3rd suspect arrested in Audubon Park shooting, all suspects in court Wednesday
FBI joins investigation of deadly Clarke County crash that killed 2, injured 4
Timothy Franklin, 18, Skylar Jemison, 18, and a 16-year-old, who will remain unidentified because of his age, are all charged as adults and faced a judge for the first time on Wednesday for a bond hearing.
A Daphne Police Department detective told the judge it was Jemison who shot Matthew Barnes, 18, and Demond Walker, 20, and that Franklin and the other teenager were in the van too when they tried to buy marijuana with fake movie money.
It happened at Audubon Park Apartments a week ago. The gunfire erupted inside a minivan owned by Walker, one of the victims.
According to investigators, when Walker realized the money was fake, the 16-year-old suspect said he would go and get the real money, opened the door of the van, and that's when police say Jemison opened fire.
In court, Jemison's attorney, Hunter Hardin, told the court his client had never been in trouble before, had strong ties to the community, and he was reasonably sure he would show up for court.
Prosecutors requested a $100,000 bond on each charge for each defendant, and the judge agreed. Jemison's bond was set at a total of $400,000 on charges of attempted murder and first-degree robbery. Bond was set at $200,000 each for Franklin and the 16-year-old suspect, who are both charged with first-degree robbery.
3 Mobile County men arrested in FBI-led 'Operation Restore Justice'
There is also a new update on the victims: Matthew Barnes remains in critical condition. According to testimony, he was shot in the neck and is paralyzed and on a ventilator. Walker, who was shot in the face, has been moved out of the critical care unit and is in stable condition.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to WKRG News 5.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Hours before interviewing Patel and Bondi, Hannity bragged he wouldn't ask about Epstein. He stayed true to his word
Ahead of his dual interviews with Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel, Fox News star Sean Hannity boasted that he would not ask them about their botched handling of the files related to deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, which has sparked a national uproar. 'If I hear that name one more time, my head's going to explode,' Hannity exclaimed on his radio show Thursday afternoon. Indeed, when he got the chance to speak to both Patel and Bondi hours later, Hannity completely sidestepped any questions related to the Epstein case, instead focusing most of his attention on the administration's claims that former President Barack Obama directed a 'treasonous conspiracy' against Donald Trump with the investigation into Russia's 2016 election meddling. Hannity, a Trump confidant who has been dubbed the White House 'shadow chief of staff,' has led the Fox News charge in trumpeting the Trump administration's attempts to distract from the Epstein saga. In a two-page memo last month, the Justice Department concluded that Epstein died by suicide and did not maintain a 'client list' to blackmail prominent figures in his sex crimes, despite Bondi saying months earlier that he had the supposed list on her desk. The memo also found there was 'no basis to revisit the disclosure of those materials.' Amid the furor from the president's MAGA base over the memo, which contradicted many of the conspiracy theories that Patel and other Trump officials had helped stoke for years, Trump ordered his supporters to stop paying attention to Epstein because the files were a Democratic 'hoax.' Fox News would immediately fall in line, largely ignoring the story while devoting much of its on-air coverage to the Trump administration's distraction efforts. This included Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassifying documents related to the investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election and accusing Obama and other intelligence officials of orchestrating a coup. Following Gabbard's initial claims on July 18, which fact checkers have called misleading, revisionist and false, the network aired 168 segments over the next 10 days centered on her accusations about an Obama-led criminal conspiracy. Since then, the right-wing network has continued to heavily invest in the story, even after Gabbard crashed and burned last week during a softball Fox News interview. During his afternoon radio show on Thursday, Hannity spoke to a caller who wanted to know if Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) would face any repercussions over allegations made by a 'whistleblower' that he leaked classified documents in 2017 to embarrass Trump. The story about Schiff, a vocal Trump critic, has received a lot of play on Fox News – especially after Trump called for right-wing media to cover it during a press conference this week. 