Latest news with #DoJ
Time of India
10 hours ago
- Time of India
FBI locates ‘Missing Minute' in Jeffrey Epstein Jail Tape. Here's what it reveals
FBI has located 'Missing Minute' in Jeffrey Epstein Jail Tape . The mystery surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's death has resurfaced as the FBI confirms possession of the previously 'missing minute' from jail surveillance footage. The absence of this segment from the publicly released Department of Justice (DoJ) video had fueled widespread speculation. Authorities now state the uncut version is in their records. FBI locates Missing Minute in Jeffrey Epstein Jail Tape The Department of Justice recently released 11 hours of CCTV footage from the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York. This included moments before and after Jeffrey Epstein's death on August 10, 2019. Analysts soon identified that one minute was missing due to an unexplained time jump at midnight. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Forensic experts confirmed that the video was edited several times across multiple hours. Attorney General Pam Bondi explained that this was likely due to an automatic reset process in the prison's video system, which happens nightly. According to CBS News, federal agencies including the FBI, Bureau of Prisons , and the DoJ Inspector General hold the original, unedited version, which includes the missing minute. However, no official details have been shared about the contents of that specific minute. Also Read: South Park Season 27: Episode 2 release date, time, episode schedule and how to watch Live Events What Released Surveillance Footage Shows? The DoJ footage showed Epstein being escorted to his cell by a guard at 7:49pm on August 9. Epstein, in an orange jumpsuit, was handcuffed and led through the common area. The footage does not directly show his cell door but does capture any movement to or from the cell. At 10:39pm, a guard was seen heading toward Epstein's cell, reappearing two minutes later. This was reportedly the last known person to approach the cell that night. At 6:30am on August 10, guards are seen distributing breakfast. By 6:33am, more guards enter, possibly after discovering Epstein's body. Questions Surrounding Prison Protocol Jeffrey Epstein's death was ruled a suicide by hanging. But the situation around it raised questions. He was supposed to have a cellmate and receive checks every 30 minutes. That night, his cellmate had been transferred and checks were missed. Two guards fell asleep and later falsified log entries. Additionally, two cameras malfunctioned and another camera's footage was unusable. Protocols were broken when Epstein's body was removed without proper photographic evidence. The Bureau of Prisons states suicide scenes must be treated like crime scenes, but those standards were not followed. Also Read: Baba Vanga's 2025 Predictions: World War 3 possibility, natural disasters rise, biological experiment going wrong, alien discovery, shift in technology and AI. Here's complete list Did Epstein Died by Suicide? Conspiracy theories circulated that Epstein was killed to silence him due to connections with powerful figures. The FBI, however, has concluded there is no credible evidence of blackmail involving Epstein's alleged 'client list.' Axios reported there is no evidence that justifies further investigation of uncharged individuals. Despite speculation, authorities maintain that Epstein died by suicide. The new footage supports findings from a medical examiner. Associated Cases and Political Fallout Ghislaine Maxwell, a known associate, is serving a 20-year sentence for child sex trafficking. No further individuals are expected to be charged. Prince Andrew, who settled a lawsuit with Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre, remains under scrutiny but is not facing charges. Elon Musk, who previously accused Donald Trump of being linked to the Epstein files, deleted his statements without offering proof. Pam Bondi had promised revealing documents, including flight logs, but those documents did not meet public expectations when released. FAQs What did the missing minute in Jeffrey Epstein's jail footage show? Authorities have not disclosed what the missing minute contains, but they confirm it exists in unedited video held by federal agencies. Was there evidence that Epstein was murdered? The FBI found no credible evidence of homicide. The video and medical findings support the conclusion of death by suicide.
