Arkansas Supreme Court orders gag order lifted in Lonoke County deadly shooting
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – A Thursday ruling by the Arkansas Supreme Court is expected to lead to a gag order being lifted in a deadly Lonoke County shooting.
The case came to the court on behalf of Aaron Spencer, who is facing charges of second-degree murder in the October 2024 shooting death of 67-year-old Michael Fosler.
Lonoke County deputies arrest man after altercation leads to deadly shooting
According to court records, Fosler had been charged in July 2024 with 'numerous sexual offenses against Spencer's teenage daughter, and he was released on bond.'
On the night of the shooting, Spencer realized his daughter had left the house and went looking for her. He found Fosler's truck with his daughter inside and forced it off the road.
'After an altercation, Spencer called 911 to report he had shot Fosler. Fosler died at the scene,' court records state.
National pharmacy company sues Arkansas over law eliminating PBM pharmacy ownership
The record continues that the state requested a gag order on the case on Dec. 4, 2024, due to what it called extensive media coverage, including a news release from Spencer's attorneys that described him as a 'heroic father.' The state argued that the coverage and public statements would lead the community to side with Spencer, thereby harming the integrity of the jury pool.
On Dec. 9, 2024, Spencer's attorney filed an opposition to the gag order. On Dec. 10, the court put the gag order in place 'without holding a hearing,' according to the filing.
Spencer then requested the Supreme Court issue a command, called a 'writ of certiorari,' to the lower court to lift the gag order. His request cited the First Amendment and the Lonoke circuit court exceeded its jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court honored that request on Thursday, and the writ was issued. In its ruling, the court stated: '[W]e hold that the circuit court's action in entering the challenged gag order was on its face a plain, manifest, clear, and gross abuse of discretion and in excess of its authority. Further, there is no other adequate remedy except for a writ of certiorari.'
Arkansas Supreme Court decides TikTok vs. Arkansas case will go forward, denies dismissal request
The ruling also cautioned the court against sealing the case's proceedings from the public, citing it as a constitutional violation.
Spencer's attorneys, Erin Cassinelli and Michael Kaiser, said in a statement that the Supreme Court's decision has far-reaching implications.
'The Court has given clear guidelines for gag orders that will help the public, litigants, and courts across the state appropriately assess case-related speech as balanced with the strong First Amendment protections that are a bedrock of our society,' they stated. 'No longer will state courts be permitted to allow a prosecutor to release alarming and potentially misleading information while a circuit court blanketly restricts a citizen's public explanation of his innocence.'
CVS Pharmacy files suit against Arkansas over new law preventing PBM ownership of pharmacies
They continued that they appreciated the Supreme Court's 'turning the lights back on in Lonoke County.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Could Trump pardon Diddy and end his trial?
Sean "Diddy" Combs is being tried in a New York courtroom for racketeering and sexual trafficking. Could that daily drama vanish instantly if President Donald Trump pardoned the embattled rapper? "Yes, it could," says Brian Kalt, law professor at Michigan State University College of Law, who focuses on legal issues and the presidency. According to Kalt, Trump — who appears to be in the middle of a pardoning spree — would be within his presidential rights to extend a preemptive pardon to fellow New Yorker Combs, who has been described by witnesses so far as violent and abusive. "These are federal charges (against Combs), so that's the main limit. The matter has be federal, it has to be criminal vs. civil, and related to something that's already been done," says Kalt. "But the person doesn't have to even be charged yet, or convicted. The Supreme Court has said preemptive pardons are OK." Trump weighed in on the possibility Friday, May 30, in the Oval Office. "Nobody's asked" about a pardon, the president said. "But I know people are thinking about it. I know they're thinking about it. I think some people have been very close to asking." Trump added, "I haven't spoken to him in years. He really liked me a lot." 'Nobody's asked': President Trump doesn't rule out pardoning Sean 'Diddy' Combs Typically, one of the last gestures from an outgoing president is a pardon. In President Joe Biden's final days in office, he famously pardoned his son, Hunter, convicted of federal gun felonies and federal tax charges. At the end of Trump's first term, he granted clemency to political allies such as Roger Stone, found guilty of obstructing a congressional investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and related offenses. But pardons can take place during a president's term, says Kalt. The right was established in Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution, which among other things gives the president "power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." Kalt says the power to pardon is derived from the British monarch's historic right and stems from a recognition that criminal law was often too harsh, and it was important to have a safety valve. "The president was the best person to be that safety valve because of his political accountability," he says. But that's where things get