2 dead, 6 injured in Finland stabbing, police say

finland police stabbing

Two people are dead and six more are injured after a stabbing in Finland’s western city of Turku on Friday. Police shot the suspect in a leg and detained him Friday, police said, adding that authorities were looking for more potential suspects.

Finnish broadcaster YLE says several people were seen lying on the ground in Puutori square in central Turku. On Twitter, police urged people to avoid that part of Turku.

One person has been “apprehended,” Finnish police said, adding “several people had been stabbed” in two squares in the city. Their conditions weren’t immediately available.

Tabloid Ilta-Sanomat says six people were injured, one man and five women, and that a woman with stroller was attacked by a man with a large knife.

Prime Minister Juha Sipila said the government was closely monitoring the ongoing police operation and holding an emergency meeting later Friday.

Witness Laura Laine told broadcaster YLE that she stood approximately 20 meters (65 feet) from where the stabbing took place.

“We heard that a young woman was screaming. We saw a man on the square and a knife glittered. He was waving it in the air. I understood that he had stabbed someone,” Laine was quoted as saying.

Police planned a news conference at 7 p.m. (1600 GMT; 12 p.m. EDT) in Turku, about 150 kilometers (90 miles) west of Helsinki, with Finland’s interior minister and the national police chief.

Finnish television channel MTV said security had been heightened at Helsinki’s international airport but didn’t give details.

“Police have told us not to go to the city center so we are in this coffee shop a few blocks away from the city center,” said Vanessa Deggins, an American who is studying business in one of Turku’s three universities. She didn’t witness the actual attack, but heard sirens going past.

“This is a safe country by American standards. I have gone home alone at 2-3 a.m. … I feel safe. This is a safe country.”

SEE ALSO: Barcelona terror attack: Van suspect named, death toll rises to 14, police kill 5 suspects in 2nd Spanish city

Join the conversation about this story »

Source link

Hollywood South News with Jabari: EXCLUSIVE! Shemar Moore in New Orleans to promote his new show SWAT – WGNO

Please enable Javascript to watch this video

NEW ORLEANS — From General Hospital to Criminal Minds, now Shemar Moore will return to TV.

The revamped TV series S.W.A.T. that aired in the 70’s and the movie S.W.A.T. that stars Samuel L. Jackson and Ryan Reynolds will have a new look in the Fall on CBS.

Shemar says that the times have updated and so has the show which will include events that are happening today like the racism in America.

In the rebooted series Shemar plays Sergeant Daniel “Hondo” Harrelson. His character takes over the squad of a highly skilled unit after his former boss was killed in the line of duty.

Catch the first season of S.W.A.T. on CBS Thursday, November 2nd 10/9c.

To see more of Shemar’s interview CLICK HERE.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Look Out, University GCs, White Supremacists May Want to Speak on Your Campus – Daily Report (registration)

Public university general counsel beware—white supremacist Richard Spencer, who led the Charlottesville, Virginia, rally that ended in violence last weekend, may soon try to speak in a campus building near you. But GCs seem reluctant to talk about this problem in public.

Calls to 11 offices of general counsel across the country Thursday elicited not one response about the free speech issue. Yet, the problem appears to be growing.

Michigan State University announced Wednesday that it is trying to decide how to handle a request from Spencer’s group, the National Policy Institute, to rent a room for a speech on its campus in East Lansing. Calls to MSU general counsel Robert Noto were referred to the communications department, which did not immediately return messages.

Meanwhile, the University of Florida on Wednesday switched its position from granting Spencer permission to speak, to announcing it would deny him a permit. A Spencer supporter has vowed to file a lawsuit. GC Amy Hass declined comment.

Spencer already won a similar lawsuit at Auburn University in April.

The white nationalist leader also has asked to speak at the University of Chicago. And who knows where else? The Spencer-related turmoil is all part of a much greater free speech debate swirling around the country’s colleges and their general counsel.

