U.S. District Judge Richard Leon’s latest ruling comes in response to an appeals court’s instruction to clarify an earlier decision on the 90,000-square-foot (8,400-square-meter) ballroom planned for the site where it demolished the East Wing of the White House.

Trump on social media called Leon, who was nominated to the bench by Republican President George W. Bush, a “Trump Hating” judge who “has gone out of his way to undermine National Security, and to make sure that this Great Gift to America gets delayed, or doesn’t get built.”

Leon said that below-ground work on security measures is exempt from his order suspending above-ground construction. Government lawyers have argued that the project includes critical security features to guard against a range of possible threats, such as drones, ballistic missiles and biohazards.

Leon’s latest ruling comes several days after a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit instructed him to reconsider the possible national security implications of stopping construction.

In his previous order, Leon barred above-ground work on the ballroom from proceeding without congressional approval. The judge also ruled on March 31 that any construction work that’s necessary to ensure the safety and security of the White House is exempt from the scope of the injunction. Leon said he reviewed material that the government privately submitted to him before concluding that halting construction wouldn’t jeopardize national security.

Leon had suspended his March 31 order for two weeks. He stayed his latest decision for another week, which gives the administration more time to seek Supreme Court review.

Leon said he is ordering a stop only to the above-ground construction of the planned ballroom, apart from any work needed to cover or secure that part of the project. Otherwise, the Trump administration is free to proceed with the construction of any excavations, bunkers, military installations, and medical facilities below the ballroom.

“Defendants argue that the entire ballroom construction project, from tip to tail, falls within the safety-and-security exception and therefore may proceed unabated,” the judge wrote. “That is neither a reasonable nor a correct reading of my Order!”

On Saturday, a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said it didn’t have enough information to decide how much of the project can be suspended without jeopardizing the safety of the president, his family or the White House staff.

The post Trump rails against court decision that once again stalls his White House ballroom project appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan did not immediately rule after hearing two hours of arguments.

At the conclusion, Circuit Judge William J. Nardini called it an “exceptionally difficult case” that raises questions of first impression “not only for this court but for any federal court in the country.”

Throughout the arguments, judges questioned whether a judge improperly considered elements of acquitted charges to sentence Combs to what his lawyer, Alexandra Shapiro, said was the most prison time ever given someone convicted of the same charges with a similar criminal history.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Christy Slavik, arguing for the government, challenged Shapiro’s claim, saying the four-year, two-month prison term given to Combs was below what federal sentencing guidelines called for and was in line with similar convictions in the 2nd Circuit.

Combs, currently in federal prison in New Jersey, is challenging his conviction and prison sentence. He was convicted last July under the federal Mann Act, which bans transporting people across state lines for any sexual crime.

But he was acquitted of sex trafficking and racketeering charges that carried the potential for a life sentence.

In sentencing Combs, Judge Arun Subramanian said: “Mr. Combs, you’re being sentenced for the offenses of conviction, NOT the crimes he was acquitted of. However, under law, the court ‘shall consider’ the nature of the offense and characteristics of the defendant.”

The judge also cited law which states that no limitation shall be placed on the “background, character and conduct” that a judge can consider.

During Thursday’s arguments, Shapiro asked the appeals panel for a speedy decision.

Combs, 56, has been behind bars since his September 2024 arrest. The Federal Bureau of Prisons says he is scheduled for release in April 2028.

His attorneys say Combs’ conviction should be reversed, or he should at least be freed and resentenced to less time.

Despite extensive written arguments on the subject, there was no discussion Thursday about claims by Combs’ lawyers that his conviction should be reversed on grounds that the First Amendment protects sexual encounters between his girlfriends and male sex workers because they were sometimes filmed and amounted to “amateur pornography.”

There was extensive discussion, though, about his lawyers’ arguments that Subramanian wrongly considered evidence of fraud and coercion that they said the jury rejected as it exonerated him on the most serious charges.

Combs’ trial last year exposed the sordid private life of one of the most influential figures in music. The case featured harrowing testimony about violence, drugs and sexual performances that witnesses said he called “freak-offs” or “hotel nights.”

He did not testify. His defense team acknowledged that he could be violent but argued that prosecutors were straining to make a federal crime out of his personal life.

The post Appeals court judges raise questions about severity of Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs’ four-year prison sentence appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Nicole Daedone, co-founder of OneTaste Inc., was also ordered to forfeit $12 million during the hearing in Brooklyn. That was the amount she sold the California-based company for, according to John Marzulli, spokesperson for the Office of U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York.

Prosecutors had sought a 20-year prison term for Daedone, arguing in presentencing court filings that her scheme left “scores of victims financially, emotionally and psychologically scarred.”