Telegraph
a day ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Maxwell interview ‘raises more questions than answers', says Laura Loomer
The Trump administration's decision to interview Ghislaine Maxwell behind bars raises more questions than it answers, one of the US president's most loyal foot soldiers said. Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence in Florida for procuring underage girls for her paedophile ex-boyfriend, Jeffrey Epstein, was interviewed for a day and a half by Todd Blanche, the US deputy attorney general, on Friday. Laura Loomer, one of Donald Trump's closest allies and a prominent figure in the Maga movement, has questioned why Maxwell was interviewed by the Department of Justice (DoJ) after it announced it would not release any more files relating to Epstein or investigate anyone else connecting to his sex trafficking offences. 'Anybody who's a decent lawyer, especially you United States attorney general, understands you're supposed to conduct your witness and suspect interviews before you decide to close a case. So how does this even work?' Ms Loomer told The Telegraph. 'Are they trying to tell us that over, over the last several years, since this has been a scandal and since Ghislaine has been in prison that they never once had the DOJ or the FBI interview her? Is that what they're trying to say?' The DoJ's decision earlier this month not to release any further files on Epstein prompted a massive backlash, landing Mr Trump in the biggest political crisis of his second term. Ms Loomer said Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, must be fired for going back on a promise to release all evidence the government collected during its investigations into the paedophile. 'I think that it's obvious that the Epstein debacle is a sore point, a sore subject for the administration,' she said. 'There's no denying the fact that 'Pam Blondie', as I call her, created a PR crisis for the administration. She screwed up.' Conspiracy theorists have long cast doubt on the official story that Epstein died by suicide in a jail cell in 2019. They believe he was murdered in order to protect a powerful cabal of paedophiles. When asked if she would release an Epstein's client list, Ms Bondi previously said it was sitting on her desk for review. Miss Loomer has been one of the loudest voices calling for the administration to reveal everything it has on Epstein. She said the buck stops with Ms Bondi for apparently confirming the existence of a client list. Mr Trump has spent the past five days in Scotland, where his focus has been on golf and European trade talks. However, he could not escape questions about his relationship with Epstein. He laid out for the first time why he fell out with the billionaire about 20 years ago. 'For years, I wouldn't talk to Jeffrey Epstein. I wouldn't talk because he did something that was inappropriate,' he told reporters during a meeting with Sir Keir Starmer, the prime minister. 'He stole people that work for me. I said, 'don't ever do that again'. He did it again, and I threw him out of the place, persona non grata. I threw him out, and that was it.' Mr Trump and Epstein, who first met moving in the same wealthy circles in New York and Florida, bonded over their love of beautiful women and the high life. The financier is even rumoured to have introduced Mr Trump to his third wife, Melania, a claim the first lady denies. Their relationship is said to have taken a turn in 2004, as they both went up against each other to buy up Palm Beach properties.
News18
2 days ago
- Politics
- News18
Justice Department Seeks Disciplinary Action Against DC Judge Over Trump Remarks
The complaint was submitted under the name of Chad Mizelle, Bondi's chief of staff. The US Department of Justice (DoJ) has launched a formal complaint against Chief Judge James Boasberg of the US District Court in Washington, D.C., accusing him of judicial misconduct over comments he allegedly made about President Donald Trump's administration. The complaint was filed on Monday, as reported by CNN. US Attorney General Pam Bondi confirmed the development in a post on X (formerly Twitter), stating, 'Today at my direction, the Justice Department filed a misconduct complaint against US District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg for making improper public comments about President Trump and his Administration." The complaint was submitted under the name of Chad Mizelle, Bondi's chief of staff, and delivered to Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan of the US Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The allegations stem from comments Boasberg is reported to have made during a judicial conference held in March. According to a report by POLITICO, which reviewed the contents of the formal complaint, Judge Boasberg allegedly implied that the Trump administration might 'disregard rulings of federal courts," thereby risking a 'constitutional crisis." The letter further claims Boasberg sought to improperly influence Chief Justice John Roberts and around two dozen other judges with his remarks. Mizelle argued that the judge's comments violated the 'presumption of regularity," a legal principle that assumes government officials act lawfully and in good faith. She also defended the administration's actions, stating that it had complied with existing court orders. Notably, Boasberg had previously blocked a Trump administration effort to deport a group of Venezuelan nationals to a prison facility in El Salvador. In an emergency