Daughter of Hong Kong tycoon Jimmy Lai tells CNN she is devastated by guilty verdict handed down to her father

Kraig Pakulski 0 103 Article rating: No rating

Katrina Samaan

Washington, D.C (CNN) — The guilty verdict handed down this week to Hong Kong media tycoon and democracy advocate Jimmy Lai was expected but is still devastating, his daughter Claire Lai told CNN’s Jim Sciutto, blaming what she described as the city’s “highly compromised” legal system under Chinese rule.

Her father, 78, now faces the possibility of life in prison after his two-year trial under a sweeping national security law that Beijing imposed on the city following months of huge and sometimes violent pro-democracy protests.

Self-made billionaire Lai, founded a fiercely pro-democracy tabloid newspaper known for its blistering broadsides against the Chinese Communist Party until its forced closure in 2021.

Prosecutors cited Lai’s lobbying of US politicians during Trump’s first term – much of it before the security law was enacted – as evidence of sedition and colluding with foreign forces, including his meetings with then-Vice President Mike Pence, then-State Secretary Mike Pompeo, and attempts to meet Trump himself.

Hong Kong authorities have repeatedly rejected claims Lai’s trial was politically motivated and maintain the city’s judicial system adheres to the rule of law.

Lai’s daughter, Claire Lai, told CNN’s Jim Sciutto that Monday’s verdict was expected but devastating, calling the national security law extremely vague, draconian and arbitrary.

“This was not going to be solved in the once promising but now highly compromised Hong Kong legal system,” she said, adding the 855-page verdict failed to meaningfully engage with free press or fundamental rights protections.

Hong Kong, a former British colony that returned to Chinese rule in 1997, has a separate judicial system to that of mainland China – which has a conviction rate above 99%.

Critics fear the national security law has brought what they describe as Beijing’s authoritarian and opaque judicial norms to Hong Kong, with all national security trials so far heard by a panel of specially selected judges, not juries – a departure from the city’s common-law tradition when dealing with serious cases.

Human rights barrister Jonathan Price KC, part of Lai’s international legal team, described the court proceedings as a “performative process” that began with Lai’s arrest in 2020 and culminated in what he called a predetermined verdict.

“The legal reasoning is scarce to say the least, if not non-existent,” Price said.

In response, Hong Kong authorities said the court “clearly pointed out in the reasons for verdict that Lai Chee-ying (Jimmy Lai) was not on trial for his political views or beliefs,” adding that the 855-page ruling is “fully open for public inspection” and “meticulously explains the court’s analysis of the relevant legal principles and evidence.”

The Hong Kong government also defended the city’s legal system, saying, “Hong Kong is a society underpinned by the rule of law and has always adhered to the principle that laws must be obeyed, and lawbreakers be held accountable.”

The family says Lai’s health has sharply deteriorated during the five years he has been imprisoned. Claire Lai said her father has lost more than 10 kilograms in less than a year and now suffers from diabetes, heart issues, high blood pressure, failing eyesight and hearing, and other visible ailments.

“My father, he was strong and robust… and he was quite known for that as well. And now he’s lost a dramatic amount of weight,” she said.

Hong Kong authorities disputed those concerns, saying Lai has received “adequate and comprehensive” medical care while in custody.

“Professional medical staff provide the most suitable healthcare services to patients, and all PICs (person in custody) are treated equally. Senio

Candace Owens won’t take back conspiracies about Charlie Kirk’s death after meeting with Erika Kirk

Kraig Pakulski 0 98 Article rating: No rating
Candace Owens speaks at the Turning Point USA at Clemson University event titled

By Elle Reeve, CNN

(CNN) — In her first podcast episode after what she described as a 4.5-hour conversation with Erika Kirk, conservative podcaster Candace Owens said Tuesday that she still does not believe that the person charged with murder for Charlie Kirk’s death is solely responsible.

Erika Kirk’s efforts to tamp down on speculation about her husband’s murder have not appeared to dissuade Owens, one of the nation’s most-watched personalities, who has seen her prominence grow while boosting conspiracy theories and antisemitic tropes about Charlie Kirk’s death.

Owens said Tuesday that her suspicions about certain employees at Turning Point USA, the conservative organizing group Kirk co-founded and where she once worked, hadn’t been assuaged by her meeting with Erika Kirk and other Turning Point staffers. Owens heavily implied that she believes Israel had something to do with Kirk’s death, promoting an unsubstantiated theory that Israeli officials have denied and that some of her critics say is evidence that she is boosting antisemitism.

Owens’ campaign following Kirk’s September 10 assassination has driven deep divisions within the MAGA influencer world. Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, and comedian Dave Smith have all defended her to some degree, while Tim Pool and Ben Shapiro have both described Owens’ actions as “evil,” and Nick Fuentes has said she’s a narcissist hurting America.