murky, he adds, noting that Republican lawmakers "don't appear willing to hold the president accountable" for granting pardons, meaning they aren't costing him in terms of political capital. In contrast, President Gerald Ford's controversial pardoning of disgraced President Richard Nixon was perceived so negatively "that it probably cost Ford re-election in 1976," Kalt says. In just over 100 days since taking office, Trump has issued pardons to a broad range of personalities. They include Todd and Julie Chrisley, stars of the reality show "Chrisley Knows Best," who were convicted in 2022 of swindling $36 million from Atlanta banks and being tax evaders, and rapper NBA YoungBoy, who in 2024 was sentenced to two years in prison for weapons possession. He also pardoned former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich, convicted of wire fraud and extortion, and Jan. 6 participant and "Bob's Burgers" actor Jay Johnston. The reason many presidents issue pardons at the end of their terms is precisely to avoid political fallout, says Kalt. In that sense, Trump's brash approach suggests he has no concerns about such ramifications. "I don't agree with these pardons on their merits, but the fact that he did them when he is politically accountable as opposed to slinking out the door does add some legitimacy to them in that sense," he says. "With pardons, you don't need Congress, you wave your magic wand and it happens. You can see the appeal for a president, particularly one like Trump." One can also see the appeal for those such as Combs, whose ordeal could end instantly should Trump's pardon "wand" wave his way. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Will Trump pardon Diddy? Trial could end, experts say
Business of Fashion
3 hours ago
- Business of Fashion
Explainer: How Retailers Can Fight a New Wave of Cyberattacks
Last week, Victoria's Secret went dark. On May 28, the lingerie giant shut down its website following a 'security incident,' the company said in a statement. (It did not confirm what caused the disruption). While the site was only down for two days, it likely cost Victoria's Secret millions in sales, adding another hurdle to its ongoing turnaround plan under new leader Hillary Super. The company's stock dropped as much as 8 percent the day it closed its site. It was just the latest technological dustup in a wave of cyberattacks on some of fashion's biggest brands and retailers. Bloomberg reported that in January hackers accessed some of Dior's customer data, then in April, UK-based high street retailer Marks & Spencer was forced to stop taking online orders after a security breach and in May, Harrods briefly restricted website access after hackers attempted to break into its systems. For years, the threat of security breaches — where individuals and organisations hack systems to access customer data such as contact information and credit card details — have haunted companies across industries, from Target to MGM Resorts. The frequency of these attacks is only growing: In 2024, the number of individuals and groups targeting companies' systems that cybersecurity consultancy S-RM engaged with across 600 incidents grew 96 percent year over year. These attacks can be extremely detrimental to a company's bottom line: Marks & Spencer still hasn't reopened its e-commerce operations, and doesn't expect to do so until July. The incident will likely end up costing the company as much as £300 million ($404 million) in lost profits. But the impact can be even further-reaching. Many cyber criminals require companies to pay multi-million dollar ransoms to regain access to their networks and even once the attack is over, retailers must work to avoid sustaining lasting reputational damage. The recent uptick in activity puts an extra burden on retailers to tighten existing cybersecurity processes or invest in additional tools that could chip away at profits. 'From a business perspective, it's nothing if not unfair [to the companies impacted by it],' said Simeon Siegel, managing director and senior analyst of retail and e-commerce at BMO Capital Markets. In the event of a cyber attack, companies have 'to balance short term fixes, while ensuring they don't have [long-term] implications,' he added. BoF breaks down what leaves fashion businesses vulnerable to cyberattacks and how they can protect themselves. How does this happen? Cyberattacks are typically orchestrated by groups that find and exploit a company's technological shortcomings. The culprit can often be difficult to trace, because even when law enforcement tracks them down, individuals can splinter into other smaller organisations. Criminals can also act individually by finding hacking tools on the dark web, said Christian Beckner, vice president of retail technology and cybersecurity at NRF. The tactics range in their level of sophistication. One of the common ways hackers infiltrate a company's systems is through 'phishing' — the dreaded emails where, posing as a company executive, they encourage employees to click a link that, if opened, can give them access to an organisation's entire data network. They can also use employee voice impersonation tools to target a company's customer service call centres, Beckner said. 'If one employee accidentally clicks a link in an email, it may not matter how protected and up-to-date your technology is,' Siegel said. 'Human error can supersede the most advanced technology.' Cyberattackers will target any industry with high transaction volumes, making fashion an appealing target. Plus, because most retail giants operate their e-commerce storefronts on years-old custom platforms that are likely outdated, they are particularly vulnerable, said Juan Pellerano-Rendón, chief marketing officer at e-commerce software start-up Swap. 