“Daedone and her co-conspirators exercised control through economic pressure, psychological manipulation, physical exhaustion and emotional degradation, leaving behind a trail of financial ruin and lasting trauma,” prosecutors wrote.

Her lawyers argued that imposing a lengthy imprisonment would be “bonkers” as they sought a term of around two years for Daedone.

They noted that the New York resident had no prior criminal record and that more than 200 people had submitted letters to the court “attesting to her character, her generosity, and her positive influence.”

“She has lived an uncommon and impactful life, and she is deeply respected by people from all walks of life, including many entirely unconnected to OneTaste,” the defense lawyers wrote in their sentencing memo. “She is a prolific writer, teacher, and spiritual practitioner whose work has long focused on reducing suffering and fostering meaningful human connection.”

Among those who penned letters of support was Van Jones, a CNN correspondent and former adviser to President Barack Obama.

The longtime criminal justice reform advocate described Daedone as “a woman of uncommon wisdom, grace and moral courage” who has “dedicated her life to helping others find healing, empowerment and a deeper sense of human connection.”

Actor Richard Schiff, of the television series “The West Wing,” wrote that Daedone was deserving of the court’s leniency because she has “spent her life trying to bring compassion, awareness, and honesty to a part of human experience that is often shamed or misunderstood.”

Daedone’s lawyers didn’t immediately respond to an email seeking comment after the sentencing. Rachel Cherwitz, the company’s former sales director, was set to be sentenced later Monday.

During the roughly one-month trial, prosecutors said the two women ran a yearslong scheme that groomed adherents — many of them victims of sexual trauma — to do their bidding.

They said Daedone and Cherwitz, of California, used economic, sexual and psychological abuse, intimidation and indoctrination to force OneTaste members into sexual acts they found uncomfortable or repulsive, such as having sex with prospective investors or clients.

The two told followers the questionable acts were necessary in order to obtain “freedom” and “enlightenment,” and to demonstrate their commitment to the company’s principles.

One of Daedone’s lawyers, meanwhile, cast her as a “ceiling-shattering feminist entrepreneur” who created a unique business centered on women’s sexuality and empowerment.

Daedone co-founded OneTaste in San Francisco in 2004 as a sort of self-help commune that viewed female orgasms as key to sexual and psychological wellness and interpersonal connection.

A centerpiece was “orgasmic meditation,” or “OM,” which was carried out by men manually stimulating women in a group setting.

The company enjoyed glowing media coverage in the 2010s as a cutting-edge enterprise that prioritized women’s sexual pleasure, and quickly opened outposts from Los Angeles to London.

Daedone sold her stake in the company in 2017 for $12 million — a year before OneTaste’s marketing and labor practices came under scrutiny.

The company’s current owners have since rebranded it as the Institute of OM Foundation. They maintain its work has been misconstrued and that the charges against its former executives were unjustified.

The post Founder of ‘orgasmic meditation’ company gets 9 years in prison in forced labor case appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The mass-casualty accident involved a boat loaded with 19 people that left Mexico on May 4, 2025, then capsized off the coast of Del Mar the following day.

Emergency crews responding to the vessel found the bodies of 18-year- old Marcos Lozada-Juarez, 55-year-old Gorgonio Placido-Diaz and 14-year-old Prince Patel. Prince’s 10-year-old sister, Mahi, also died, but her remains were not discovered until a few weeks later.

Several other occupants of the boat — including the children’s parents — were hospitalized for injuries ranging in severity from minor to critical.

Two defendants were arrested on the beach, while three others were arrested in vehicles that had picked up some of the migrants who arrived on the vessel, prosecutors said.

The two accused of piloting the boat — Jesus Ivan Rodriguez-Leyva and Julio Cesar Zuniga-Luna — await trial, while the other three defendants have pleaded guilty and been sentenced.

Gustavo Lara was sentenced on Monday. According to his plea agreement, Lara was arrested after four migrants who had been transported from the beach got into his car.

Lara’s co-defendants were sentenced last year.

Melissa Cota was sentenced to 21 months in prison. She also picked up a group of migrants who had been driven from the beach and was responsible for providing them food at a “load house,” according to prosecutors.

Sergio Rojas-Fregoso was sentenced to 16 months in prison. He admitted in a plea agreement to guiding some of the migrants who arrived on shore to vehicles, while also transporting some migrants from the scene in his own car.

The post 1 Sentenced In Deadly Human Smuggling Event Off San Diego Coastline appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Three dozen potential jurors were questioned by Judge Arun Subramanian about their answers on a questionnaire meant to help determine if they could be fair and impartial at a trial that will feature violent and sexually explicit videos. Opening statements and the start of testimony are scheduled for next week.

