that any indictment would bring. U.S. District Judge Casey Cooper in Washington, who has known Boasberg since they attended Yale together, said Boasberg is “exactly the sort of independent thinker you would want in that position,” calling him “incredibly balanced and thoughtful and fair.” During Howell’s tenure as chief judge, she regularly heard legal arguments in special counsel investigations.

Advance your legal career and achieve your professional goals – submit your resume to BCG Attorney Search today.

Boasberg has faced challenging assignments before. In 2020 and 2021, he presided over the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which hears government requests for secret surveillance warrants. His tenure came after the Justice Department’s internal watchdog had highlighted failures in the department’s process for seeking secret warrants. Boasberg oversaw Special Counsel John Durham’s criminal case against former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who pleaded guilty in 2020 to altering an email to justify a government wiretap of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. Boasberg sentenced Clinesmith to a year of probation and 400 hours of community service.

After the 2020 election, Boasberg rejected a challenge by Republican state lawmakers and others who were contesting Trump’s defeat and had asked him to block congressional certification of Biden’s election win. “Courts are not instruments through which parties engage in such gamesmanship or symbolic political gestures,” wrote Boasberg, who referred the lawyer behind the case, Erick Kaardal, to the court’s grievance committee for acting with “potential bad faith.”

It is worth noting that no sitting or former president has ever been indicted. Nonetheless, Boasberg is well-prepared to handle the cases, and fellow judges and former law clerks believe he is the ideal chief judge to lead the court through the intense scrutiny that any indictment would bring.

In conclusion, the appointment of Judge James “Jeb” Boasberg as the new chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia comes at a critical time in American politics, as he inherits oversight of secret proceedings involving special counsel criminal investigations into former President Donald Trump’s retention of classified documents and efforts by him and his allies to undo his 2020 election loss. Boasberg’s extensive legal experience and reputation for independent thinking make him well-suited to handle the intense scrutiny and legal challenges that may arise in these high-profile cases. As the nation continues to grapple with the aftermath of the Trump presidency and the ongoing investigations into his actions, the appointment of Judge Boasberg represents a significant development in the legal and political landscape of the United States.

The post Secret Trump Proceedings Get New Chief Judge in Washington first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) had stated that former President Donald Trump is not immune from liability in civil lawsuits related to the January 6th, 2021 Capitol riot if his speech before the event “encouraged imminent private violent action and was likely to produce such action.” The DOJ’s comments came in a brief filed on March 2nd, with the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

According to the brief, the DOJ was expressing no view on allegations that Trump’s speech incited the riot, but if the allegations were true, he would not be shielded. Trump had previously claimed absolute immunity from civil suits related to the attack on the Capitol. However, the DOJ argued that “no part of a president’s official responsibilities includes the incitement of imminent private violence.”

The civil suits against Trump were filed by 11 Democratic members of the House of Representatives and two Capitol police officers, according to The Washington Post. The suits allege that Trump violated the Ku Klux Klan Act and other laws by inciting the violent mob that stormed the Capitol. During the speech, Trump talked about election fraud and told supporters they had to “fight like hell” or “you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

The DOJ acknowledged that Trump had absolute immunity from damages from his official acts. However, it noted that this did not include the incitement of violence. The department added that a court considering a claim to hold a president liable for violence allegedly connected with his speech should deny absolute immunity only if the speech is viewed objectively. In context, both encouraged imminent private violence and were likely to produce such violence.

The DOJ’s brief represents a significant shift in the legal landscape surrounding the events of January 6th. It has important implications for ongoing investigations and potential future legal action. The brief effectively opens the door for civil suits against Trump related to the Capitol riot, should evidence emerge that his speech incited the violence.

Because Trump had only argued that he had absolute immunity, the appeals court could reject that absolute position “without attempting to comprehensively define the boundaries of the president’s immunity,” the DOJ said. This leaves the possibility that Trump could still be shielded from some civil lawsuits, but only if they relate to his official acts and not to incite violence.

The National Law Journal, Law360, BuzzFeed News, and Reuters have covered the DOJ’s brief. The filing is the latest development in a series of legal battles related to January 6th. Multiple investigations are ongoing, and criminal charges have been brought against hundreds of people in the Capitol riot.