'A lot of times these larger conglomerates have IT teams, and they're updating their website regularly, but security might not always be at the top of their list,' Pellerano-Rendón added. Retailers that operate with thin margins have historically been slower to invest in cybersecurity over tools like a website redesign that can immediately drive revenue, said Sam Rubin, senior vice president of consulting and threat intelligence for Unit 42 at cybersecurity firm Palo Alto Networks. 'You could spend several million dollars on cybersecurity and feel safer and be safer, but what's going to show up on your P&L is greater operating expenses without a necessarily highly visible tangible benefit,' Rubin said. 'Sometimes that does get neglected in favor of driving top line growth in business.' How should retailers respond? When a company is hacked, they often have no choice but to shut down services until they can find the culprit and boot them out of their network. Preventing an initial cyberattack can be a near impossible task as cyber criminals' tools become more advanced and accessible. Many retailers have increased cybersecurity measures in recent years, specifically around payment processing, Beckner said. Customers' financial information wasn't compromised in many of the recent attacks, which is the scariest violation for many customers and therefore a natural priority for companies to prevent. To lower the risk of repeat offenses, retailers have to 'assess where there might be existing vulnerabilities in your IT systems and services, and patch and upgrade those where they existed,' Beckner added, including adding multi-step authentications for company log-ins and conducting additional training for employees across the organisation. The latest run of cybersecurity hiccups could also push major retailers to make big personnel changes such as hiring heads of security (if they don't have them already), according to Pellerano-Rendón. They might also consider using more e-commerce services from software giants like Shopify that routinely update their software, making it more difficult to infiltrate, he added. Companies can institute drills where they work with third party firms to simulate an attack to better assess the strength of their existing systems and what additional processes they need to implement, said Steve Ross, director of cybersecurity, Americas at S-RM. In the aftermath of an attack, retailers also must do damage control in order to make sure their customers feel safe buying from them again. Shoppers today are aware that technology violations occur and are outside of a company's control, 'and not necessarily that Victoria's Secret or Marks & Spencer has betrayed their trust in any way,' Pellerano-Rendón said. Still, retailers need to tell customers whose personal information may have been compromised exactly which steps they've taken to protect their data down the line. 'It really comes down to making sure you're communicating … and having that plan in place to quickly bounce back,' Beckner said.
USA Today
3 hours ago
- USA Today
These are the safest places in America for gay and transgender people
These are the safest places in America for gay and transgender people Which states are the best and worst for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer Americans to live and work? More and more, it's a question of partisan politics. Here's why. Show Caption Hide Caption See as rock climbers hang Transgender Pride flag in Yosemite Rock climbers unfurled a large Transgender Pride flag on El Capitan in Yosemite National Park. The National Park Service has since removed it. As Oklahoman legislators push to restrict trans rights and overturn the 2015 Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage, Zane Eaves says his identity as a transgender man has put a target on his back in his home state. One of 18,900 trans adults in Oklahoma, Eaves has received death threats as has his wife of 10 years and their two children. 'All the hatred and political stuff going on' are driving this Oklahoma lifer from the place he was born and raised, Eaves, 35, said. He has only crossed the state line three times in his life, but in recent weeks, he made the difficult decision to move his family to North Carolina to be closer to friends and allies. 'I am just trying to stay alive and keep my marriage,' Eaves said. Oklahoma ranks 44th in the nation on a list released Monday of the most and least welcoming states for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer Americans. More and more, the question of where LGBTQ+ people feel safe is one of blue vs. red, according to advocacy group Out Leadership. LGBTQ+ equality fell across the board for the third straight year, according to Out Leadership's State LGBTQ+ Business Climate Index shared exclusively with USA TODAY. But the sharpest declines came in Republican-led states. While progressive strongholds championed supportive policies and protections, conservative states elected a slate of leaders who openly oppose gay and trans rights and sponsored an unprecedented wave of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation, Out Leadership CEO and founder Todd Sears said. So-called 'Don't Say Gay' bills, religious exemptions and other legislation tanked the rankings of 19 red states in the Out Leadership index, according to Sears. Today, the divide between states that roll out the welcome mat and less hospitable parts of the country is wider than ever, he said. The least and most welcoming LGBTQ+ states Each year for the last seven, Out Leadership