The turmoil includes recent incidents of free speech protest-related violence or disruptions of unpopular speakers at Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, in May; at Middlebury College in Vermont in March, and the University of Southern California in Los Angeles in February. Messages seeking comment from general counsel or other executives at these universities were not returned.

The debate became so heated that in June the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on “the assault on the First Amendment on college campuses.”

Veteran First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams, formerly counsel for The New York Times and now senior counsel at Cahill Gordon & Reindel in New York, testified at the hearing. “The answer to the suppression of almost any speech, the First Amendment answer, cannot be to limit expression but to discuss it, not to bar offensive speech but to answer it. Or to ignore it. Or to persuade the public to reject it,” Abrams said.

Also testifying was UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh, who urged universities to keep their doors open to unpopular speakers. Volokh said banning a speaker “is an abdication of the universities’ responsibility to educate—to teach their students about the importance of responding to speech with arguments, and not with suppression.”

At least one of the experts, Frederick Lawrence, a senior research fellow at Yale Law School and visiting professor of law at Georgetown University Law Center, came closest to suggesting some sort of restrictions on hate speech. Lawrence noted that Canada, Denmark, Germany, New Zealand and the U.K. all have laws to punish hateful language.

Lawrence proposed applying the criminal law doctrine of “intent” to hate speech. He asked, “Is the actor intending to cause harm to a particular victim or is the actor intending to communicate views, however hateful or unpleasant those views may be?”

Geoffrey Stone, the Edward H. Levi Distinguished Service Professor of Law at the University of Chicago and noted First Amendment advocate, tends to agree with the Volokh free speech view. Stone helped shape his school’s principles for freedom of expression in 2015.

In an interview Thursday, Stone said a university should look at the free speech issue as “an opportunity for the university to educate its community about how to respond to this kind of expression.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Internet rights group slams Google and GoDaddy's 'dangerous' decision to ban a neo-Nazi site

White nationalists carry torches on the grounds of the University of Virginia, on the eve of a planned Unite The Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, U.S. August 11, 2017. Alvarez/News2Share via REUTERSA prominent Internet rights group has condemned Google and GoDaddy for refusing to manage the domain registration for the neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer. 

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a non-profit organization that defends digital civil liberties, issued a blistering statement on Thursday slamming the domain gatekeepers for using their power to silence speech. 

After Heather Heyer was killed in Charlottesville, The Daily Stormer ran a post mocking her for her physical appearance and using various offensive epithets. This prompted widespread outrage on Twitter, and led GoDaddy to investigate and, ultimately, ban The Daily Stormer for violating its terms of service. 

Following this, the neo-Nazi site attempted to register a domain with Google, but that attempt was quickly blocked as well.

Though many around the web were pleased to hear these companies were making an effort to eliminate hate speech from the web, the EFF claims taking such actions sets a dangerous precedent. 

“Because Internet intermediaries, especially those with few competitors, control so much online speech, the consequences of their decisions have far-reaching impacts on speech around the world,” the EFF’s post explains.

Though it harshly condemns hate speech of any kind, the EFF’s post goes on to argue that domain suspension is too broad of a weapon to use against hate speech, because it “makes everything hosted [on the domain] difficult or impossible to access,” and has a high likelihood of blocking speech that wasn’t targeted.  

The main concern expressed by the EFF is that eliminating websites full of hate speech is a slippery slope. 

“We might well face a world where every government and powerful body would see itself as an equal or more legitimate invoker of that power,” the statement reads. “That makes the domain name system unsuitable as a mechanism for taking down specific illegal content as the law sometimes requires, and a perennially attractive central location for nation-states and others to exercise much broader takedown powers.”

Following Google and GoDaddy’s decision to drop The Daily Stormer, Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince decided to drop them as a customer, after which the website was soon hit with a DDoS attack. Prince said it made him “deeply uncomfortable” to know he had so much power to limit speech. 

