
Hearing held for judge accused of allowing immigrant to escape ICE custody
A hearing began Monday for a Massachusetts judge facing civil charges over allegations that she allowed an immigrant in her court to evade an immigration enforcement agent.
The case stems from a 2018 incident in which Shelley Joseph, a district court judge, is accused of colluding with the immigrant's attorney and a court officer to allow him escape out a back door of the courthouse after a hearing on charges that included drug possession. An Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer had been waiting outside the courtroom to detain the defendant, Jose Medina-Perez.
"This case is about the integrity, impartiality and independence of the Massachusetts judiciary and the appearance of the integrity, impartiality and independence every judge must uphold," Judith Fabricant, special counsel for the commission, told the hearing.
A lawyer for Joseph, Elizabeth Mulvey, said the case had been distorted over time and that everyone had come to believe that her client "let an illegal immigrant out of the door" with half of those people believing she should be jailed and the other half calling her a "folk hero." ALSO READ: Speed immigration records checks, find visa overstayers: US to USCIS, ICE
She argued Joseph had been vilified in the media and people were giving the impression that "dozens of people" had seen Joseph "get off the bench, escort the defendant to the door, give him a hug and wish him god speed." "Today in this court room and we are going to have opportunity to hear all the evidence," Mulvey said.
The case is similar to a Milwaukee judge accused in April of helping a man evade immigration authorities. The case has escalated a clash between the Trump administration and local authorities over the Republican president's sweeping immigration crackdown.
Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan is accused of escorting the man and his lawyer out of her courtroom through the jury door after learning that immigration authorities were seeking his arrest. The man was taken into custody outside the courthouse after agents chased him on foot.
In the Massachusetts case, federal obstruction of justice charges against Joseph were dropped in 2022 after she agreed to refer herself to a state agency that investigates allegations of misconduct by members of the bench. That agency, the Commission on Judicial Conduct, concluded last year that Joseph "engaged in willful judicial misconduct that brought the judicial office into disrepute, as well as conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice and unbecoming a judicial officer."
ALSO READ: Los Angeles immigration raids: What's happening & how Indians can stay safe
Denis McInerney, the hearing officer assigned to the case by the Supreme Judicial Court, said he will hear the evidence and then make a recommendation afterward based on whether he find Joseph violated the Massachusetts Code of Judicial Conduct. The hearing is expected to last about a week.
Much of the first day was dominated by the first witness, lawyer David Jellinek, who told the court he had been hired that day to represent Medina-Perez and had been granted immunity by federal prosecutors. Along with the drug charges, Medina-Perez was in court on a warrant out of Pennsylvania.
After doing some research, Jellinek believed his client wasn't the same person wanted on the warrant. "I was worried they were going to take a US citizen into custody," he told the court. "I was quite concerned for my client." Jellinek failed to convince the ICE agent that they had the "wrong guy" so he came up with a plan to release Medina-Perez out the back door.
Fabricant argued that Joseph signal her approval for the plan - including an off the record conversation during a side bar when she appeared sympathetic to Jellinek's desire for his client to avoid ICE.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
Anti-ICE protest: Car rams into crowd, 66-year old woman injured-Watch video
Moment from incident (@GhostCypher04) A 66-year old woman reportedly suffered a broken arm and injury on face after a car rammed into a crowd protesting against the immigration and customs enforcement (ICE) department in downtown Chicago on Tuesday evening . In a video which has now gone viral, on social media platforms, a maroon sedan can be seen speeding through the protesters, nearly hitting multiple pedestrians. Demonstrators were seen momentarily chasing and striking the vehicle before it drove off from the scene without halting. The woman, identified as Heather Blair, was on her way back home when the car barrelling down the street hit her, fracturing her left arm. She was taken to Northwest Memorial Hospital for treatment, Blair told CBS news. 'I thought it was a violent act, because the car was accelerating," Blair said. "It seemed like it was getting kind of heated, and we didn't want to be involved in any violence'. The police said they are still investigating the matter. Massive demonstrations erupted in key US cities last week following a wave of immigration raids, as the Trump administration moves to deliver on his campaign pledge to deport immigrants using aggressive measures. "President Trump promised to carry out the largest mass deportation campaign in American history and left-wing riots will not deter him in that effort," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said.