'That evidence seems rather incontrovertible to me. But, of course, everyone's innocent until proven guilty,' Hannity said before pivoting to his upcoming interviews with Patel and Bondi. 'You know, the main focus of me having Kash Patel and Pam Bondi on tonight is all of this new information,' Hannity said. 'Now, I know if, you know, the liberal media, etcetera, etcetera, you would probably, you know, 'Oh, tell us about, you know, Jeffrey Epstein.'' Saying he 'head's going to explode' if he hears Epstein's name again, he then pointed to a CNN poll that found Americans don't feel the Epstein case is the top issue in the country before asserting that there isn't anything damning about Trump in the files. 'This was Joe Biden's Justice Department. If there was anything in there, it would have been released. I can promise you that,' he declared, adding that the DOJ has also met with Epstein's partner Ghislaine Maxwell and has asked for grand jury testimony to be released. 'So, let's see what happens.' Late last month, the Wall Street Journal – which is owned by Fox News founder Rupert Murdoch – reported that Trump wrote a 'bawdy' birthday letter to Epstein in 2003 that featured the president allegedly drawing a figure of a naked woman alongside suggestive phrases about his relationship with the disgraced financier. Trump vehemently denied the story as a 'fake thing' and promptly sued the WSJ and Murdoch for $10 billion. The Jounral and other outlets would later report that Bondi informed Trump in May that his name was included in the Epstein filed. The president has also denied those reports, with the White House calling it a 'fake news story.' Additionally, dozens of other public figures were reportedly named in these files, and the president has never been formally accused or charged with a crime in connection with Epstein. Meanwhile, Hannity told the caller that his focus during his conversations with Patel and Bondi would be on whether former Obama intelligence officials were in 'trouble,' what evidence they were compiling in their 'grand conspiracy investigation,' and what Bondi's power was in 'convening a grand jury.' 'That's my focus tonight,' he concluded. 'If you want to tune in and hear about Epstein, I'm going to tune in and find out whether or not we had the most corrupt deep state abuse of power in the history of the country.' True to his word, the pro-Trump host didn't once mention the Epstein case to either the FBI director or attorney general, despite those two being at the heart of the backlash over the administration's refusal to release further documentation about the deceased sex predator. Instead, as he hinted on the radio, Hannity devoted the bulk of his conversation with the pair to the topic of the administration's Russia probe and any further developments, including Patel's discovery of so-called 'burn bags' of classified information about the Obama-era investigation. He also praised Bondi over her role in the administration's federal takeover of the Washington police department, which the president has claimed is to fight a 'crime emergency.' At the same time, despite reports about turmoil between Bondi and Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino over the Epstein fallout, Hannity assured his viewers that everything was running smoothly behind the scenes. 'At the FBI, the director Kash Patel is working around the clock with Dan Bongino and others and other agents. Not only are they dealing with the crime crisis left behind by Joe Biden and unvetted illegals, 12-20 million, but also peeling back the layers of what has been – what we have reported as a deeply politicized, weaponized federal bureaucracy.' Notably, Bondi – who has long been a frequent guest on Fox News airwaves – had been absent from the network for weeks amid the growing backlash over the Epstein memo and her central role in it. However, now that she is leading the president's 'hostile takeover' of the nation's capital, and Fox News has appeared to successfully move past the Epstein saga, it would seem that Bondi is once again welcome back on the conservative cable giant.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
POLITICAL ROUNDUP: Another distraction or was there interference in 2016 election?