hearing, held shortly after the controversial invocation of the Alien Enemies Act, Boasberg ordered that any aircraft already en route to El Salvador should be rerouted back to the US. However, reports suggest that the administration went ahead with its plans, successfully transferring many of the Venezuelan detainees despite the ruling. The complaint by Mizelle further alleges, 'Having assumed President Trump would defy court orders, Judge Boasberg issued a [temporary restraining order] and threatened sanctions, all on a false premise." Mizelle has called for disciplinary measures against Boasberg, including a public reprimand, and has requested that the Alien Enemies Act case currently assigned to him be reassigned to a different judge during the course of the investigation. According to protocol, judicial complaints in the US are usually reviewed by the chief appellate judge, who may dismiss them or order an investigation. A council of judges then decides on possible actions, such as a reprimand or reassigning cases. Removal from the bench, however, requires impeachment and a two-thirds Senate vote. Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from geopolitics to diplomacy and global trends. Stay informed with the latest world news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated! view comments First Published: July 29, 2025, 20:32 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
International Business Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- International Business Times
Ghislaine Maxwell Makes Desperate Final Move to Overturn Sex Trafficking Conviction as Her Lawyers Try for Presidential Pardon
British socialite and Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell filed an appeal with the Supreme Court Monday, seeking to overturn her 2021 federal conviction for sex trafficking. Maxwell's lawyers argue that she is covered by the 2007 plea deal Epstein made with South Florida prosecutors, which included a provision not to charge his associates. The appeal was filed shortly after the DoJ under President Trump announced earlier this month that it opposed the Supreme Court reviewing the case. "Rather than grapple with the core principles of plea agreements, the government tries to distract by reciting a lurid and irrelevant account of Jeffrey Epstein's misconduct," Maxwell's legal team wrote in their petition. Maxwell's Last-Ditch Effort X "But this case is about what the government promised, not what Epstein did," wrote the husband-and-wife duo, David and Mona Markus. Maxwell met on Thursday and Friday with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche to respond to questions related to the highly contentious case that has caused deep divisions within the MAGA movement. Speaking outside the courthouse in Tallahassee, Florida last week, attorney David Oscar Markus said that his client fully cooperated and answered all of Blanche's questions. Ghislaine Maxwell, ex-girlfriend of Jeffery Epstein was arrested on sex trafficking charges on June 2. Instagram He also appeared to be positioning her for a potential presidential pardon. In 2007, Epstein reached a plea deal that allowed him to plead guilty in Florida to charges of soliciting prostitution and procuring minors for prostitution, resulting in just 13 months of jail time. As part of the deal, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Miami agreed "not to institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein." Jeffrey Epstein Twitter/Jeffrey Epstein The deal names four people, none of whom was Maxwell. However, the Markuses maintain that the agreement also protects their client, claiming the phrase "any potential co-conspirators" grants her immunity as well. Earlier this month, Attorney General Pam Bondi appeared to quash the appeal by filing a statement opposing Supreme Court review of the case. Despite that, Maxwell's legal team is moving ahead with an official petition for the nation's highest court to hear the case. Fate Hangs in Balance The 21-page brief from Bondi's Department of Justice dismisses Maxwell's claim that Epstein's original non-prosecution agreement (NPA) granted her immunity. The letter argues that it is "incorrect" to assume the deal applied to the entire U.S. government, including the Southern District of New York, which prosecuted Maxwell in 2021. Ghislaine Maxwell with Epstein Twitter Alongside the Supreme Court appeal, Maxwell's legal team is also pursuing a potential presidential pardon. Last week, Maxwell sat for over nine hours of interviews with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche. Her attorney, David Markus, said she discussed around "100 different people" connected to Epstein's child sex trafficking network during the meetings. "They asked about every possible thing you could imagine – everything," he said. Ghislaine Maxwell with Jeffrey Epstein US District Attorney's Office The attorney also argued that Maxwell has been made the "scapegoat" in the Epstein scandal and claimed she has been "unjustly treated" over the past five years. Markus said that, while no official pardon request has been submitted to the White House yet, they aren't ruling out the possibility, adding that "things are moving very quickly." "The president said earlier he has the power to do so, we hope he exercises that power in the right way," he said of a potential commutation. When questioned on Friday morning, Trump did not rule out the option of granting a pardon to Maxwell. "I'm allowed to do it, but it's something I haven't thought about," he said.