“The ability of somebody to single-handedly choose to knock content offline doesn’t align with core ideas of due process or justice,” Prince told Business Insider on Wednesday. “Whether that’s a national government launching attacks or an individual launching attacks.”

The Daily Stormer was briefly hosted on a Russian server, but was kicked off of that as well. Founder Andrew Anglin announced on the Gab social network that the site would take refuge on the dark web. 

Read the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s full statement here. 

SEE ALSO: Cloudflare CEO explains his emotional decision to punt The Daily Stormer and subject it to hackers: I woke up ‘in a bad mood and decided to kick them off the Internet’

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Everything we know about the new iPhone that Apple will announce in September

Source link

Criminal Minds: How Daniel Henney will join – EW.com (blog)

To celebrate Fall TV and our huge Fall TV Preview issue — hitting stands on Sept. 15 — EW is bringing you 50 scoops in 50 days, a daily dish on some of your favorite shows. Follow the hashtag #50Scoops50Days on Twitter and Instagram to keep up with the latest, and check EW.com/50-Scoops for all the news and surprises.

Who’s dead or alive?

When Criminal Minds wrapped its 12th season on CBS, six members of the BAU team jumped into a pair of SUVs on a wild goose chase to meet Reid. But what happened was a straight-up disaster: somebody sabotaged their tires to blow up right in the path of an 18-wheeler truck — and it’s unclear who, if any, survived the devastation.

In anticipation of the drama’s Sept. 27 start date, EW got some exclusive scoop from executive producer Erica Messer about the accident and how new cast member Daniel Henney — fresh off the short-lived spinoff Criminal Minds: Beyond Borders — joins the action as Agent Matt Simmons.

Sonja Flemming/CBS

“Garcia [Kirsten Vangsness] has just learned that her team is in trouble. And the first person she calls is Agent Simmons,” Messer tells EW. “He drives them to the site of the last known signal from the team. They discover this horrific car accident. Once they see who is injured, they discover that someone is missing.”

Messer says that Simmons and Garcia work together for the majority of the episode to find the missing BAU member. Could it be Emily Prentiss, David Rossi, and Jennifer Jareau or Tara Lewis, Luke Alvez, and Stephen Walker?

But even if someone  — gulp — dies from the accident, Messer tells EW that there are no plans to expand the team beyond Henney this season. Speaking of whom, here’s another first look of the actor as Agent Matt Simmons in his new digs. Is he hot on the trail of Mr. Scratch, who may or may not have caused that horrific accident?

Sonja Flemming/CBS

Criminal Minds returns for its 13th season on Wednesday, Sept. 27, on CBS.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Vegas lawyers confidents laws will follow pot evolution – Merced Sun-Star

Just over two years after filling out tens of thousands of sheets of paperwork for their medical marijuana licenses, Nevada weed entrepreneurs didn’t have it as bad this time around, according to lawyers in the new recreational industry.

While first-time marijuana business owners scrambled to meet state demands for obtaining their licenses back in 2015 — which included long applications, large amounts of cash, hiring and security — the process of entering the recreational business has been a matter of “fine-tuning,” as more experienced license-holders are now looking more for clarification on individual regulations in 2017.

“The questions are more specific. Before it was, ‘How do we do this, how do we operate?’?” said Las Vegas attorney Riana Durrett, who serves as executive director of the Nevada Dispensary Association. “Now, the owners are very familiar with the laws, and it’s specific questions and fine-tuning.”

Durrett, who earned both her undergraduate and graduate degrees from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, is one of several practicing attorneys in the valley working to help business operators understand Nevada’s new recreational marijuana laws. Those laws allow adults 21 and older to use and possess up to 1 ounce of marijuana flower or 1/8 ounce of the THC equivalent of concentrates, such as shatter, wax and carbon dioxide oil.

This year, the Legislature and the Nevada Department of Taxation cleared the way for “early start” sales of the plant to begin July 1.