TAHLEQUAH — In July 2018, a federal grand jury in the District of Columbia returned an indictment against Russian military intelligence officers for their alleged roles in interfering with the 2016 election in the United States. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's 'Most Wanted' site, the individuals indicted should be considered armed and dangerous and an international flight risk. 'The indictment charges 11 defendants, Boris Alekseyevich Antonov, Dmitriy Sergeyevich Badin, Nikolay Yuryevich Kozachek, Aleksey Viktorovich Lukashev, Artem Andreyevich Malyshev, Sergey Aleksandrovich Morgachev, Aleksandr Vladimirovich Osadchuk, Aleksey Aleksandrovich Potemkin, Ivan Sergeyevich Yermakov, Pavel Vyacheslavovich Yershov, and Viktor Borisovich Netyksho, with a computer hacking conspiracy involving gaining unauthorized access into the computers of U.S. persons and entities involved in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, stealing documents from those computers, and staging releases of the stolen documents to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election,' states the site. Other indictments include aggravated identity theft, false registration of a domain name and conspiracy to commit money laundering, the website notes. 'Two defendants, Aleksandr Vladimirovich Osadchuk and Anatoliy Sergeyevich Kovalev, are charged with a separate conspiracy to commit computer crimes, relating to hacking into the computers of U.S. persons and entities responsible for the administration of 2016 U.S. elections, such as state boards of elections, secretaries of state, and U.S. companies that supplied software and other technology related to the administration of U.S. elections,' states the site. A federal warrant was issued for each of these defendants when the indictment was returned by the grand jury. This week, Attorney General Pam Bondi ordered an investigation into allegations that President Barack Obama's administration made up evidence of interference in the 2016 election This was reported on CNN in an article titled, 'Pam Bondi has a new probe into the handling of 2016 Russian meddling. John Durham already spent four years investigating it,' published Aug. 11. During Trump's first term, Attorney General at the time, Bill Barr, said the government was spying on American citizens. Barr had Durham lead a four-year investigation. 'But Durham's lengthy investigation did not lead to any criminal charges — or allegations of significant wrongdoing — related to the CIA and intelligence community's role in concluding that Russia interfered in the 2016 election and wanted to help Trump win,' states the article. Requests for input on this topic from U.S. Sen. James Lankford, R-District 51, U.S. Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-District 52, and U.S. Rep. Josh Brecheen, R-District 2, went unanswered for this article by press time. On the Facebook forum Aug. 9, readers were asked what they believe is behind the investigation, and if they thought there was Russian interference. Kevin McFarland believes there was no interference. 'I believe it was a concoction from the Clinton camp to distract from her email scandal,' McFarland said. Susan Feller said all roads lead to Russian President Vladimir Putin. 'This is supported by cold, hard, indisputable facts. What the studies did not find, however, is that Trump personally colluded with the Russians. People around him did,' Feller said. Darrel Ratliff 'absolutely agrees' there was Russian interference. 'But this investigation will come up with whatever they want it to come up with,' Ratliff said. Eric Swanson reminded commenters on the forum that multiple investigations have found that Russia interfered in the 2016 election with the goal of helping Trump's campaign and damaging Clinton's. Swanson said U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard's claim about the Obama administration defies common sense. 'If there were evidence of such a conspiracy, why did four investigations fail to uncover it?' Swanson said. 'If the investigation proves that there was a conspiracy, then the perpetrators should be held accountable.' Swanson suspects this probe is an attempt to please Trump by attacking his political opponents, a clear example of the weaponization of the Department of Justice that 'MAGAs love to complain about.' Devin Gordon said this current situation is like a game of Monopoly: Someone gets mad and flips the board, or the winner loses when they acquire everything and the remaining players can't pay their rent. 'The housing market is collapsing, giving investment firms that already own every industry in America an opportunity to move in and buy more real estate for pennies on the dollar, closing the door on homeownership for millions of working Americans,' Gordon said. 'The government is quietly federalizing law enforcement, beginning in D.C., which will undoubtedly spread through the rest of our country.' Gordon said that AI and surveillance are spreading with little to no safeguards or restrictions put in place to protect the public. 'The resources stripped from us for one AI data center is astonishing, and they're popping up everywhere,' Gordon said. 