The Guardian
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
DoJ drops cases against LA protesters after officers caught making false claims
US immigration officers made false and misleading statements in their reports about several Los Angeles protesters they arrested during the massive demonstrations that rocked the city in June, according to federal law enforcement files obtained by the Guardian. The officers' testimony was cited in at least five cases filed by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) amid the unrest. The DoJ has charged at least 26 people with 'assaulting' and 'impeding' federal officers and other crimes during the protests over immigration raids. Prosecutors, however, have since been forced to dismiss at least eight of those felonies, many of them which relied on officers' inaccurate reports, court records show. The DoJ has also dismissed at least three felony assault cases it brought against Angelenos accused of interfering with arrests during recent immigration raids, the documents show. The rapid felony dismissals are a major embarrassment for the Trump-appointed US attorney for southern California, Bill Essayli, and appeared to be the result of an unusual series of missteps by the DoJ, former federal prosecutors said. The Guardian's review of records found: Out of nine 'assault' and 'impeding' felony cases the DoJ filed immediately after the start of the protests and promoted by the attorney general, Pam Bondi, prosecutors dismissed seven of them soon after filing the charges. In reports that led to the detention and prosecution of at least five demonstrators, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agents made false statements about the sequence of events and misrepresented incidents captured on video. One DHS agent accused a protester of shoving an officer, when footage appeared to show the opposite: the officer forcefully pushed the protester. One indictment named the wrong defendant, a stunning error that has jeopardized one of the government's most high-profile cases. 'When I see felonies dismissed, that tells me either the federal officers have filed affidavits that are not truthful and that has been uncovered, or US attorneys reviewing the cases realize the evidence does not support the charges,' said Cristine Soto DeBerry, a former California state prosecutor who is now director of Prosecutors Alliance Action, a criminal justice reform group. She said officers often call for charges that prosecutors don't end up filing, but it was uncommon for the DoJ to file, then dismiss cases, especially numerous felonies in rapid succession. 'It seems this is a way to detain people, hold them in custody, instill fear and discourage people from exercising their first amendment rights,' DeBerry said. There are at least 18 cases brought by the DoJ against LA protesters that prosecutors have not dismissed, covering a wide array of alleged criminal conduct, according to case records the US attorney's office shared with the Guardian. In three of those cases, protesters have agreed to plea deals, including one defendant accused of spitting at an officer and another who allegedly threw rocks. Some still facing charges are accused of throwing bottles and molotov cocktails, pointing a laser at a helicopter and aiding in civil disorder by distributing gas masks. In six of the felony dismissals reviewed by the Guardian, the DoJ has re-filed lower-level misdemeanors against the defendants. For the many protesters whose charges were withdrawn or scaled back, the officers' initial allegations, as well as the DoJ's filings, have deeply impacted their lives. All the demonstrators who won dismissals spent time in jail before the government's cases against them fell apart. 'We are not the violent ones,' said Jose Mojica, one of the protesters whose assault case was dismissed, in an earlier Guardian interview. 'They are chasing down innocent people.' The DoJ's initial wave of cases stemmed from one of the first major protests in the LA region, a demonstration on 7 June in the south Los Angeles city of Paramount. Border patrol sightings had sparked fears that agents were targeting laborers at a Home Depot, and as dozens of locals and demonstrators gathered outside an office complex that houses DHS, officers fired teargas and flash-bang grenades while some protesters threw objects. The US attorney's office filed a joint case against five demonstrators, charging each with assaulting officers, a felony the DoJ warned could carry 20-year sentences. A criminal complaint, written by DHS and filed in court by the DoJ on 8 June, said that as the crowd grew, some protesters 'turned violent'. Two sisters, Ashley, 20, and Joceline Rodriguez, 26, began 'blocking' officers' vehicles, the complaint alleged. When a border patrol agent attempted to move Ashley, she 'resisted' and 'shoved the agent with both her hands', then Joceline 'grabbed the arm' of one of the agents to prevent her sister's arrest, the charges said. Both were arrested. In an investigative file, DHS suggested that 'in response' to the sisters' arrest, Christian Cerna-Camacho, another protester, began to 'verbally harass' agents, making threatening remarks. Demonstrator Brayan Ramos-Brito, then 'pushed [an] agent in the chest', DHS claimed, at which point, a fifth protester, Jose