In conclusion, the DOJ’s recent brief represents a significant shift in the legal landscape surrounding the Capitol riot. The department’s stance effectively opens the door for civil suits against Trump related to the January 6th. However, whether evidence will emerge that Trump’s speech incited the violence remains to be seen. The DOJ’s comments have important implications for ongoing investigations and potential future legal action. They also highlight the complex legal questions surrounding the limits of presidential immunity.

The post DOJ: Trump not immune to civil suits related to Jan. 6 Capitol riot first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

While passengers aboard the coronavirus-stricken Diamond Princess cruise ship have been in quarantine for more than a week, the 1,000-person crew on the ship has not been. Staff members are deeply concerned that they’re at a greater risk of contracting the novel virus.

Sonali Thakkar, 24, a concerned crew member has spoken out- claiming shipboard workers aren’t properly quarantined and are getting sick.

Thakkar told CNN she fears the virus is spreading among the staff members on the ship-currently docked in Japan- because the crew members still attend to the needs of the cabin-bound passengers.

“There are many places where we all are together, not separated from each other,” she told the outlet. “Especially when we sit in the same mess hall and eat together, the place where it can spread very fast.”

Thakkar has been recently isolated in her cabin after she came down with a fever, headache and a cough. Workers are “really scared and tense,” she said.

“We just want every crew member to be tested and separated from the rest of the people who are infected. Because we don’t know who is carrying the virus or how fast it is spreading,” Thakkar said.

More than 3,700 people were on board the ship- which is now a floating quarantine zone- when it first went into isolation near the port of Yokohama, Japan, after several passengers got infected with the novel  COVID-19 coronavirus.

With the number of infected patients continuing to increase daily, the cruise ship has the largest outbreak of the virus outside of mainland China.

Japan’s health minister Katsunobu Kato, announced 40 new cases on Wednesday, among those aboard the Diamond Princess cruise ship.

To date, a total of 175 passengers and workers aboard the cruise ship have become infected with the virus. 

According to the New York Times, those diagnosed with the illness have been taken off the ship to local hospitals, but the incubation period can last more than a week, and only 439 of the 3,600 people on board have been tested so far. 

Princess Cruises, which operates the vessel, said in a statement posted on their site that crew members who have been cleared after an initial health screening “are fulfilling their duties as required” and that tests are ongoing.

“When not working, crew members are requested to be in their staterooms,” said the statement.

Crew members on board said 10 shipboard workers tested positive for the virus, The Washington Post reported. The workers have complained they have not been quarantined the same way as the passengers, so those who had the virus could have interacted with the rest of the crew.  

A cook aboard the ship spoke to The Post anonymously questioning why the crew has not been isolated. 

“Are we not part of the ship? If passengers have been isolated, why haven’t we yet?” he told The Post. 

Some of the employees on the ship deliver food to passengers, while others like Thakkar work on the gangway where passengers are moved on and off the ship, increasing their risk of coming into contact with someone who has the virus. 

“I am stuck here, and I don’t know if I will go home alive.” another cook told The Post. 

Gisele Norris, a doctor of public health at Aon National Healthcare said “The most vulnerable people on that ship are the crew because my understanding is they’re not isolated in the same way that passengers are. They’re coming into contact with dirty dishes” 

The deadly virus has killed at least 1,100 people and infected over 45,000 worldwide.

The post Coronavirus-Stricken Cruise Ship Crew Member Speaks Out first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Summary: UT Austin students strap dildos on their backpacks to protest a new law allowing people to carry guns on campus.

Yes, you read it correctly.

At the University of Texas at Austin, students are protesting a new law that will allow more guns on campus next year, BoingBoing.net reports.

In Texas, where people often toss around the phrase “go big or go home,” students are going beyond your typical sign-bearing protest. Instead, they’re protesting the new gun law with giant, floppy dildos. Many of the dildos are neon-colored.

Not surprisingly, “strapping giant swinging dildos to…backpacks” is a violation of the school’s obscenity policy.

Jessica Jin organized the Campus (DILDO) Carry protest on Facebook. Her position is that more guns on campus will not increase student safety.

Last year, Kid Rock was subpoenaed to return a glass dildo.