'They sell it under the same old guise of public safety, then watch and laugh at the people as they ignorantly cheer on the things intended to replace and restrict them.' The people in power aren't Republicans or Democrats, they're friends, working on a common interest for themselves and the people who pay their salaries, which isn't U.S. taxpayers, Gordon said. 'They will be long gone, enjoying all they stole from us, while we're broke, fighting among ourselves, arguing about today's topic, unable to pay rent, unable to buy food, unable to afford life while being tracked and surveilled, wishing we'd have flipped the board a while ago,' Gordon said. What you said In a poll on TDP's website, readers were asked: 'Do you believe there was Russian meddling in the 2016 election, and who was behind it?' The answer that got the most votes was, 'Barack Obama and his allies,' with 36.5%; 31.1% answered, 'Putin and Trump and their allies;' 9.5% voted 'Vladimir Putin only;' and 9.5% voted, 'no one; there was no meddling.' Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
It's time to stop relying on FBI data alone to compare sexual violence rates between U.S. states
To the average American, talk of 'FBI statistics' conjures up images of unassailable data needing no further questioning. During the past decade, however, significant limitations in official crime numbers have become more apparent, prompting calls for caution, including by the FBI itself. On its own website, the Federal Bureau of Investigation "strongly discourages" data users against using rankings based on their own 'Uniform Crime Reporting' numbers to compare different locations. The FBI notes that 'incomplete analyses have often created misleading perceptions which adversely affect geographic entities and their residents' — this, 'despite repeated warnings against these practices.' This explains the FBI's own 'longstanding policy against ranking participating law enforcement agencies on the basis of crime data alone.' Such rankings, they say, 'ignore the uniqueness of each locale,' given the 'many factors that cause the nature and type of crime to vary from place to place.' Despite those cautions, this has been common practice for years among scholars, journalists and public-facing websites like Statista and WalletHub, which have used FBI data as a primary metric to compare U.S. states on sexual violence and other crimes. The many factors shaping FBI data FBI numbers do tell us something meaningful, especially when considered alongside other available data. 'For complex problems like this that are hard to measure and hard to get disclosure, it's really beneficial to have a lot of sources of information,' says Kathleen C. Basile, an associate director for science in the Division of Violence Prevention in the Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Her colleague Sharon G. Smith, also a behavioral scientist in the Division of Violence Prevention at the CDC, shares in a joint interview with the Deseret News that data from both FBI arrests and emergency room admissions give us an idea of how victims of sexual violence 'evaluate what happened to them' and how often they 'feel comfortable telling an authority.' 'Do they think it's serious enough to report? Are they worried about being shamed? Are they worried about retaliation?' A community where these kinds of fears dominate would have less reporting of sexual crime — whereas healthier norms of sharing and openness could be associated in a given locale with markedly higher official figures. There are many other personal and systemic factors that can influence whether something like sexual violence against a youth or adult is reported to police. In addition to police distrust and uncertainty at their ability to help, individuals may feel shame and fear of retaliation, and choose not to report due to fear about being blamed or not believed, feelings of guilt or embarrassment, worries about social or professional consequences, and complex, ongoing relationships with the perpetrator. Others face pressure from unsupportive friends or family, aren't emotionally ready to speak due to emotional trauma, or struggle with gaps in memory caused by trauma or substance use. Limited access to support services can also be a reporting barrier, as can concerns about legal processes that risk reopening emotional wounds. There can also be limited awareness of what 'counts' as sexual violence, alongside another set of factors that the FBI emphasizes can vary among different U.S. locations in a way that impacts crime rates. These factors include population size and density, the proportion of young people in a given area, economic conditions, cultural and religious characteristics, divorce rates, and state-level policies. The FBI also highlights the importance of the 'effective strength of local law enforcement agencies,' 'citizens' attitudes toward crime' and the 'crime reporting practices of the community,' examined in more detail below. Assault never reported to the FBI Manhattan Institute scholar Jeffrey H. Anderson reported in City Journal last fall that only 85% of law enforcement agencies