RHOC Alum Lydia McLaughlin Planning Lawsuit Against Cop Who Shot Her Brother Dead
On April 17, alum older brother was riding his motorcycle in Newport Beach. According to dash cam footage, Geoffrey Shyam Stirling stopped at a red light, where a police officer was also stopped.
Even though the light remained red, Lydia's brother decided to continue down the Pacific Coast Highway, running the light. Immediately flipping on his lights and sirens, the police officer pulled the former RHOC star's brother over at the side of the highway.
Though he stepped off his motorcycle, Geoffrey refused to follow the officer's instructions to sit on the curb. When he lunged for the officer, a struggle took place, and Geoffrey allegedly grabbed the officer's taser. Sadly, the physical altercation resulted in Geoffrey's death when the officer pulled his pistol.
Following the public release of both the officer's bodycam and the dashcam footage, Lydia's family plans legal action. In a statement to The U.S. Sun, Lydia, her father Scott Stirling and her brother Jesse Stirling called the footage 'disturbing.'
'The videos have raised serious concerns and many questions about the actions of that police officer,' the statement reads. 'The family through their Attorneys plan to file a lawsuit in Federal Court to obtain full answers and seek accountability.'
The family also claimed that Lydia's brother was 'experiencing a mental health crisis' at the time of the incident. At one point in the video, he appeared to be urinating through his pants.
'Geoff was unarmed and posed no deadly threat to the officer,' the statement continues, although the Newport PD alleges he grabbed the officer's taser and pressed it to the back of the officer's head.
Drawing his gun, the officer demanded Geoffrey drop the taser. When he didn't comply, the officer fired his weapon six times.
Rushed to a nearby hospital, Geoffrey passed away from his injuries. His death comes just six months after the passing of Lydia's pot-smoking, hippie mom, Judy Stirling.
'The family remains heartbroken and devastated that Geoff was taken from them in what appears to be an unjustified use of lethal force,' the statement concludes. 'Equally tragic is that there may have been other options and tactics available to the officer that he failed to utilize based on his training.'
Newport Beach Police Department is currently undergoing its own independent investigation of the incident.
The Real Housewives of Orange County is now streaming on Peacock and on Hayu in the UK and Ireland.
TELL US – WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE BODYCAM FOOTAGE?
The post RHOC Alum Lydia McLaughlin Planning Lawsuit Against Cop Who Shot Her Brother Dead appeared first on Reality Tea.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
2 hours ago
- New York Times
NASCAR wins key appeal in antitrust lawsuit filed by Michael Jordan's 23XI Racing, Front Row Motorsports
A three-judge federal appeals court has overturned a key ruling in the NASCAR antitrust case, dealing a significant blow to the race teams seeking to retain their status for this season. Front Row Motorsports and 23XI Racing, the team co-owned by Michael Jordan and three-time Daytona 500 winner Denny Hamlin, had won a preliminary injunction from a U.S. District Court in December that allowed them to race as 'charter' teams in 2025 without being subjected to a clause that prevented them from suing NASCAR. Advertisement But the U.S. Court of Appeals overturned that Thursday, ruling the lower court 'abused its discretion' with the preliminary injunction, clearing the way for NASCAR to strip three charters from each of the two race teams. The charters are valued in the tens of millions of dollars. Charters are franchise-like licenses that allow race teams to have guaranteed entries into NASCAR Cup Series races and earn the accompanying higher payouts. Without charters, 23XI and Front Row would have to race as 'open' teams and risk failing to qualify for a race; open teams also get drastically less money from each race than charter teams. The ruling follows a hearing last month in which the three judges expressed considerable skepticism over the grounds on which the preliminary injunction was granted, saying there was no similar precedent in more than 125 years of the Sherman Antitrust Act. At issue was a release clause in NASCAR's 2025 charter agreements the teams claimed would prevent them from bringing antitrust action against NASCAR if they signed it. The lower court agreed with the teams that the clause was a monopolistic practice and allowed them to sign a version of the charter agreement that removed the release clause while the lawsuit was pending this season. But the appeals court disagreed, ruling there were no previous cases that said requiring a release constituted an antitrust violation. 'Because we have found no support for the proposition that a business entity or person violates the antitrust laws by requiring a prospective participant to give a release for past conduct as a condition for doing business, we cannot conclude that the plaintiffs made a clear showing that they were likely to succeed on the merits of that theory,' the court said. 