US tourists held in maximum security Mexico prison freed, return home
US tourists held in maximum security Mexico prison freed, return home
Show Caption
Hide Caption
FBI issues tips for travelers going abroad for spring break
The FBI's Los Angeles field office issued tips to Americans traveling abroad for spring break, urging travelers to stay safe.
Paul and Christy Akeo were released from a Mexican prison after 32 days, following allegations of defrauding a hospitality company.
The couple's arrest stemmed from a timeshare contract dispute with The Palace Company, which they claim involved undelivered services.
As part of the resolution, the disputed amount of $116,587.84 will be donated to a Mexican charity for orphans.
Two American tourists who were held in a Cancun, Mexico, prison have been released, their attorneys said.
Paul and Christy Akeo returned to Lansing, Michigan, after 32 days, according to a news release from the law firm Manly, Stewart & Finaldi. Prosecutors in the Mexican state of Quintana Roo had alleged the couple defrauded a hospitality company by canceling nearly $117,000 in credit card transactions.
The arrest stemmed from a timeshare contract dispute with The Palace Company. The Akeos' family maintained they were wrongly accused of fraud.
The couple's children, Lindsey Lemke Hull and Michael Lemke, thanked President Donald Trump, U.S. special envoy Adam Boehler and Rep. Tom Barrett, R-Mich., 'for working tirelessly for the release of Paul and Christy Akeo' in a statement from the family on Thursday.
Barrett visited the maximum security prison where the Akeos were being held, he said in a post on X on Wednesday. 'I met with them personally for an hour and learned of the horrific conditions they are facing – rubbled walls, overcrowded cells, toilets that don't flush, and disgusting food,' he wrote. 'This has left them scared, frustrated, and struggling to find hope. I assured them that I am doing everything I can to urgently secure their safe release.'
The lawmaker later posted a video on X on Thursday night showing him boarding a plane with the couple.
Palace and the Akeos 'agreed to a resolution of their dispute,' the company told USA TODAY in an emailed statement.
'The Palace Company and the Akeos agree that $116,587.84, the amount that was contested by the Akeos and refunded to them by American Express, will be donated to a bona fide established nonprofit in Mexico benefiting orphan children,' the company said. 'Each party regrets that this incident occurred.'
A judge validated the agreement and dismissed the criminal case, the Quintana Roo Attorney General's office said. "The Prosecutor's Office reiterates its commitment to justice and social welfare, acting in accordance with the law to ensure repair for damages and respect for the rights of all parties involved," prosecutors said in a translated Facebook post.
The couple's attorney, John Manly, said late last month that the Akeos disputed the charges with the credit card company after Palace failed 'to deliver services," including canceling booked weeks without notice. Palace told USA TODAY at the time that the pair's weeks were canceled because they violated their membership terms 'after promoting and profiting from their benefits on social media.' The Akeos were notified of the breach, the company said, and later disputed the charges.
Manly said the couple believed they were allowed to market and sell some of their weeks to third parties. He also accused Palace of demanding $250,000 and that the Akeos sign a non-disclosure agreement in exchange for their release, among other conditions.
'No American should be held hostage to the demands of a private company anywhere in the world,' Hull and Lemke said in their statement Thursday. 'Paul and Christy are under the care of physicians and therapists to be treated for illnesses and trauma inflicted upon them during their captivity. We ask that their privacy be respected as they rest and heal.'
Nathan Diller is a consumer travel reporter for USA TODAY based in Nashville. You can reach him at ndiller@usatoday.com.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Boulder illegal immigrant terror suspect's 'possible radicalization' probed by authorities: retired FBI agent
In the wake of a violent firebombing at a pro-Israel rally in Boulder, Colorado, a retired FBI agent said that authorities are probing the Egyptian suspect's "possible radicalization," an expert said. "Authorities are currently conducting a forensic search of the scene, collecting device remnants, fingerprints, and possible surveillance footage," Jason Pack, a retired FBI special agent, told Fox News Digital. "Background investigations are underway—both locally and internationally, likely with Egyptian authorities through the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, into the suspect's history, affiliations, and possible radicalization." Authorities identified the suspect as 45-year-old Egyptian national Mohamed Sabry Soliman, who had overstayed his visa. "He came armed with Molotov cocktails and a homemade flamethrower. He shouted 'Free Palestine' and other slogans during the assault. This wasn't random. It was personal and likely politically or ideologically driven," he said. Boulder, Colorado Suspected Terror Attack Suspect Mohamed Sabry Soliman Faces Murder, Assault, Other Charges Investigators are now determining whether the incident meets the federal legal definition of domestic terrorism. Read On The Fox News App "Authorities are actively investigating whether the attack where the suspect used Molotov cocktails and a makeshift flamethrower while shouting 'Free Palestine,' meets the legal definition of a domestic terror incident under U.S. law," Pack explained. He cited U.S. Code § 2331, which outlines domestic terrorism as acts that violate criminal law, are intended to intimidate or influence, and occur within the United States. Soliman, 45, is charged with violating 18 U.S.C. §§ 249(a)(1) and (a)(2), federal hate crime statutes involving acts motivated by race, religion, or national origin. "Investigators will likely examine whether the suspect's actions, targeting a public gathering with incendiary devices, were