submitted data for 2023 — meaning 'the FBI is capturing only a portion of crimes reported to police.' According to the Marshall Project's analysis of participation data from the FBI Uniform Crime Reporting, nearly one-third of the nation's 18,000 law enforcement agencies were also missing from the FBI's 2022 crime statistics. After his own analysis of short-comings in the FBI data in 2022, Theodore P. Cross, a professor of social work at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, concluded that 'this is a human process in which a sophisticated data collection task is put on the shoulders of law enforcement professionals who have a million different responsibilities.' Cross said in a recent Deseret News interview that 'many law enforcement agencies are not going to have data specialists. They're not going to have people whose primary responsibility is data. It's going to be an added function for somebody who might be doing 12 other things.' Because there can be long delays between when someone is summoned to court and when they are actually arrested, some arrests are never officially reported to the FBI in certain parts of the country. 'The effect is to reduce the arrest rate,' Cross explained. 'We found that it was a bigger problem for some types of crime than others,' he said, noting it was 'more common in sexual assault cases' based on data from Massachusetts. (Officials at Utah's Bureau of Criminal Identification told the Deseret News that the state has quality control measures in place to prevent this issue.) Pressure to undercount sexual assault An earlier, 2014 analysis of federal sexual violence figures, by University of Kansas law professor Corey Rayburn Yung, found that 22% of the 210 studied police departments (from cities with populations of more than 100,000) demonstrated 'substantial statistical irregularities in their rape data.' Drawing on a statistical method to detect outlier cities 'with highly unusual patterns in their submitted crime data' between 1995 and 2012, Yung identified 46 large U.S. cities that 'appear to be undercounting on a consistently high level.' Yung highlighted 'questionable reporting techniques to create the false impression of decreasing violent crime' as one explanation for undercounting, connected with pressure to show improved crime statistics year after year. This includes cases where officers label an allegation as 'unfounded' with little or no subsequent investigation, or they misclassify the incident as a lesser offense. In other instances, officers may fail to file any report at all after interviewing a rape victim. All this may contribute to artificially low statistics in different locations in the U.S., including New Orleans, Washington, D.C., and Baltimore, which have all been highly scrutinized. Journalist Soraya Chemaly, for instance, reported in 2014 that Baltimore had 'a suspicious 80 percent decline' in rape statistics over 15 years starting in 1995 (compared with a 7% reduction nationally during the same period). In his 2014 report, entitled 'How to Lie with Rape Statistics,' Yung noted that the number of jurisdictions that appear to be undercounting had increased by 61% during the time period studied, prompting him to warn about systematically misunderstanding the scope of America's 'hidden rape crisis.' Sexual violence data from cities like Philadelphia, St. Louis, Atlanta, Dallas, Milwaukee and Oakland also raised significant concerns about accuracy or reliability. By contrast, Salt Lake City and Provo were on the list of cities without any anomalies in their data. Higher agency participation, higher reporting? Crime numbers vary based on the 'effective strength of law enforcement agencies,' according to the FBI. Utah has repeatedly ranked among the states with a higher percentage of law enforcement agencies submitting data to the FBI — including 98.5% in 2019 (seventh highest), 92% in 2022 (15th highest) and among the 28 states with 100% of agencies reporting in 2024. Officials from Utah's Bureau of Criminal Identification in the Department of Public Safety told the Deseret News that the state passed the FBI's National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) Quality Control Audit in June 2024 'with no issue or areas of concern.' Thanks, in part, to a state law requiring agencies to report data, 98.14% of Utah's population in 2024 was covered by law enforcement agencies submitting information to the FBI. Why does this matter when it comes to sexual violence statistics? Because states with a higher percentage of law enforcement agencies reporting to the FBI also tend to show higher official rape rates. Our own review of available data confirms a general correlation between higher per capita rape rates and stronger agency participation. High levels of crime data, therefore, may reflect better data capture — not necessarily more crime. This connection between high agency reporting and accurate crime statistics shows up in the other direction as well: States with lower FBI reporting (Florida, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey) have less reliable rape estimates, with data likely unrepresentative and significantly understating