The turnaround of less than nine months from the time the ballot question passed to the kickoff of recreational sales made Nevada the first of four states that legalized adult-use weed in last year’s election to have its new industry up and running. That timeline resulted in a flurry of questions for lawyers — regarding both business and criminal law — as purveyors and consumers scrambled to keep pace with the evolving legal landscape.

Durrett, whose advocacy organization represents more than 80 percent of pot dispensaries across Nevada, said among questions she received the most from license holders was how to apply new packaging and labeling regulations for the recreational industry. Senate Bill 344, passed this session, mandated that edible products don’t resemble candy or other substances marketed to children, and that all packages be labeled “This is a marijuana product” in bold print. Language from the bill was later adopted in an emergency regulation on edibles by the industry’s regulating body, the Department of Taxation.

Employees of marijuana businesses in Nevada are now allowed to use their state-issued marijuana agent cards to work at any of the state’s 60 marijuana dispensaries, 88 cultivation facilities, 57 production facilities or 11 testing laboratories. Previous regulations in the medical marijuana industry forced weed workers to apply for a new agent card each time they moved to a new position — a process that took four to six weeks, even when the employee was moving between dispensaries.

“It has made life much easier for employers and their employees,” Durrett said of the recently passed Assembly Bill 422, which paved the way for the streamlined agent card process. “It’s helped us avoid having to reinvent the wheel.”

Criminal defense lawyer Nicholas Wooldridge of LV Criminal Defense has represented Las Vegas clients since moving back to the valley from New York City in 2014. Wooldridge, who also graduated from UNLV’s Boyd School of Law, said the number of criminal clients his office serves for marijuana-related offenses has decreased drastically since 2015. Once representing more than a dozen clients at a given time for weed crimes, Wooldridge can now count the marijuana offenders he represents on one hand.

“Prior to the law, it was common to see people charged with having some weed on them, but it’s not too often now unless you’re dealing pot,” he said. “I don’t think cops are looking to get into people’s houses to see if they have over an ounce of weed.”

Wooldridge said cases of most low-level marijuana offenders “haven’t been taken seriously” in court since Ballot Question 2 passed in November, and many marijuana cases that would have been prosecuted prior to this year are now being dismissed. Those most at risk are motorists driving under the influence of weed.

Wooldridge questioned legislation that classifies marijuana users whose blood contains two or more nanograms of marijuana or five or more nanograms of marijuana metabolites per milliliter of blood as impaired and subject to DUI charges. He calls that protocol “flawed,” arguing that samples from people who frequently use the plant could test above the legal limit days after last using pot, even though they’re not high at the time of their arrest. Metro Police spokesman Officer Larry Hadfield confirmed that valley police were “always on the lookout” for impaired drivers and said those who failed a field sobriety test would be arrested.

“People who smoke pot have to be really careful not to get pulled over,” Wooldridge said. “Or at least if you do get pulled over, be in a state where they don’t suspect that you could possibly be stoned.”

Attorney Amanda Connor of Connor & Connor PLC, perhaps the most well-known lawyer representing pot industry licensees in Nevada, said the recreational industry’s long-term success would revolve primarily around its ability to resolve an ongoing wholesale distribution dispute and its capacity to develop reliable permanent regulations once the current early start regulations expire Jan. 1.

Connor said permanent regulations for the industry should “work themselves out” as a combination of tweaks from the early start regulations and recommendations from Gov. Brian Sandoval’s recreational marijuana task force, appointed this year. Connor added that progress — including a determination for how the Department of Taxation quantifies the amount of distribution sufficient to run the industry — still must be made on the ongoing wholesale dispute with licensed alcohol distributors before the weed industry can feel confident about its ability to legally supply dispensaries.

“A lot still has to play out, but there’s reason to believe the industry will stabilize and develop,” Connor said. “I think Nevada will have big numbers going forward.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Sheriff David Clarke is being sued by family of an inmate who died after not receiving water for a week

david clarke

The family of a man who died from dehydration in jail back in April 2016 has filed a lawsuit against Milwaukee county and Sheriff David Clarke.