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
33 minutes ago
- First Post
Why Elon Musk's apology to Trump was a good business decision
Last week, Tesla CEO Elon Musk claimed that Donald Trump, whom he endorsed for president and gave hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign contributions, was part of the files linked to Jeffrey Epstein. This week, Musk has backed down, saying his posts against Trump 'went too far'. Post the apology, Tesla shares rose, and Musk's net worth increased by $191 million read more Tesla CEO Elon Musk has backtracked this week, apologising and saying his posts against Donald Trump 'went too far'. AP Last week, Elon Musk made a serious allegation against US President Donald Trump. The Tesla CEO and richest man in the world claimed that Trump, who he endorsed for president and to whom he gave hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign contributions, was part of the files linked to Jeffrey Epstein. Epstein, the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender, killed himself in prison in 2019. However, Musk quickly backtracked this week, apologising and saying his posts against 'went too far'. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Musk's apology also came ahead of a major product launch for Tesla next week. But how did the feud escalate? And how has his apology has been good for business? Let's take a closer look How the feud escalated It began with Trump and Musk having a fallout over the Republican president's 'big, beautiful bill'. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it,' Musk wrote on X on June 3. Trump, two days later, during a meeting in the Oval Office with Germany's new leader, said he was 'very disappointed' with Musk's comments. 'Elon knew the inner workings of this bill better than almost anybody sitting here,' Trump said. 'Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will anymore.' 'He hasn't said bad about me personally, but I'm sure that will be next,' Trump said. 'But I'm very disappointed in Elon. I've helped Elon a lot.' 'False,' Musk hit back immediately on X even as Trump continued to speak. 'This bill was never shown to me even once and was passed in the dead of night so fast that almost no one in Congress could even read it!' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD When Trump further said he would have 'won Pennsylvania easily' without Musk's help, The Tesla CEO responded immediately. Musk, remember, spend hundreds of millions of dollars to elect Trump including a $1 million a day giveaway in Pennsylvania. Musk responded that Trump would have lost the election without him and that the Democrats would control both the House and the Senate. Donald Trump said he was 'very disappointed' with Elon Musk. Reuters 'The Big Ugly Bill will INCREASE the deficit to $2.5 trillion!' Musk added. Musk then put up a poll asking his followers if it was time to create a new political party – one that represented the 80 per cent of Americans in the middle. Musk then pointed out that he would be around for a lot longer than Trump. 'Oh and some food for thought as they ponder this question: Trump has 3.5 years left as President, but I will be around for 40+ years…' Trump then launched an all-out assault on Musk. 'I asked him to leave, I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!' Trump wrote on social media. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trump also threatened Musk's government subsidies and contracts. He wrote, 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts. I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it!' 'Such an obvious lie. So sad,' Musk responded. Then came the big bombshell accusation. Musk claimed Trump appeared in the Jeffrey Epstein files . 'Files linked to the investigation of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein have emerged as a point of fixation for Trump and his allies and right-wing media figures,' Musk wrote. 'Time to drop the really big bomb: Donald Trump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public.' 'Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out,' Musk added. On June 6, the White House claimed that the two men were said to have a phone call to clear the air. However, Trump, in his usual fashion put paid to that telling ABC he was 'not particularly' interested in speaking to Musk. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'I'm not even thinking about Elon. He's got a problem. The poor guy's got a problem,' Trump said. Musk backs down Trump's threats against Musk's subsidies and government contracts seemed to have worked. Musk on Wednesday back down from his claims. 'I regret some of my posts about President @realDonaldTrump last week. They went too far,' Musk wrote on X early Wednesday morning. This came after Musk made a private phone call to Trump. The development came after Musk and Trump allies including Vice President J Dance and White House Chief Suzie Wiles privately met to discuss a truce. SpaceX headquarters is shown in Hawthorne, California. The company receives billions of dollars in revenue every year in government contracts. Reuters Trump, for his part, appeared pacified by the apology. 'I thought it was very nice that he did that,' Trump told the New York Post. 'Look, I have no hard feelings,' Trump said. 'I was really surprised that that happened. He went after a bill that's phenomenal. …He just — I think he feels very badly that he said that, actually.' 'The President acknowledged the statement that Elon put out this morning and he is appreciative of it and we are continuing to focus on the business of the American people,' the White House said in a statement. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD How has Musk's apology been good for business? According to Forbes, Musk's net worth rose to $411.4 billion after the apology – an increase of $191 million. This came as, Tesla's shares, which had tanked 14 per cent in the middle of the feud, gained around 1 per cent on Wednesday. The spat between the two men had caused Musk around $34 billion of his net worth – which makes given that SpaceX and Tesla, which form a huge chunk of his net worth, are hugely dependent on government contracts and subsidies. Investors in Musk's companies would now be heaving a sigh of relief after his apology to Trump. Now, with both men seemingly on a path to reconciliation, Musk can keep financing Trump and the Republicans' political ambitions and the government money can keep flowing for both SpaceX and Tesla. With inputs from agencies


Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Democratic governors embrace border security, reject Trump immigrant 'abuses'
WASHINGTON, - Three prominent Democratic U.S. governors face a grilling on Thursday from a Republican-led U.S. House of Representatives panel over immigration policy, as President Donald Trump steps up a crackdown on people living in the country illegally. The governors of New York, Illinois and Minnesota are due to testify to the House Oversight Committee following days of protests in downtown Los Angeles over the Trump administration's aggressive ramping up of arrests of migrants. Tensions escalated as Trump ordered the National Guard and Marines into California to provide additional security. Trump's immigration crackdown has become a major political flashpoint between the White House and national Democrats. California's Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom, seen as a contender for the party's presidential nomination in 2028, in a Tuesday night video speech accused Trump of choosing "theatrics over public safety." Minnesota's Tim Walz, who ran unsuccessfully for vice president last year; Illinois' JB Pritzker, also seen a 2028 hopeful, and New York's Kathy Hochul, walked a careful line in their prepared testimony for Thursday's hearing, voicing support for immigration enforcement, if not Trump's tactics. "If they are undocumented, we want them out of Illinois and out of our country," Pritzker said. At the same time, Pritzker lashed out against "any violations of the law or abuses of power" and said, "Law-abiding, hardworking, tax-paying people who have been in this country for years should have a path to citizenship." Reuters/Ipsos polls show Trump getting more support for his handling of immigration than any other policy area. "Minnesota is not a sanctuary state," Walz proclaimed, adding that state officials cooperate with federal immigration authorities, while noting that it offers "respect" to cities and counties that choose to give no more than the legal minimum support to the Department of Homeland Security.