has released the State LGBTQ+ Business Climate Index to gauge the overall climate for gay and transgender people state by state, mapping out where they will face the most and the least discrimination and hardship. Out Leadership's index measures the impact of state government policies and prevalent attitudes about the LGBTQ+ community, weighing factors such as support for young people and families, health access and safety, political and religious attitudes, work environment and employment and nondiscrimination protections. The Northeast had six of the 10 highest-ranked states, while the Southeast had six of the lowest-ranked. Massachusetts, led by the nation's first openly lesbian governor, Democrat Maura Healey and New York, which guaranteed gender-affirming care and LGBTQ+ refugee protections, tied for first place in this year's index, with Connecticut and New Jersey close behind. The least LGBTQ+ friendly state was Arkansas, which ranked last for the third straight year. South Carolina, Louisiana, South Dakota and Alabama also received low scores. The states that had the largest gains in the index were Kentucky and Michigan, which Out Leadership attributed to 'pro-equality' leadership from governors Andy Beshear and Gretchen Whitmer, both Democrats. The steepest declines were in Ohio, Florida and Utah, all led by Republican governors. Where are the safest places to live? The Out Leadership index was created as a LGBTQ+ inclusion reference guide for business leaders. But gay and trans people soon began using it to figure out where they should – and should not – live and work, never more so than now as rights rollbacks from the Trump administration and red statehouses hit close to home. Opposition to transgender rights was a central plank in Trump's presidential campaign and since taking office he has signed a series of executive orders recognizing only male and female genders, keeping trans athletes out of women's sports, banning trans people from serving in the military and restricting federal funding for gender-affirming care for trans people under age 19. Even states seen as safer for LGBTQ+ people have been navigating these edicts around trans athletes. Trump threatened to cut federal funding to California if a trans girl competed in a state track and field event held Saturday. AB Hernandez, a junior from Jurupa Valley High School in Riverside County, shared first place in the high jump and triple jump and second in the long jump. She shared the awards podium with her cisgender competitors under a new rule drafted by state athletics officials days before the event to mollify critics. Republican-led states have been in the vanguard of anti-trans legislation, causing greater geographic polarization and prompting fears among LGBTQ+ residents, even those who live in liberal cities. Jordan McGuire, a 27-year-old gay man in North Dakota, said the years he spent living in the Deep South taught him about the repressive discrimination routinely faced by gay and genderqueer people. At the same time, socially progressive cities in conservative states like Fargo and Grand Forks are no longer the safe havens they once were, he said. Now that his fiancee is transitioning to female, the couple is exploring a move to a 'sanctuary' state that will be safer for them. 'It feels like five or 10 years ago, trans people were not under the same microscope they are now and that has definitely influenced our move,' McGuire said. 'Yeah, people were prejudiced but it wasn't a witch hunt. They weren't looking for people in bathrooms and schools. But now things are so polarized.' That rising anxiety was captured in a post-election survey from UCLA's Williams Institute which found that nearly half of transgender people had already fled unsupportive communities and nearly 1 in 4 were considering uprooting their lives. The most frequently cited reasons for wanting to move were concerns about LGBTQ+ rights – 76% – the sociopolitical climate – 71% – anti-trans rhetoric and climate – 60% – and anti-trans laws and policies – 47%. LGBTQ+ Americans on the move Interest in relocating to friendlier states is even higher today than it was after Trump's reelection, say nonprofit workers who aid trans and gender-diverse people relocate to more liberal states with broader protections. So far in 2025, Rainbow Railroad in Canada has received more than 3,000 requests from LGBTQ+ people living in the United States, up more than 1,000% from the same time last year, according to communications director Timothy Chan. Nearly all requested international relocation support. For now, Rainbow Railroad can't aid Americans with resettlement services because of immigration restrictions, Chan said. TRACTION has heard from a record number of people from states as far away as Texas, Oklahoma and Arkansas with many of them reporting being threatened or feeling unsafe in their homes and neighborhoods, said Michael Woodward, the executive director of the trans-led organization in Washington state. Trans and gender-diverse people historically face financial hardship due to systemic oppression and discrimination, and need assistance finding jobs and housing as well as with interstate moving expenses that can run tens of thousands, Woodward said. TRACTION used to get a few applications a week until Trump won a second term. In the two weeks following the election, 'we received as many requests for assistance as we'd received in the entire life of the project thus far,' he said. After the inauguration, TRACTION started getting three to five applications every day. With one employee and a handful of volunteers, his organization is struggling to keep up with demand, Woodward said.