Terrill Thomas, 38, was found dead on the floor of his cell at the Milwaukee County Jail eight days after he was admitted in April 2016.

Three months after an inquest jury recommended charges for seven prison officials, Thomas’ family has filed a lawsuit against both Milwaukee County and Clarke, who runs the jail.

According to the Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel, other defendants named in the lawsuit include eight jail supervisors, 14 correctional officers along with medical professionals who worked at the jail at the time of Thomas’ death.

Post-death examination found that three prison officers turned off Thomas’ water as punishment for bad behavior and trying to flood his cell after being admitted to jail. According to the Sentinel, they never restored the water or notified a supervisor of their actions.

Thomas had a history of mental illness and bipolar disorder, but instead of moving him to a special needs union, the officers also allegedly left him without water or adequate food supply from April 17 until his death on April 23, according to the Sentinel.

“The change in Mr. Thomas’ condition was obvious to every jail employee who looked into his cell, including multiple defendants,” reads the lawsuit. “However, not a single one bothered to call for help until it was too late to save Mr. Thomas’ life.”

By the time of his death Thomas had allegedly lost more than 34 pounds.”By April 23 he was too weak to yell or bang on his window. He was simply lying naked on his cell floor, barely able to move, severely dehydrated, literally dying of thirst,” the lawsuit reads.


While lawsuits have alleged Clarke’s negligence towards his duty in running a jail over the last year, Clarke hit the campaign trail with Donald Trump. During the 2016 campaign, Clarke regularly made appearances endorsing Trump on conservative media networks while decrying President Barack Obama and Black Lives Matter on Twitter.

Clarke’s loyalty to Trump did not go unnoticed in Wisconsin, where many accused him of abandoning law enforcement in his home state to seek fame and power.

“He has to run a law-enforcement department, which has very specific responsibilities, and a city that has had a really, really tough year,” Charlie Sykes, a recently retired conservative Wisconsin radio host who has known Clarke for more than 20 years, told Business Insider. “And when he gets involved, it often has an almost gratuitous, grandstanding sense to it.”

Jails run by Clarke have repeatedly been called out for its inmate treatment — Milwaukee County auditors launched an investigation after four inmates died in custody at the county’s two jails within the span of months.

SEE ALSO: Prosecutors say an inmate at the jail Sheriff David Clarke runs died of dehydration after not receiving water for a week

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 8 details you might have missed on season 7 episode 4 of ‘Game of Thrones’

Source link

'Criminal Minds' Season 13 Spoilers: How Will Agent Simmons Affect the Team's Dynamics? – Christian Post

Facebook/CriminalMindsAgent Simmons will join the squad in the next season of “Criminal Minds.”

Agent Matthew Simmons (Daniel Henney) is expected to play a huge role in the upcoming season of “Criminal Minds.”

Showrunner Erica Messer recently spoke to TV Guide about the decision to add Henney in the show. The actor had previously starred in its spin-off, “Criminal Minds: Beyond Borders.” After that series was canceled, it was announced that he would be part of the Behavioral Analysis Unit in the new installment. Messer said she was looking forward to the energy Henney would bring into the show and that it has been “lovely” working with him. Simmons had previously worked with the BAU when he helped in Reid’s (Matthew Gray Gubler) release from prison, so he will not exactly be a stranger to the team. He will take the place that Damon Gupton, who played Agent Stephen Walker, left.

“It was difficult,” Messer shared with TV Guide. “As you know, these decisions aren’t made quickly or anything like that. Everything was a thoughtful decision.”

She added: “The discussions were, ‘Do you think Daniel would want to join Criminal Minds?’ But of course to add one more that means someone’s not coming back and that’s never an easy thing when someone isn’t returning to the show. … The decision was made that made that Damon would not be returning and Daniel would be joining, so then it’s up to us to tell the stories and have them make sense.”