Mojica, 'used his body to physically shield' Ramos-Brito and then 'elbowed and pushed' agents. Agents then 'subdued' and arrested Mojica and Ramos-Brito, the complaint said. All five defendants are Latino US citizens. DHS's own subsequent reports, however, reveal multiple factual discrepancies in the narrative initially presented by officers and prosecutors. While the complaint suggested Cerna-Camacho, Ramos Brito and Mojica attacked agents in protest of the sisters' arrest, records show the women were arrested in a separate incident – which occurred after the men were detained. Border patrol agent Eduardo Mejorado, a key witness considered a victim of the assaults, appeared to initially give inaccurate testimony about the order of events. He 'clarified' the timeline when questioned, a DHS special agent wrote in a report three days after charges were filed. A supervisor on the scene also documented the correct chronology in a later report and 'apologized' for errors, saying, 'Due to the chaos of the events that day, some events may have been miscommunicated'. Mojica had outlined the discrepancies in an interview with the Guardian days after his arrest. The DHS special agent also noted that defense lawyers had presented video they said was 'in direct contrast to the facts' laid out in the initial complaint. The footage, seen by the Guardian, appeared to show an agent pushing Ramos-Brito, not the other way around, before he was taken to the ground along with Mojica, who was also not seen in the footage shoving or assaulting agents. The agent acknowledged the officer's shoving and said the subsequent 'fight' was 'hard to decipher'. The agent also claimed Ramos-Brito's behavior before he was pushed included 'pre-assault indicators', such as 'clenching fists' and 'getting in [the agent's] face'. Meanwhile, chaotic social media footage of the arrest of the sisters appeared to show an officer pushing Ashley, prompting her to briefly raise her hand, at which point two agents grabbed her and took her to the ground. Her older sister was then seen briefly touching the arm of one of the agents on top of her sister. Both appeared to be filming with their phones before their arrests, and it's unclear who DHS and the DoJ were alleging were the victims in their purported assaults. DHS records also show that one supervisor emailed a female border patrol agent seen in the video standing near the sisters, saying he was 'trying to tie that whole event together for prosecution' and looking into a 'rumor' Ashley 'may have shoved' this agent. The agent responded that she had told Ashley to move, but did not say she was shoved. Within two weeks of the initial charges, the US attorney's office filed motions to dismiss the cases against the sisters, Ramos-Brito and Mojica 'in the interest of justice', without providing further explanation. The DoJ then filed a new case against the sisters, this time accusing them each of a single misdemeanor, saying they 'assaulted, resisted, opposed, impeded, intimidated, and interfered with' border patrol, but offering no detail. The sisters pleaded not guilty to the misdemeanors; Ashley's lawyer declined to comment and Joceline's attorney did not respond to inquiries. The DoJ also filed a misdemeanor indictment against Ramos-Brito, but then said it was erroneous and rescinded it, only to refile a misdemeanor in a different format. Ramos-Brito pleaded not guilty and his lawyer didn't respond to emails. Mojica, who spoke out about how he was injured during his arrest, has not been charged again. Essayli, the US attorney for LA, who is an ardent Trump supporter appointed this year, initially published mugshots of the defendants, but has not publicly acknowledged that he has since dismissed their felonies. Ciaran McEvoy, a spokesperson for Essayli, declined to comment on a detailed list of questions about specific cases. The LA Times reported last week that Essayli was heard 'screaming' at a prosecutor over a grand jury's refusal to indict one of the protesters. McEvoy said the LA Times story relied on 'factual inaccuracies and anonymous gossip', without offering specifics, adding in an email: 'Our office will continue working unapologetically to charge all those who assault our agents or impede our federal investigations.' Bondi defended Essayli in a statement, calling him a 'champion for law and order who has done superlative work to prosecute rioters for attacking and obstructing law enforcement in Los Angeles'. She added: 'This Department of Justice is proud of Bill, and he has my complete support as he continues working to protect Californians and Make America Safe Again.' Jaime Ruiz, a spokesperson for Customs and Border Protection, which oversees border patrol, did not respond to detailed questions about cases and officers' inaccurate testimony, saying the department is 'unable to comment on cases under active litigation'. 'DHS and its components continue to enforce the law every day in greater Los Angeles even in the face of danger,' he added. 