The judge gave the would-be jurors a brief description of the sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy charges against Combs, telling them he’d pleaded not guilty and was presumed innocent.

By the end of the day, the jury pool was half its size as some were excluded for personal reasons such as inability to endure a trial projected to last two months or because their opinions or past experiences would make it difficult for them to remain objective.

A similar number of jurors was expected to be questioned on Tuesday. A jury was not expected to be chosen before Wednesday.

Throughout Monday, Combs, 55, sat with his lawyers in a sweater over a white collared shirt and gray slacks, which the judge had allowed rather than jail clothing. He’s been held in a grim federal lockup in Brooklyn since his arrest last September. His hair and goatee were almost fully gray because dye isn’t allowed in jail.

Unlike other recent high-profile celebrity trials, Combs’ court case won’t be broadcast live because federal courtrooms don’t allow electronic recordings inside — meaning courtroom sketch artists serve as the public’s eyes in the courtroom.

If convicted of all charges, he could face up to life in prison.

Several prospective jurors indicated they’d seen news reports featuring a key piece of evidence in the case: a video of the hip-hop mogul hitting and kicking one of his accusers in a Los Angeles hotel hallway in 2016. One prospective juror described a still image she saw from the video as “damning evidence.” That woman was rejected from consideration.

After another juror was dismissed, Combs asked for a bathroom break, telling the judge, “I’m sorry your honor I’m a little nervous today.”

One prospective juror said she had posted a “like” to a video put on social media by a comedian who included references to large amounts of baby oil found by law enforcement in one of Combs’ homes. She was not dismissed.

The 17-page indictment against Combs — which reads like a charging document filed against a Mafia leader or the head of a drug gang — alleges that Combs engaged in a two-decade racketeering pattern of abusive behavior against women and others, with the help of people in his entourage and employees from his network of businesses.

Combs and his lawyers say he’s innocent and any group sex was consensual. They say there was no effort to coerce people into things they didn’t want to do, and nothing that happened amounted to a criminal racket.

Prosecutors say women were manipulated into drug-fueled sexual performances with male sex workers that Combs called “Freak Offs.” To keep women in line, prosecutors say Combs used a mix of influence and violence: He offered to boost their entertainment careers if they did what he asked — or cut them off if they didn’t.

And when he wasn’t getting what he wanted, the indictment says Combs and his associates resorted to violent acts including beatings, kidnapping and arson. Once, the indictment alleges, he even dangled someone from a balcony.

Combs has acknowledged one episode of violence that is considered a key piece of the prosecution’s case. In 2016, a security camera recorded him beating up his former girlfriend, the R&B singer Cassie, in the hallway of a Los Angeles hotel. Cassie filed a lawsuit in late 2023 saying Combs had subjected her to years of abuse, including beatings and rape.

The Associated Press does not typically name people who say they have been sexually abused unless they come forward publicly, as Cassie, whose legal name is Casandra Ventura, did.

The post Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs’ says he’s ‘a little nervous’ as sex trafficking trial gets underway appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

A federal judge in Oakland on Tuesday blocked a Biden administration rule that limits migrants’ access to asylum at the southern border, casting doubt on the future of a key policy aimed at limiting crossings. The order from federal Judge Jon S. Tigar, who was appointed by President Obama, won’t take effect for two weeks.

The Biden administration quickly appealed the ruling to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and asked Tigar to stay his order while the higher court considers the matter. If the administration is unsuccessful in the 9th Circuit, it could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The policy, which restricts access to asylum for migrants who come through a third country on their way to the U.S. without applying for protections, is the centerpiece of the Biden administration’s efforts to reduce the number of migrants crossing without authorization each month. Tigar said Tuesday that the rule was “contrary to law” because it presumed that people who crossed the southern border were ineligible for asylum.

Biden administration officials have said in court declarations that without the policy, border crossings will increase, straining government resources. In June, crossings at the border were at their lowest level in more than two years. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro N. Mayorkas said in an emailed statement Tuesday that the agency “strongly” disagrees with the ruling and is “confident” that the rule is lawful. “To be clear, because the district court temporarily stayed its decision, today’s ruling does not change anything immediately,” he added. “It does not limit our ability to deliver consequences for unlawful entry. Do not believe the lies of smugglers.”

The rule targets people who enter the U.S. without authorization. Government officials have encouraged migrants to instead use a Customs and Border Protection app called CBP One to schedule an appointment at a port of entry. U.S. officials have also advertised a system that allows migrants from Cuba, Venezuela, Haiti and Nicaragua to apply for entry into the U.S. provided they have a financial sponsor and can pass security checks. Tigar said that applying for asylum on the way to the southern border is not feasible for many migrants.