So why dildos, of all items that could be strapped to one’s backpack? Jin explains, “You’re carrying a gun to class? Yeah well I’m carrying a HUGE DILDO…just about as effective at protecting us from sociopathic shooters, but much safer for recreational play.”

Governor Greg Abbot signed S.B. 11, also known as the “campus carry” law, on June 1, 2015. The new legislation allows concealed carry license holders to carry a concealed handgun throughout university campuses as of August 1, 2016.

The Facebook page for the Campus (DILDO) Carry event states:

“The State of Texas has decided that it is not at all obnoxious to allow deadly concealed weapons in classrooms, however it DOES have strict rules about free sexual expression, to protect your innocence. You would receive a citation for taking a DILDO to class before you would get in trouble for taking a gun to class. Heaven forbid the penis.”

The comments section on the Facebook page has blown up, with those who support and oppose gun control facing off.

Gregory Pulensky comments, “You are a very brave young woman; be careful, the people on the other side of the ‘discussion’ are more than a little unhinged.”

George Pickering-Seba says, “You liberals are whack jobs. You just keep sinking deeper and deeper into lower forms of depravity every year. Walking around with dildos on your backsides…hahaha your grandparents would be so proud.”

Three years ago, a woman was arrested for throwing a sex toy at a cop.

Andre Hill asks, “So then why do the police bother with guns? Seems like they should just carry dildos instead…”

Dominic Guevara counters, “What if in carrying my gun the only thing I have in mind is your safety? Is it wrong for me to care for the protection of a stranger?”

An employee is demoted for a comment about a sex toy purchase.

According to The Daily Dot, the students plan to start carrying the dildos on August 24, 2016, the first day of the next fall semester. This is also the first day that students will be allowed to carry guns on campus, as long as they have concealed carry permits.

As of the publishing of this article, the Facebook event page had 4,200 participants, and 19,000 had been invited to the event. The twitter hashtag #cocksnotglocks was spreading like wildfire.

Source: BoingBoing.net

Photo credit: The Daily Beast

The post Students Protest Gun Laws…with Dildos first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Summary: Too busy to keep up with all the news that’s fit to print? Read about this week’s biggest headlines here.

We know you lawyers are busy, which makes it hard to stay on top of the news. To keep you up to date, we’ve compiled a list of this week’s top stories:

1. Russia Drops a Bomb. Or More Like Several Bombs. On Wednesday Russia launched its first round of airstrikes in Syria. Putin claims the strikes were aimed at ISIS, but the US says they actually hit Syrian rebels, and that Russia is “throwing gasoline on the fire” of Syria’s civil war. Syria’s war has been dragging on for four years. An estimated 9 million refugees have fled their homes, overwhelming Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Europe. Iran has announced it is sending foot soldiers to aid Russia. [The Guardian, syrianrefugees.eu]

2. Shooter Takes Down Victims at Oregon College. On Thursday morning a gunman opened fire at Umpqua Community College in rural southwest Oregon. Nine people and the gunman were killed and 20 were injured. [The New York Times]

3. Judge Nixes Courtroom Selfies. After obtaining a not-guilty verdict for his client in a first-degree homicide case, criminal defense attorney Anthony Cotton was so overjoyed he pulled out his phone . . . and took a selfie with his client. Cotton soon posted the photo on his Facebook page. The judge got wind of it, dragged Cotton back to his courtroom, and ordered the lawyer to delete the photo. Cotton obeyed and quickly apologized. Theoretically, the judge could have ordered Cotton into custody for contempt, if he had witnessed the photo being taken. “I know that [the] younger generation sees that social media stuff differently,” the judge said, but “[t]o me it’s undignified.” [Milwaukee Wisconsin Journal Senitel]

4. Palestine President Disses the Oslo Accords. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas pulled a no-he-didn’t moment while addressing the UN. Abbas floored the international community by saying Palestinians are no longer bound by the Oslo accords. The Palestinian President claims Israel has violated the agreements by building too many settlements and occupying the West Bank, which Israel denies. Israel and Palestine signed the accords in the 1990s, setting up their own states. The accords are considered the foundation of the Middle East peace process. [The New York Times]