Meanwhile, season 13 is expected to see the return of the serial killer, Mr. Scratch (Bodhi Elfman). Adam Rodriguez, who plays Luke Alvez, recently hinted that the BAU might finally capture the criminal and end his evil reign.

Since Scratch escaped from prison in season 11, he has been targeting the BAU members and their families. Last time, he made Reid’s life miserable. The FBI agent was sent to jail for a crime he did not commit. Shortly after, his mother, Diana (Jane Lynch), was abducted. Spoilers indicate that BAU may use Reid as bait to capture Scratch. The man will not be able to resist toying with the lanky agent again.

“Criminal Minds” season 13 will premiere on Sept. 27 at 10 p.m. EDT on CBS.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

If liability is limited, written notice to your client to seek independent counsel is needed. – The Legal Intelligencer

If liability is limited, written notice to your client to seek independent counsel is needed.

I have an active criminal defense practice and have a very good plea agreement for my client, but he has to waive any rights to appeal and any rights to claim my ineffectiveness. Can I allow that to happen?

The question is an interesting one. The pertinent rule, which has been discussed recently in an earlier article, is Pennsylvania Rule of Professional Conduct 1.8(h). That precludes a lawyer from making an agreement limiting the lawyer’s liability to the client for malpractice unless the client is independently represented in making the agreement. The rule also precludes settling a claim for liability with a client in a legal malpractice case without giving the client written notice that they should seek independent counsel.

The question becomes is a waiver of the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel the same as signing a release in reference to a professional liability case? The question is really an interesting one. As criminal lawyers know, bringing a legal malpractice suit against a criminal lawyer for his criminal representation of a client, there first has to be a finding of ineffective assistance of counsel or else normally the legal malpractice suit will be dismissed. As a result, there is a close connection between a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel and the ability of a client to sue their criminal defense lawyer for legal malpractice.

If that’s the case, it would appear that Rule 1.8(h) would be applicable and if a lawyer is going to have a client enter into a plea agreement in which there is a waiver of any right to claim ineffective assistance of counsel, the lawyer could not do so without first complying with the mandated Rule 1.8(h) and have the client seek independent counsel before the client is willing to waive their right under those circumstances.

The Pennsylvania Bar Association did issue an opinion cited as 2014-100, which adopted that concept.

Criminal defense lawyers have to be careful. Sometimes trying to aid a client and convince a client to do the right thing can create conflict, such as waiving claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Sometimes conflicts of interest sneak up on a lawyer and they’re not always recognized. Sometimes in the heat of litigation or resolving issues a lawyer can miss a potential conflict that can later come back to haunt the lawyer.

Rule 1.8(h) is an important rule to learn to remember. Any time a lawyer is trying to limit their liability in any fashion with a client, that rule appears to be triggered. The bottom line is if one is limiting liability, then the lawyer has to give written notice to the client to seek independent counsel.

Sexual relationships with a client are prohibited.

My law firm represents a major client. I discovered one of the partners is having a sexual relationship with the in-house counsel to that firm. Would that create a problem for the firm in continuing to represent the business?

The rule at issue is found at Rule 1.8(j) of the Rule of Professional Conduct. That rule notes a lawyer shall not have sexual relations with a client unless a consensual relationship existed between them before the client asked for legal representation. Therefore, if a lawyer has already been dating someone and then that person asks the lawyer to represent them, it would be OK. But, if the lawyer is representing a client and then started dating the client, that is prohibited by the rule. The comment to the rule is found in Comment 17, 18, and 19 to Rule 1.8. The comment notes the relationship between a lawyer and client is a fiduciary one. Because the relationship is unequal because the client can be exploited by the lawyer, a sexual relationship is prohibited. The Rule recognizes the lawyer’s independence could be compromised and a conflict of interest could be created.

Of particular interest to the question is Comment 19. The comment notes when a client is an organization, the rule prohibits a lawyer for the organization from having a sexual relationship with a constituent of the organization who supervises, directs, or regularly consults with the lawyer concerning the organization’s legal matters.