He added that waiting in Mexico for appointments at a port of entry was similarly difficult. “Because CBP One access is limited to central and northern Mexico, asylum seekers must remain in these areas until they successfully secure an appointment,” he wrote. “The record suggests that migrants waiting in Mexico are at serious risk of violence.” In 2019, Tigar blocked the Trump administration’s version of the policy. The Supreme Court later stayed that order.

Advocates for immigrants have blasted the Biden administration’s asylum limits, labeling them as nothing more than a return to former President Trump’s strict policies. The legal challenge to Biden’s policy was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Immigrant Justice Center and the UC Hastings Center for Gender and Refugee Studies in May, when the policy went into place.

The groups celebrated Tigar’s ruling on Tuesday. “The ruling is a victory, but each day the Biden administration prolongs the fight over its illegal ban, many people fleeing persecution and seeking safe harbor for their families are instead left in grave danger,” Katrina Eiland, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said in an emailed statement. “The promise of America is to serve as a beacon of freedom and hope,” she added, “and the administration can and should do better to fulfill this promise, rather than perpetuate cruel and ineffective policies that betray it.”

Biden administration officials have said that the policy is intended to discourage unauthorized migration and encourage people to seek alternatives. “As intended, the rule has significantly reduced screen-in rates for noncitizens encountered along the [U.S.-Mexico border],” Blas Nuñez-Neto, a senior Homeland Security official, wrote in the filing. “The decline in encounters at the U.S. border, and entries into the Darién Gap, show that the application of consequences as a result of the rule’s implementation is disincentivizing noncitizens from pursuing irregular migration and incentivizing them to use safe and orderly pathways.” Nuñez-Neto said in the late June declaration that there were 104,000 migrants in northern Mexico and that many appeared to be “waiting to see whether the strengthened consequences associated with the rule’s implementation are real.”

Data from his filing appeared to confirm that the policy had significantly lowered the share of migrants at the southern border who crossed into the U.S. and were allowed to apply for asylum. In their request to stay Tigar’s order pending appeal, government attorneys said that his ruling undermined “efforts taken to prevent an expected increase in encounters at the southwest border following the termination of the Title 42,” referring to the public health measure that allowed border agents to quickly turn away migrants at the border before it was discontinued on May 11.

The policy Tigar deemed unlawful helps prevent a “potentially significant increase in encounters at the southwest border, which would overwhelm the immigration system, incentivize human smuggling, lead to extreme overcrowding in border facilities” and undermine agencies’ ability to manage the immigration system, the government’s attorneys argued.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Federal court blocks Biden rule limiting asylum for migrants, a big blow to administration appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss said: “As alleged, McAfee and Watson exploited a widely used social media platform and enthusiasm among investors in the emerging cryptocurrency market to make millions through lies and deception. The defendants allegedly used McAfee’s Twitter account to publish messages to hundreds of thousands of his Twitter followers touting various cryptocurrencies through false and misleading statements to conceal their true, self-interested motives. McAfee, Watson, and other members of McAfee’s cryptocurrency team allegedly raked in more than $13 million from investors they victimized with their fraudulent schemes. Investors should be wary of social media endorsements of investment opportunities.”

FBI Assistant Director William F. Sweeney Jr. said: “As alleged, McAfee and Watson used social media to perpetrate an age-old pump-and-dump scheme that earned them nearly two million dollars. Additionally, they allegedly used the same social media platform to promote the sale of digital tokens on behalf of ICO issuers without disclosing to investors the compensation they were receiving to tout these securities on behalf of the ICO. When engaging in illegal activity, simply finding new ways to carry out old tricks won’t produce different results. Investment fraud and money laundering schemes carry a strict penalty under federal law.”

According to the allegations in the charging documents unsealed today in Manhattan federal court, including the Indictment against JOHN DAVID MCAFEE and JIMMY GALE WATSON JR. and an earlier-filed criminal Complaint against MCAFEE:[1]

During the period from in or about December 2017 through in or about October 2018, JOHN DAVID MCAFEE and JIMMY GALE WATSON JR., and other members of the McAfee Team, perpetrated two fraudulent schemes relating to the promotion to investors of cryptocurrencies qualifying under federal law as commodities or securities.