5. Government Shutdown Narrowly Averted­ . . . Again. With just hours to spare before the end of the fiscal year, Congress averted a government shutdown Wednesday, approving a temporary spending measure that will keep federal agencies open through December 11. Political analysts think House Speaker John Boehner’s resignation announcement may have garnered Democratic support for the bill and ultimately pushed it across the finish line. However, as The New York Times reports, “[T]he bill does nothing to resolve the core disputes over fiscal policy between Republicans and President Obama, setting up even larger and potentially more calamitous battles in the month ahead.” [The New York Times]

6. Jurors Still Deciding the Dewey & LeBouef Case. Jurors are nine days into deliberations in the criminal trial of Dewey & LeBouef’s former executives. Three of Dewey’s execs have been accused of altering the firm’s financial records to hide its money troubles from lenders and investors. The defendants have been charged with a scheme to defraud, conspiracy, New York state securities violations, 15 counts of grand larceny, and more than 30 counts of falsifying business records. Deliberations continued today, prompting some to wonder, “What’s taking so long?” Speculation is the prosecutors are getting nervous; the jurors seem to be locked and divided, which doesn’t bode well for proving the case “beyond a reasonable doubt.” [The American Lawyer]

Read more breaking news.

The post The Scoop first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Summary: American soldiers and Marines have reported that they have been asked to look the other way while sexual abuse occurs in Afghanistan.

According to The New York Times, Lance Corporal Gregory Buckley Jr. told his father in a phone call that he could hear Afghan law enforcement officers sexually abusing boys who had been brought to the base.

Gregory Buckley, Sr. remembers that his son told him, “At night we can hear them screaming, but we’re not allowed to do anything about it.” When asked why the behavior had not been reported, Buckley, Sr. said his son responded that officers “told him to look the other way because it’s their culture.”

Sadly, Buckley Jr. was shot to death at the base shortly thereafter. His phone call about the sexual abuse was the last one he made home.

Apparently the sexual abuse of children is not a new problem in Afghanistan. Armed commanders especially have a reputation for the practice, which is called bacha bazi, or “boy play.” American soldiers and Marines have been told to stay out of it, even if the abuse is occurring on military bases.

As American forces have joined with Afghan militias to fight the Taliban, the hands-off policy has remained in effect. However, many were concerned that instead of getting rid of pedophiles, the military was actually arming them in some instances, giving them power over local villages. When the abuse began, there was little that could be done.

Dan Quinn, a former Special Forces captain who attacked a commander for keeping a boy chained to his bed, said, “The reason we were here is because we heard the terrible things the Taliban were doing to people, how they were taking away human rights. But we were putting people into power who would do things that were worse than what the Taliban did—that was something village elders voiced to me.”

The war formally ended in 2014.

The practice of telling U.S. soldiers to ignore child sexual abuse is coming under scrutiny, especially since word has spread that officers like Dan Quinn are being punished for speaking up. After being pulled from Afghanistan, Quinn quit the military.

Allegedly the Army is also trying to force St. First Class Charles Martland, a Special Forces member who helped Captain Quinn rough up the commander, to retire.

Representative Duncan Hunter, (R-CA) says, “The Army contends that Martland and others should have looked the other way (a contention that I believe is nonsense).” A well-known Congressional publication, The Hill, also states Representative Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.) has called for an end to punishing soldiers who report the abuse.

When asked about the policy, Colonel Brian Tribus, the spokesman for the command in Afghanistan, said, “Generally, allegations of child sexual abuse by Afghan military or police personnel would be a matter of domestic Afghan criminal law….there would be no express requirement that U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan report it.” An exception, he noted, would be if rape was used as a weapon of war. However, in a separate New York Times article, many say that Colonel Tribus is wrong. Sexual abuse appears to violate the Geneva Conventions, and rape is outlawed by international human rights law.

MSNBC’s Harold Ford, Jr. adds, “The allegation that it’s happening on a U.S. base…would suggest that [the] question not only deserves an answer but obviously there could be legal implications here for allowing this to happen on U.S. property.”

The act of nonintervention is supposed to keep a good relationship between the United States and Afghan forces. But many U.S. military members are uncomfortable maintaining silence in the face of pedastry, a practice where powerful men often keep young teenagers with them to demonstrate social status.