Therefore, Comment 19 would appear to prohibit a lawyer who is representing the organization from having a relationship with the general counsel to the organization. But, it should be noted that the prohibition is a personal one and does not apply to one’s entire firm. Comment 20 to Rule 1.8 is entitled imputation of prohibitions. That comment notes as follows: “The prohibition set forth in Paragraph J (Rule 1.8j) is personal and is not applied to associated lawyers.” (See Comment 20 to Rule 1.8 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.)

Therefore, if someone was having a relationship with a constituent of the organization the firm represents, then that lawyer would be barred from representing the organization, but other lawyers in the firm would not be prohibited.

Obviously, the better practice is not to have sexual relationships with one’s clients or constituents of an organizational client. That is, of course, the goal. But, on the other hand, lawyers are human and Cupid does appear in odd circumstances. But, as a professional, a lawyer has to follow the Rules of Professional Conduct and those rules prohibit sexual relationships with a client or a constituent of an organizational client. •

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

'I think he's a greedy little man': Prospective jurors revealed contempt for 'pharma bro' Martin Shkreli

martin shkreli

Martin Shkreli was found guilty on two counts of securities fraud earlier this month, but the process of selecting a jury for the case against the former pharmaceutical CEO and hedge fund founder appeared to be as lively as the trial itself.

Some of the 200 potential jurors apparently did not hold back their views toward Shkreli during court interviews held over the course of three days in June. Their court interviews were compiled by Harper’s Magazine ahead of its September issue.

“I’m aware of the defendant and I hate him,” Juror No. 1 said. “I think he’s a greedy little man.”

When asked by the court if the juror agreed that jurors were obligated to “decide the case based only on the evidence,” Juror No. 1 responded with: “I don’t know if I could. I wouldn’t want me on this jury.”

“He’s the most hated man in America,” Juror No. 47 said. “In my opinion, he equates with Bernie Madoff … My parents are in their eighties. They’re struggling to pay for their medication. My mother was telling me yesterday how my father’s cancer drug is $9,000 a month,” the person claimed.

The court, emphasizing that the case would have to be considered with “an open mind,” dismissed Juror No. 47, who said, “I would find that difficult.

“When I walked in here today I looked at him, and in my head, that’s a snake — not knowing who he was,” Juror No. 52 said. “I just walked in and looked right at him and that’s a snake.”

Benjamin Brafman, Shkreli’s attorney, quipped, “So much for the presumption of innocence.”

“From everything I’ve seen on the news, everything I’ve read, I believe the defendant is the face of corporate greed in America,” Juror No. 77 said.

“We would object,” Brafman responded.

“You’d have to convince me he was innocent rather than guilty,” Juror No. 77 continued.

“I heard he bought an album from the Wu-Tang Clan for a million dollars,” Juror No. 144 said, referring to an exclusive single-copy album the hip-hop group released. Shkreli paid $2 million for the record in 2016. 

“The question is, have you heard anything that would affect your ability to decide this case with an open mind,” said the court. “Can you do that?”

“I don’t think I can because he kind of looks like a dick,” Juror No. 144 responded.

Juror No. 59, after being called upon to address the court, came out of the gates storming: “Your Honor, totally he is guilty and in no way can I let him slide out of anything because —” Juror No. 59 began, before being cut off.

“Okay,” the court interjected. “Is that your attitude toward anyone charged with a crime who has not been proven guilty?”

“It’s my attitude toward his entire demeanor, what he has done to people,” Juror No. 59 responded.

“All right,” the court said. “We are going to excuse you, sir.”

But Juror No. 59 wasn’t done: “And he disrespected the Wu-Tang Clan.”

Read the full transcript here »

SEE ALSO: Investor says Martin Shkreli reminded him of ‘Rain Man’

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Stocks have shrugged off Trump headlines to hit new highs this week

Source link