'And without satisfaction of the likelihood-of-success element, the plaintiffs were not entitled to a preliminary injunction.' Advertisement During the May hearing, judges had warned the teams their claim came across as 'having your cake and eating it, too.' That's because the teams were suing over monopolistic practices while also asking the court to force NASCAR to allow them to participate. 'If you don't want the contract, you don't enter into it and you sue,' Judge Paul Niemeyer said at the time. 'Or if you want the contract, you enter into it, and you've given up past releases.' It is not yet clear what will happen next in the immediate aftermath of Thursday's ruling. If NASCAR chooses to follow through by stripping the charters, the teams would lose approximately a combined quarter billion dollars in charter values in addition to the lower race winnings they will now receive. The teams can still appeal this ruling, so it would not go into effect immediately. Any team losing a charter is impactful considering the additional millions in lost revenue associated with owning a charter. Now, compound that by three — the number of charters each owned by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports — and the magnitude of Thursday's ruling really is driven home. Both teams stand to lose a considerable amount of money, potentially to such a degree that it raises questions about how each team will be able to effectively operate going forward. Yes, both ownership groups have the financial means to withstand the short-term hit as their federal lawsuit against NASCAR plays out in the courts (the trial is set to begin Dec. 1). And the teams could still appeal and win, which would make all this null and void. As it stands, though, this appears to be a body blow that could stunt their respective competitiveness over the remainder of the 2025 season. From a bigger perspective as it relates to the ongoing lawsuit, should the teams appeal and lose, one has to wonder if Thursday's ruling influences 23XI and Front Row to reconsider pursuing their joint federal lawsuit. Or perhaps it emboldens them even more to continue forward, even in spite of the financial impact. — Jordan Bianchi, motorsports writer
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
'High risk': The Star's $167m credit to money launderer
The Star was willing to offer millions in gambling credit to a known money launderer and wrote falsified letters to enable overseas bank transfers from unknown individuals. These details and many more have been exposed as financial watchdog AUSTRAC pursues the embattled casino giant in the Federal Court. The Star made "innumerable contraventions" of Australian anti-money laundering laws through its conduct, including a willingness to do business with 117 high-risk customers, barrister Daniel Tynan told a Federal Court hearing on Thursday. The casino has admitted that 70 of these customers - who were junket funders, operators or players - each posed a high money laundering risk. "They would have the opportunity to gamble that money, get the returns, wash it, do it again," Mr Tynan told Justice Cameron Moore. One of these customers, Suncity junket operator Alvin Chau, was provided with credit of up to $266.67 million. Chau funded at least 3690 junket programs at The Star's Sydney casino, bringing in a turnover of about $12.6 billion. Despite media reports linking him to overseas crime syndicates, The Star continued to engage with the Suncity head, Mr Tynan said. It was only after Chau was arrested by Macau police and hit with a number of charges - including money laundering - that the casino stopped dealing with him, the court has heard. Another customer was given almost $167 million in credit despite The Star knowing from at least 2014 that he had been involved in alleged money laundering, Mr Tynan said. The casino also facilitated high-risk transactions from 1221 customers who transferred money in and out through channels that obscured their identity, the court was told. Staff at EEIS, a Macau-based subsidiary of The Star, wrote up falsified letters for local customers wanting to send funds through the Bank of China directly to the casino, Mr Tynan continued. These letters contained false claims about the source of the funds being deposited, the barrister said. Almost $990 million in deposits were made through The Star's hotel debit cards, allowing gamblers to transfer money directly to the casino without going through an Australian bank. The cards also allowed gamblers in countries like China with restrictions on gambling to disguise their transactions by claiming they were for other purposes like hotel accommodation, Justice Moore was told. The Star advanced money to customers who complained about the 24 to 48-hour waiting period before funds hit their accounts. Individuals could also withdraw cash directly, Mr Tynan said. "This is coming in anonymously, taken out in cash - it can be used for anything." AUSTRAC is seeking $400 million in penalties over the breaches while the casino has argued it can only pay $100 million without being pushed into administration. In April, the failing casino business received a $300 million rescue package from US gaming giant Bally's Corporation. The hearing continues on Friday.