One former Marine lance corporal says, “The bigger picture was fighting the Taliban. It wasn’t to stop molestation.” The lance corporal, who requested that his identity be kept private, said he felt sick when he walked into a room on base where a few men were on the floor with children between them. He said, “I’m not a hundred percent sure what was happening under the sheet, but I have a pretty good idea of what was going on.”

The hands-off approach of the U.S. has isolated the villages where some of the victims hail from. In 2010 and 2011, villages that had been taken from the Taliban were protected by Afghan Local Police militias. The locals were happy at first; but by the summer of 2011, complaints were circulating about their conduct.

For example, one militia commander allegedly raped a teenage girl he noticed working in the fields. The provincial police chief ordered the man to serve one day in jail—and then the girl was forced to marry him.

When Captain Quinn asked what he could do, he was told that he could bring it up with local officials, but that was about it. Captain Quinn commented, “We’re being praised for doing the right thing, and a guy just got away with raping a 14-year-old girl.”

Village elders became upset at the commanders’ actions. Captain Quinn says he gathered the commanders and lectured them on human rights after each incident occurred.

One commander then fled with his workers’ wages. Captain Quinn later found out that the commander used the money to pay for dancing boys. Another commander killed his daughter, a 12-year-old, because she kissed a boy. Captain Quinn said, “There were no repercussions.”

In September of 2011, an Afghan woman arrived at an American base with her son. The woman had bruises all over her body and her son was limping. One of the police commanders, Abdul Rahman, allegedly abducted the boy and ordered him to be a sex slave. The boy was chained to Rahman’s bed. When his mother tried to get him back, she was beaten up. The son was eventually freed, but his mother was scared he would be taken again.

She said her son was “such a good-looking kid” that he was a “status symbol” desired by local commanders.

Captain Quinn approached Rahman about what happened. Rahman acted like the incident was no big deal, and actually started laughing when Captain Quinn told him “you are held to a higher standard if you are working with U.S. forces, and people expect more of you.”

Enraged, Captain Quinn said, “I picked him up and threw him onto the ground. I did this to make sure the message was understood that if he went back to the boy, that it was not going to be tolerated.” Sergeant Martland joined Captain Quinn in punching and hitting Rahman.

Captain Quinn maintains that Rahman’s injuries were not severe. Rahman has since been killed in a Taliban ambush. Rahman’s brother insists that the boy was never raped.

Referring to the Afghan Local Police, Sergeant Martland wrote a letter to the Army, stating that he and Captain Quinn “felt that morally we could no longer stand by and allow our A.L.P. to commit atrocities.”

Lance Corporal Buckley’s father believes that his son was killed in connection to the sexual abuse. He has filed a lawsuit to find out more information about his son’s death. Buckley and two other marines were killed in 2012 by one boy who was with a group  living at base with Sarwar Jan, an Afghan police commander.

Jan had a bad reputation, and in 2010, Marine officers convinced Afghan law enforcement to arrest him after he committed a series of crimes supporting the Taliban and child abduction. Two years later, Jan returned with a different unit.

Lance Corporal Buckley noticed that a group of “tea boys,” or domestic servants who may be pressured into sexual slavery, arrived with Jan and lived in the same barracks right under the Marines.

Though Marine officers were warned about Jan, no one acted on the warnings. Two weeks later, a 17-year-old boy with Jan shot and killed Lance Corporal Buckley and two other Marines with a rifle.

Lance Corporal Buckley’s father still wonders whether the shooting occurred because of the abuse. He says, “As far as the young boys are concerned, the Marines are allowing it to happen and so they’re guilty by association. They don’t know our Marines are sick to their stomachs.”

The sole American who was punished in the subsequent investigation was Major Brezler, the individual who emailed warnings about Jan. The Marine Corps has started proceedings to discharge him.

Jan has moved to a higher-ranking command in the same province. He has denied having sex slaves or personally knowing the boy who shot the Marines. “No, it’s all untrue,” he insists.

However, may say that he has a “toothache problem,” a euphemism for the sexual abuse of children.

Source: New York Times

Additional source: MSNBC

Photo credit: New York Times

The post Soldiers Told to Ignore Sexual Abuse first appeared on JDJournal Blog.