the true extent of sexual violence. Higher police trust, higher reporting? Even more than other violent crime, rape goes unreported for a variety of reasons. Among felony crimes, a resolution or 'clearance' of sexual assaults through a successful report and arrest has the most variability. That might explain why the percentage of rape or sexual assaults reported to police in the United States ranges so widely across different years. For instance, in a single year between 2017 and 2018, the percentage of rape or sexual assault victimizations reported to police declined from 40% to 25%, according to the U.S. Department of Justice — yet went up again to 33.9% the year afterward. And between 2022 and 2023, the percentage of rape or sexual assault victimizations reported to police went up from 21% to 46%, a 25-point swing. Citing Yung's analysis, the writer Soraya Chemaly summarized that 'law enforcement officials who are dedicated to addressing these problems understand that higher reporting numbers are a sign of trust in police departments.' Higher trust in police departments are an indicator that a given state has a greater willingness and tendency to report crime, including sexual violence. Utahns have relatively high confidence in police, according to available state surveys over the past decade: A 2013 Libertas survey of Utah citizens found 82% of Utah citizens surveyed responded affirmatively when asked 'speaking generally, do you trust or distrust police officers?' A 2015 Dan Jones & Associates survey found 84% of Utahns saying they 'trust law enforcement in my local community to use their powers ethically and appropriately.' A 2018 Salt Lake Tribune-Hinckley Institute of Politics survey found 94% of Utahns expressing confidence in police (60% a 'great deal' and 34% 'some'). And in 2021 — the year following George Floyd's death when rates of public trust in law enforcement plummeted across the nation — a Deseret News/Hinckley Institute of Politics poll still found 82% of Utahns reporting that they 'mostly' or 'completely' trust their local police department. These numbers show that Utah's public confidence in law enforcement is consistently high — sometimes 20 to 30 percentage points above the national average, depending on the year. This suggests that Utahns may be especially willing to trust police with disclosures and reports, challenging earlier perceptions that state residents are generally less likely to report crimes. One often-cited, concerning statistic from 2007 claimed that only '11.8% of individuals who have experienced rape or sexual assault in Utah reported the crime to law enforcement.' While frequently referenced, that data is nearly two decades old. A more recent estimate from 2022, published by Utah's Public Health Indicator Based System, found that '27% of rape or sexual assaults were reported to the police in Utah,' which is closer to national reporting rates, which typically range from 21% to 40%, depending on the year. How Utah compares with other states in willingness to report is almost impossible to know, since there is no comprehensive, state-by-state data showing how often rapes are reported to police. National crime surveys simply haven't been designed to provide reliable state-level reporting rates. Furthermore, officials from Utah's Bureau of Criminal Identification told the Deseret News that they 'only receive data on crimes that are reported to law enforcement' and do not have access to any information that would indicate how many rapes go unreported or that reveal broader reporting trends. Wide variation in measuring assault across the nation States vary widely in how accurately they capture data on sexual violence. Ironically, those states that do a better job of reporting may appear worse in FBI statistics simply because they're more comprehensive, diligent and transparent. All this again explains why the FBI has 'strongly discouraged' comparing locations on their crime data — something that happened again last week when national and local media touted new rankings of 'America's Most Dangerous Cities' drawing exclusively on FBI data. Sexual violence data is even more fraught. This is different from suggesting that false reports are commonly being made in a way that inflates sexual violence rates. In fact, professor Julie Valentine, a sexual assault researcher at the University of Utah, told the Deseret News that if she could dispel one myth, it would be the widespread belief that 'there's a lot of false reports of rape.' She notes that in Salt Lake and Utah counties, the rate of false reporting is as low as 3% to 9%. False reports are not the problem. Rather, we're highlighting the likelihood of some states having artificially low rape rates (in a way that makes other states with more accurate counts appear unusually high), all based on inaccuracies and variation in FBI crime numbers that make state-by-state comparisons so fraught. If we want to truly understand the scope of sexual violence in America, it's time to look beyond the surface of national crime statistics. The real story lies not just in the official numbers — but in how, where and whether they're reported at all.