The first scheme involved a fraudulent practice called “scalping,” which is sometimes referred to as a “pump and dump” scheme. This scalping scheme generally consisted of the following. First, MCAFEE, WATSON, and other McAfee Team members bought large quantities of publicly traded cryptocurrency altcoins, which qualified as commodities or securities, at inexpensive market prices with advance knowledge that MCAFEE planned to publicly endorse them via his widely followed Twitter account (the “Official McAfee Twitter Account”). Second, after these purchases, MCAFEE published false and misleading endorsement tweets via his Official McAfee Twitter Account recommending those altcoins to members of the investing public for investment in order to artificially inflate (or “pump” up) their market prices without disclosing that MCAFEE owned large quantities of the promoted altcoins, even though MCAFEE had given false assurances that he would disclose such information in various tweets and public statements during the scalping scheme. Third, MCAFEE, WATSON, and other McAfee Team members then sold (or “dumped”) their respective investment positions in the promoted altcoins into the temporary but significant short-term market price increases that MCAFEE’s deceptive tweets typically generated, often for significant profits. From in or about December 2017 through in or about January 2018, MCAFEE, WATSON, and other McAfee Team members collectively earned more than $2 million in illicit profits from their altcoin scalping activities while the long-term value of the recommended altcoins purchased by investors declined substantially as of a year after the promotional tweets. From in or about December 2017 through in or about October 2018, MCAFEE, WATSON, and other McAfee Team members engaged in various efforts to liquidate the digital asset proceeds of their scalping activities into United States currency.

In the second scheme, MCAFEE, WATSON, and other McAfee Team members also used MCAFEE’s Official McAfee Twitter Account to publicly tout fundraising events called “initial coin offerings” (“ICOs”) in which startup businesses (“ICO issuers”) issued and sold digital tokens qualifying as securities to the investing public, without disclosing and, in fact, concealing that the ICO issuers were compensating MCAFEE and his team for his promotional tweets with a substantial portion of the funds raised from ICO investors. As the United States Securities and Exchange Commission had publicly warned, and as MCAFEE and WATSON well knew, the federal securities laws required them to disclose any compensation paid by ICO issuers for touting securities offerings styled as ICOs. From approximately on or about December 20, 2017 through on or about February 10, 2018, MCAFEE, WATSON, and other McAfee Team members collectively earned more than $11 million in undisclosed compensation that they took steps to affirmatively hide from ICO investors. In each instance, MCAFEE and WATSON failed to disclose to ICO investors that the ICO Issuers were paying the McAfee Team a substantial portion of the funds raised from ICO investors for their touting efforts, despite knowing that they were required to disclose such compensation under federal securities laws. Furthermore, in several instances during this ICO touting scheme, MCAFEE and WATSON took active steps to conceal their secret compensation arrangements with ICO issuers from ICO investors, and MCAFEE made false and misleading statements and omissions to hide such deals from ICO investors. From approximately in or about December 2017 through in or about October 2018, MCAFEE, WATSON, and other McAfee Team members engaged in various efforts to liquidate the digital asset proceeds of their ICO touting activities into United States dollars.

During the period from in or about December 2017 through in or about October 2018, MCAFEE and WATSON caused another McAfee Team member to engage in banking transactions to launder proceeds of the fraudulent ICO touting scheme.

In separate parallel enforcement actions, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) have filed civil charges against MCAFEE and WATSON.

MCAFEE, 75, and WATSON, 40, are United States citizens. Both of them are charged in a seven-count Indictment with one count of conspiracy to commit commodities and securities fraud, which carries a maximum potential sentence of five years in prison; one count of conspiracy to commit securities and touting fraud, which carries a maximum potential sentence of five years in prison; two counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and two counts of substantive wire fraud, each of which carries a maximum potential sentence of 20 years in prison; and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering, which carries a maximum potential sentence of ten years in prison. In addition to potential prison sentences, each of these charges also carries potential financial penalties. The maximum potential prison sentences in this case are prescribed by Congress and are provided here for informational purposes only, as any sentences to be imposed on the defendants will be determined by the judge.

Ms. Strauss praised the work of the FBI on the investigation of this case and thanked the SEC and CFTC, both of which conducted separate parallel investigations, for their assistance.

This case is being handled by this Office’s Securities and Commodities Fraud Task Force. Assistant United States Attorneys Samson Enzer and Elizabeth Hanft are in charge of the prosecution.

The allegations contained in the charging documents in this case are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

[1] As the introductory phrase signifies, the entirety of the texts of the Complaint and Indictment and the description of those charging documents set forth herein constitute only allegations, and every fact described should be treated as an allegation.

Justice.gov • Contributed

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post John David McAfee And Executive Adviser Of His Cryptocurrency Team Indicted In Manhattan Federal Court For Fraud And Money Laundering Conspiracy Crimes appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.