Tyler Robinson, 22, has been charged with aggravated murder in Kirk’s death, and authorities have said bullet casings from the shooting were inscribed with internet and video game memes, including, “Hey fascist! Catch!” Prosecutors have also released text messages between Robinson and his roommate in which Robinson says he shot Kirk because he “had enough of his hatred.” Robinson has not yet entered a plea.

Owens has instead suggested France, Israel and Egypt might have been involved; that Charlie Kirk was “betrayed” by people close to him; and that state and federal law enforcement are covering up a bigger crime.

By Owens’ retelling, Erika Kirk came prepared to debunk some of Owens’ claims, bringing phone records and having Owens speak to a lawyer to explain how the investigation would proceed through court. But Owens said Turning Point did not have any inside information on the investigation and no access to unseen evidence.

“With that in mind, I’m saying why is the public being gaslit on this?” Owens said. She called the evidence presented in the police affidavit “fake and gay,” one of her catchphrases.

Erika Kirk has not commented on their meeting beyond a post Monday night on X in which she said “a very productive conversation” with Owens and was turning her attention to AmericaFest, a signature Turning Point event scheduled to feature several top officials in President Donald Trump’s administration and conservative influencers.

In earlier interviews, Owe

¿Por qué los expertos legales ven “lagunas” en la insólita demanda de Trump contra la BBC por US$ 10.000 millones?

Kraig Pakulski 0 60 Article rating: No rating

Análisis por Brian Stelter

Hasta este año, era inaudito que un presidente de EE.UU. en funciones demandara a un medio de comunicación. En solo unos meses, el presidente Donald Trump ha logrado que parezca algo normal.

Trump ha demandado a The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times y ahora a la BBC, presentando la demanda en Florida cada vez y alegando difamación en cada caso.

Sin embargo, detrás de las millonarias cifras de estas demandas, el sustento legal es cuestionado. Diversos expertos jurídicos consultados por CNN coinciden en que estas denuncias presentan serias debilidades técnicas, sugiriendo que el verdadero objetivo de Trump no es ganar en los tribunales, sino generar un impacto publicitario en su base de seguidores.

La más reciente demanda, presentada esta semana contra la BBC, alega que una mala edición de un documental preelectoral fue un intento difamatorio de influir en los votantes estadounidenses, a pesar de que el documental no se emitió en Estados Unidos.

La demanda “no tiene ningún fundamento jurídico, ni por difamación ni por motivos jurisdiccionales”, afirmó Bob Corn-Revere, asesor jurídico principal de la Fundación para los Derechos Individuales y la Expresión.

“No es más que el más reciente intento del presidente de intimidar a los medios de comunicación que considera adversarios de su Gobierno”, afirmó.

El patrón es evidente: Trump acapara inmediatamente los titulares por emprender una batalla legal, lo que le hace parecer que está tomando medidas audaces para combatir las fechorías de los medios de comunicación, y deja a algunos de sus seguidores esperando un fallo multimillonario que dañe a un supuesto adversario.

Abogados especializados en medios de comunicación han revisado la demanda y le han encontrado muchos puntos débiles, por lo que podría no prosperar.

Dylan McLemore, que estudia derecho de los medios de comunicación y enseña en la Universidad de Oklahoma, dijo a CNN: “La decisión de presentar la demanda en Florida se remonta a la pregunta central de todas las demandas por difamación del presidente contra las empresas de medios de comunicación: ¿las presenta para ganar en los tribunales o para crear titulares y enfriar el discurso crítico de la prensa?”.

McLemore y otros expertos en derecho de los medios de comunicación expresaron su escepticismo sobre la demanda contra la BBC, a pesar de que la cadena británica ya ha admitido un error de edición y se ha disculpado por ello.

“Una disculpa no es una admisión de culpa”, dijo McLemore. “De hecho, en los casos de difamación, el demandado puede argumentar que la disculpa pública reduce el daño al demandante”.

El caso se refiere a una emisión de octubre de 2024 de la serie documental “Panorama” de la BBC. Un episodio sobre la campaña de reelección de Trump unió dos partes diferentes del discurso de Trump del 6 de enero de 2021 para que pareciera que le había dicho a la multitud que caminaría con ellos hasta el Capitolio y “lucharía con uñas y dientes”.

En el discurso real, sus exhortaciones a “luchar” estaban separadas de su sugerencia de ir al Capitolio para “animar a nuestros valientes senadores y congresistas”.

El programa de la BBC debería haber hecho evidente la edición a los espectadores, tal vez con un efecto de flash blanco, una técnica de edición habitual.

Pero la mala edición no llamó la atención en el momento en que el documental se estrenó en televisión. Solo se dio a conocer este otoño, cuando se filtró a un periódico británico un memorando de un antiguo asesor de la BBC sobre las deficiencias editoriales.

Trump

RSS
First42914292429342944296429842994300Last