ideologically motivated and intended to instill fear or make a political statement," he said. According to Pack, the public details already suggest several qualifying elements. He said that prosecutors will need "more than just ideology." "However, federal prosecutors will need more than just ideology; they'll have to prove intent to intimidate or coerce," he said. "Key evidence could include statements, writings, digital communications, or planning behavior." The suspect's behavioral red flags are also under scrutiny, he said. "According to sources familiar with the case, the attacker was reportedly shirtless, highly agitated, and made no attempt to escape after launching the assault," Pack said. "From a behavioral and psychological profiling perspective, this suggests impulsive extremism or a desire for martyrdom rather than escape or survival. These traits are often associated with ideologically driven lone actors." "This kind of attacker typically operates without a support network but may be influenced by online propaganda or perceived injustices," he said. "The erratic behavior, crude weaponry, and politically charged language point to a disorganized, emotionally unstable individual whose radicalization—if confirmed—could place the case within the growing trend of unpredictable, lone-wolf-style domestic attacks." Us Politicians, Jewish Groups Condemn 'Horrifying' Boulder Terror Attack: 'Vile, Antisemitic Act Of Terror' The retired Supervisory Special Agent from the FBI with 21 years of service said that he has investigated cases "just like this." "It's rare, but not unheard of, for someone to act out violently in support of a cause, especially when that person feels isolated, powerless, or desperate. Based on the information we know now, Soliman appears to fit the profile of a lone actor, someone with a grievance, who may have felt unheard and decided to lash out. They will also have to assess his mental health." "The homemade weapons show planning. The target, a group rallying on behalf of Israeli hostages, was clearly chosen on purpose. That suggests a level of intent and maybe radicalization, though there's no public evidence yet tying him to any organized group," Pack said. The affidavit paints a detailed picture of Soliman's planning. In an interview with investigators, Soliman said that he researched on YouTube how to make Moltov Cocktails, purchased the ingredients and constructed them. He told investigators that he wanted to kill the "Zionist group" and wished they were all dead after searching for the gathering online. He also stated that he would carry out the attack again if given the chance. He referenced "our land," which he identified as Palestine, and his desire to stop supporters of Israel from "taking over" that land, according to the affidavit. Pack said that the FBI and local authorities are digging into "everything," noting Soliman's online history, phone, travel records and any international connections. "That includes whether he downloaded bomb-making materials or had contact with foreign actors," he said. "Agents are also talking to people who knew him in Colorado Springs, where he lived. They'll want to know if he talked about violence, politics, or anything that might have raised red flags. Investigators will look for any signs this could have been prevented." Suspect In Boulder Terror Attack Determined To Be Egyptian Man In Us Illegally: Fbi On the scene, forensics will remain a top priority for federal investigators, Pack said. "The forensic work at the scene is just as important. They're collecting every piece of evidence, from bottle shards to accelerant residue. That'll help piece together exactly what he used, how he built it, and where he might have tested it," said Pack. "This kind of violence shakes communities—and it's not something law enforcement takes lightly. One man with homemade firebombs injured nearly a dozen people. That's why police around the country will be taking a second look at security plans for similar events, especially ones tied to Israel, Gaza, or other politically charged issues." Despite the gravity of the attack, Pack believes there's no indication of a broader conspiracy. "From what I've seen, there's no broader plot here. But that doesn't mean it ends in Boulder. Investigators are thinking long term—looking for signs this kind of thing could happen again somewhere else." "These kinds of lone-wolf attacks are tough to predict, but they're not impossible to stop," he said. "The key is sharing intel, watching for behavioral warning signs, and not ignoring threats when they surface." "For now, law enforcement is doing what it does best: following the evidence, interviewing witnesses, and staying focused on keeping the public safe."Original article source: Boulder illegal immigrant terror suspect's 'possible radicalization' probed by authorities: retired FBI agent
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - China's courtroom espionage strategy demands a federal response
In April, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit handed down a decision in a stunning case that should be a wake-up call to lawmakers across the country. In U.S. v. Pangang Group, a Chinese state-owned enterprise admitted in open court that it had engaged in state-sponsored industrial espionage, stealing American trade secrets to achieve strategic goals for China's government. The company even tried to invoke sovereign immunity, claiming that theft for the purpose of national industrial development was a legitimate function of the Chinese state. This brazen confession didn't just confirm China's role in weaponizing commercial enterprises for geopolitical gain — it also underscored how vulnerable our systems remain to economic sabotage. One of the least understood, but potentially most damaging, tools in this arsenal is third-party litigation funding. It's time that Congress wakes up and takes steps to address this looming threat. During my time in Congress, I served on the Committee on National Security and learned about many forms of foreign interference, but few are as insidious as third-party funding. Under this system, outside financiers — often anonymous — fund lawsuits in return