CBS News
20 hours ago
- CBS News
21-year-old sentenced for role in murder, hostage plot in Baltimore vacant home over drug deal
A federal judge in Baltimore sentenced a 21-year-old man to 22 years in prison for his role in a 2022 murder inside a vacant home. According to federal prosecutors, the motive for the killing was money and drugs. The murder plot The plot unfolded in May 2022. According to the plea agreement, Ziyon Thompson picked up the victim, Miguel Soto-Diaz, at a hotel near the Inner Harbor and drove him to a vacant home on Furrow Street in Southwest Baltimore's Carrollton Ridge neighborhood. A federal judge in Baltimore sentenced a 21-year-old man to 22 years in prison for his role in a murder inside a vacant home. CBS News Baltimore Authorities said Soto-Diaz was tied up before the home was set on fire. Authorities said Soto-Diaz was tied up before the home was set on fire. CBS News Baltimore Federal investigators said Soto-Diaz ran a marijuana operation in California and struck a deal with the suspect to provide drugs. Thompson then devised a plot to hold Soto-Diaz hostage, authorities said. The victim was gagged and strapped to a chair. Court records said he placed a call to the victim's son on FaceTime. According to the plea agreement, Thompson "showed Soto-Diaz tied to a chair with duct tape over his mouth and zip ties on his hands and ankles. The defendant demanded 200 pounds of marijuana and $50,000 for the safe return of Soto-Diaz." A short time later, the victim was shot and the home was set ablaze. Investigators found a gas can and five spent shell casings. Other evidence included this text from Thompson: "Papi said send the bags and money so he can be ok and he said don't call the police or he want [sic] be coming home." This week, a judge sentenced Thompson to 22 years and one month in federal prison for aiding and abetting the murder. Once he completes the sentence, he will face five years of supervised release. The homeowner fought squatters Darryl Brown owned the home at the time. As part of an in-depth series of reports on vacant homes, he told WJZ Investigator Mike Hellgren earlier this year how he tried to renovate it, but squatters took over. "I remember it was myself and the police officer standing in front of a young man that went in my home and demanded, told me and the police officer, that he was exercising squatters' rights. I was like I don't know what that means. The officer told me to back up and to go downtown. I went downtown and the judge denied me," Brown recalled. Of Soto-Diaz's killing, he said, "It was a murder that psychologically messed me up." He eventually got a court order to remove the squatters, but by the time it was enforced, the home was burned. Brown said he sold it at a loss. Asked what he would tell the current owner, Brown said, "Get out of it. Right now, it's like a sinking ship because I don't see anything coming from the ashes." Still vacant More than three years later, 325 Furrow Street is still vacant and seemingly in worse shape, with a tree growing through the second story. CBS News Baltimore Most of the homes on that block are not occupied. The home next door is unsecured and filled with trash. Most of the homes on that block are not occupied. The home next door is unsecured and filled with trash. CBS News Baltimore The city says there are currently 12,605 vacant homes in Baltimore City. They have made progress on reducing the number of vacants, but a new permitting system has faced slowdowns that led council member Odette Ramos to call it "an abomination." The city has an ambitious plan to reduce that number to a "functional zero" within the next 15 years at a cost of $3 billion.