'Our officers are facing a surge in assaults and attacks against them as they put their lives on the line to enforce our nation's laws. Secretary [Kristi] Noem has been clear: If you obstruct or assault our law enforcement, you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.' Tricia McLaughlin, DHS assistant secretary, added in a statement: 'Our agents, officers, and prosecutors will continue to work together to keep Americans safe, and we will follow the facts, evidence, and law.' Mejorado, the border patrol agent, could not be reached. Cerna-Camacho is the only defendant of the five whose original charges are still pending, but when he showed up to court for his recent arraignment, the DoJ attorney was forced to admit his office had made an error: the one-paragraph indictment filed against Cerna-Camacho erroneously named Ramos Brito. Cerna-Camacho's lawyers have argued that the government's 30-day window to indict his client had passed, and the case must be dismissed. Cerna-Camacho pleaded not guilty, and his lawyer declined to comment. 'This is an extraordinary mistake and a dangerous embarrassment,' said Sergio Perez, a former DoJ lawyer who is now executive director of the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, a California-based legal advocacy group, about Cerna-Camacho's case. 'The US Department of Justice is supposed to be the pinnacle of professional and responsible criminal prosecutions. When you can't get the name right, it calls into question all other factual assertions in those documents. It's way beyond a clerical error. It's smoke where there is likely fire.' The case is a significant one for the Trump administration. Cerna-Camacho was arrested four days after the protest, when two unmarked vehicles rammed his car while his toddler and infant were inside, with officers deploying teargas. The incident caused outrage locally. But DHS aggressively defended the arrest, publishing a photo of Cerna-Camachobeing detained, and saying he had 'punched' a border patrol officer at the Paramount protests. Video from the protest showed Cerna-Camacho and an officer scuffling in a chaotic crowd, with Cerna-Camacho at one point raising his hand, but it's unclear if he made contact with the officer. In an initial complaint against Jacob Terrazas, DHS accused the man of felony assault, saying he was 'one of several individuals … actively throwing hard objects [at officers]' during the Paramount protests, without referencing specific evidence or details. Video of his arrest showed an officer slamming him to the ground, and at his arraignment, Terrazas appeared badly concussed, and a judge ordered he immediately get medical attention. Terrazas was released after nine days in jail, then two days later, the DoJ moved to dismiss the case. However, prosecutors filed a new misdemeanor charge, accusing him of a 'simple assault' misdemeanor, saying he 'aided and abetted' others and 'forcibly assaulted, resisted, opposed, impeded, intimidated, and interfered with' a border patrol employee, without providing details. Tarrazas has pleaded not guilty, and his lawyer did not respond to inquiries. The government has also dismissed its 'conspiracy to impede an officer' felony charges against Gisselle Medina, but then filed an 'accessory' to 'assault' misdemeanor, claiming in a brief charging document that she had 'assisted the offenders'. The charges did not offer any details on how she allegedly assisted others. Medina has not yet been arraigned and her lawyer did not respond to inquiries. The DoJ also recently dismissed felony assault charges against Russell Gomez Dzul, who had been stopped 7 June by border patrol when officers deemed him suspicious for appearing 'nervous' near them and biking away, but then filed a simple assault misdemeanor, without offering details. He has pleaded not guilty and his lawyer did not respond to requests for comment. Andrea Velez, a US citizen arrested during a 24 June raid in downtown LA on her way to work, also had a felony assault charge dismissed this month, and has not faced further prosecution. One of the only cases from the first round of prosecutions that the government has not dropped is the one that made international headlines – the arrest of David Huerta, a prominent California union leader jailed while observing an immigration raid. Carley Palmer, a lawyer who served as a supervisor in the US attorney's office in LA until she left last year, said the dismissals and downgrading of charges likely occurred after more in-depth evaluation by line prosecutors and supervisors, and in some ways reflected 'the process working': 'We want prosecutors to feel they can reevaluate evidence and change their mind when new information comes to light.' Prosecutors might dismiss cases if a grand jury declines to indict, if they believe they can't persuade jurors at trial, or if they learn officers violated the defendants' rights, she added. The LA Times reported that Essayli has struggled to secure indictments at grand juries. Palmer, now an attorney at the Halpern May Ybarra Gelberg firm, said it was unusual, however, for the office to prosecute these kinds of 'he said she said' protest scuffles in the first place, taking away resources from traditional priorities, including fraud, economic crimes, public corruption and civil rights abuses. 'Federal charges are very serious and have real implications for people's lives,' Palmer added. 'Even if it gets dismissed, it will be on someone's record for the rest of their lives. It carries a lot of consequences, so you want prosecutors to understand and appreciate the power they have.'