for a cut of the potential winnings. There is no federal requirement to disclose these arrangements, including whether the backers are foreign nationals, sovereign wealth funds or shell corporations tied to adversarial governments. That must change. Third-party funding isn't necessarily inherently malicious, but this opacity and the nature of these arrangements opens the door to abuse. Although its backers have historically been hedge funds or other investors in pursuit of healthy returns that are insulated from the broader market — which raises its own set of ethical concerns about subverting the justice system to earn a profit — these actors are generally not seeking to undermine the U.S. more broadly. Foreign-backed funders, on the other hand, can use litigation to drain resources from U.S. companies through prolonged legal battles. Not only that, but they can also use such proceedings to obtain access to proprietary information such as technical data, trade secrets and supply-chain vulnerabilities through the discovery process. For firms tied to sectors like AI, pharmaceuticals, aerospace or semiconductor design, this is a direct national security risk. The FBI has called China's economic espionage the 'greatest long-term threat to our nation's information and intellectual property, and to our economic vitality.' Yet right now, we lack even the most basic safeguards to ensure that our courtrooms aren't being used as intelligence-gathering venues for hostile foreign powers. That is unacceptable. Fortunately, there are solutions that are currently under consideration. Rep. Ben Cline's (R-Va.) Protecting Our Courts from Foreign Manipulation Act of 2025 would be a critical first step. It would prohibit foreign governments and sovereign wealth funds from investing in third-party litigation funding, require transparency about who is funding litigation, and direct the Department of Justice to report annually on foreign activity in this space. Another promising effort backed by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) is the Litigation Funding Transparency Act, which would mandate disclosure of funding sources in all federal civil cases, ensuring that judges, juries and defendants know who's really pulling the strings behind the scenes. These federal efforts echo a growing movement at the state level. In my home state of Kansas, for example, lawmakers recently enacted Senate Bill 54 — a strong, bipartisan reform that mandates the disclosure of third-party litigation funding agreements within 30 days of execution. It also requires a sworn statement that identifies all parties to the agreement, whether the funder can influence litigation or settlement decisions, and if any foreign entity is involved in the financing. But piecemeal state action can only go so far, and we need Congress to act quickly. Third-party litigation funding should not be a backdoor for China or any other adversary to undermine American companies, steal our intellectual property, or compromise our national defense base. When state-owned enterprises such as the Pangang Companies can openly admit in court that they steal American innovation for geopolitical gain, we can no longer afford to treat litigation finance as just another investment vehicle. It now has the potential to be a vector of strategic exploitation. National security isn't bounded by state lines, and neither is foreign influence. The threats are real, the stakes are high, and the time for action is now. Let's not wait for the next courtroom confession to learn what China already knows: that America's legal system is a battlefield, and without reform, we're fighting blindfolded. Todd Tiahrt previously represented the 4th District of Kansas in the U.S. House of Representatives and served on the House Committee on National Security. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Jonathan Joss' Husband Says Actor's Death was a Hate Crime, Details Years of Homophobic Harassment
The husband of Jonathan Joss, the 'King of the Hill' actor fatally shot by a neighbor in San Antonio, thanked Joss for saving his life in the Sunday altercation. He explained that the actor, whom he had just married on Valentine's Day, pushed him out of the line of fire at the site of their former home, which had burned down following repeated threats. '[The neighbor] started yelling violent homophobic slurs at us. He then raised a gun from his lap and fired. Jonathan and I had no weapons. We were not threatening anyone. We were grieving. We were standing side-by-side. When the man fired, Jonathan pushed me out of the way. He saved my life,' Tristan Kern de Gonzales wrote in a Facebook post on Monday. Joss' neighbor, identified as Sigfredo Alvarez-Cega, was arrested a block away. Alvarez-Cega, who reportedly got into a heated argument with Joss before killing him, has been charged with murder. De Gonzales explained that before the neighbor with the gun appeared, they were horrified to discover 'the skull of one of our dogs and its harness placed in clear view. This caused both of us severe emotional distress. We began yelling and crying in response to the pain of what we saw,' he said. 'He was murdered by someone who could not stand the sight of two men loving each other. I was with him when he passed. I told him how much he was loved,' de Gonzales wrote. He also explained that during the two years he and Joss had lived at the site, that 'people in the area … repeatedly told us they would set it on fire. We reported these threats to law enforcement multiple times and nothing was done.' He added that they were 'harassed regularly by individuals who made it clear they did not accept our relationship' from people who were 'openly homophobic.' De Gonzales said that he and Joss were still newlyweds who were looking for a trailer and 'planning our future.' He thanked Joss' friends and fans, concluding his post with, 'My focus now is on protecting Jonathan's legacy and honoring the life we built together … Jonathan saved my life. I will carry that forward. I will protect what he built.' The post Jonathan Joss' Husband Says Actor's Death was a Hate Crime, Details Years of Homophobic Harassment appeared first on TheWrap.
