The Goncalves Family Wants Kohberger To Face A Firing Squad If Found Guilty

As the one year mark passes in the case of missing North Carolina girl Madalina Cojocari, the community where she once lived has come together to show support for the missing girl and to demand that she found. The heartbreaking ordeal started last year when Madalina wasn't reported missing by her parents for over three weeks. That set off a gigantic search for Madalina, but unfortunately, it turned up cold. Now, the authorities are saying that they are not giving up and they plan on finding Madalina no matter how long it takes. Her mother is in jail still while her Stepfather has already been released. (commercial at 7:26)to contact me:[email protected]:Madalina Cojocari's community stand hand in hand in heartbreaking pics on anniversary of 12-year-old's disappearance | The US Sun (the-sun.com)

Jeffrey Epstein was one of the biggest donors to higher education intsitutions such as Harvard and MIT and in return, Epstein was granted access to these universities, their professors and even had an office of his own on the campus of Harvard. All of this came on the backend of him dishing out lavish donations and gifts to these scientists and colleges.Why did Jeffrey Epstein do it though? Was it just charity? Or was he angling for something else?Let's dive in and discuss it!(commercial at 11:08)to contact me:[email protected]:Cozying Up to Monsters - LA Progressive

The family of murdered Kaylee Goncalves have been very clear with what they think should happen if Bryan Kohberger is convicted of murder. They think that he should be put to death. Not only that, they think that his execution shouldn't be by lethal injection. Instead, they want him to face a firing squad. (commercial at 9:00)to contact me:[email protected]:Family of Idaho murder victim Kaylee Goncalves want 'killer' Bryan Kohberger to face a firing squad | The US Sun (the-sun.com)

Lord Peter Mandelson, born on October 21, 1953, is a prominent British politician and former Member of Parliament (MP). He is widely known for his active involvement in the Labour Party and his influential role within the UK government during the New Labour era.Mandelson first gained recognition as a key strategist and close ally of Labour leader Tony Blair. He played a crucial part in rebranding the Labour Party as "New Labour" and contributing to their electoral successes in the late 1990s and early 2000s.He was instrumental in shaping the party's policy agenda, focusing on modernization, economic reform, and closer ties with the business community.In 1997, Mandelson was appointed as the Minister without Portfolio, becoming one of the most powerful figures in the government. He later held several high-profile positions, including Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, and Skills. Mandelson played a significant role in shaping UK trade policy and promoting international business relations during his tenure.Despite his success, Mandelson faced controversy during his political career. He resigned twice from government positions. The first instance was in 1998, known as the "Lobbygate" scandal, which involved allegations of impropriety and influence-peddling. The second resignation occurred in 2001, following the "Hinduja passport affair," where he was accused of helping an Indian billionaire obtain British citizenship.After leaving front-line politics, Mandelson continued to be involved in public life. He served as the European Commissioner for Trade from 2004 to 2008, playing a vital role in European Union trade negotiations and advocating for global trade liberalization. Upon his return to the UK, he was appointed as a life peer in the House of Lords, taking the title of Baron Mandelson.Prince Andrew, born on February 19, 1960, is a member of the British royal family and the third child of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. He holds the title of Duke of York and has been involved in various public duties and charitable endeavors throughout his life.Prince Andrew served in the British Royal Navy and had a successful military career.However, he retired from active service in 2001. Since then, he has primarily focused on his royal duties and engagements, representing the Queen both domestically and internationally.Throughout his life, Prince Andrew has been associated with numerous charitable organizations and initiatives, particularly in the fields of entrepreneurship, science, technology, and education. He has played an active role in supporting and promoting these causes, often engaging with young entrepreneurs and advocating for their development and success.However, Prince Andrew's reputation has been marred by his association with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Epstein was a wealthy financier and convicted sex offender who faced numerous allegations of sex trafficking and abuse. Prince Andrew's close relationship with Epstein came under intense scrutiny, and he faced allegations of sexual misconduct himself. In 2019, Prince Andrew announced his decision to step back from public duties and royal engagements indefinitely due to the controversy surrounding his association with Epstein.Since then, Prince Andrew has remained largely out of the public eye, with his official role within the royal family significantly reduced. The legal proceedings and investigations related to his involvement with Epstein are ongoing, and he has faced numerous legal challenges and requests for cooperation from authorities.In this episode, we hear how both men were offered advisors roles with Epstein, according to the email's revealed by the WSJ. (commercial at 7:39)to contact me:[email protected]:Epstein plan to make Andrew and 'Petie' Mandelson 'star advisers' in a new consultancy business | Daily Mail Online

On October 4, 2024, I predicted that Sean "Diddy" Combs would eventually be hit with a superseding indictment, following the pattern commonly seen in high-profile federal cases involving RICO charges and allegations of sex trafficking. That prediction became reality on January 30, 2025, when federal prosecutors in New York unsealed a new, expanded indictment against Combs, introducing additional charges and new alleged victims—including accusations involving minors. This indictment replaces the previous one, adding more weight to the government’s case and signaling that federal investigators have uncovered further damning evidence against him.A superseding indictment is a legal tool used by prosecutors when they obtain new information that strengthens their case. In Combs' situation, this means the government has broadened its charges, likely as a result of witness cooperation, forensic evidence, or ongoing investigations into his alleged sex trafficking network. The new indictment not only increases the potential penalties Combs faces—raising the possibility of a life sentence—but also alters the legal landscape of the case. With new charges and additional victims included, his defense team is now forced to rework their strategy while prosecutors push forward with a more comprehensive case.This development is a major turning point in the trial and could have several immediate effects. First, it may delay the trial, originally set for May 2025, as both sides will need time to prepare for the expanded scope of the prosecution’s case. Second, the new charges make plea negotiations more difficult, as prosecutors now hold even more leverage. Third, the inclusion of allegations involving minors could further shift public perception and make it harder for Combs’ legal team to counter the growing pressure from both the media and law enforcement. Ultimately, this superseding indictment confirms what I anticipated months ago—that the government was building a larger case behind the scenes, and that Diddy’s legal troubles are far from oveOn January 30, 2025, federal prosecutors in New York filed a superseding indictment against Sean "Diddy" Combs, expanding the scope of the existing charges to include two additional alleged victims. The indictment now covers a 20-year period from 2004 to 2024, alleging that Combs engaged in a pattern of coercing multiple women into sexual acts through intimidation, threats, and the use of narcotics. One particularly disturbing allegation describes Combs dangling a victim over a hotel balcony to enforce compliance. These actions are said to have been facilitated by his business enterprises, including Bad Boy Entertainment, which prosecutors claim he used to lure and exploit victims. Combs, who has been detained without bail since his arrest in September 2024, continues to deny all allegations. His attorney, Marc Agnifilo, has criticized the updated indictment, asserting that the prosecution's theory is flawed and that the relationships in question were consensual.(commercial at 8:54)to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.144.0_2.pdf

On October 4, 2024, I predicted that Sean "Diddy" Combs would eventually be hit with a superseding indictment, following the pattern commonly seen in high-profile federal cases involving RICO charges and allegations of sex trafficking. That prediction became reality on January 30, 2025, when federal prosecutors in New York unsealed a new, expanded indictment against Combs, introducing additional charges and new alleged victims—including accusations involving minors. This indictment replaces the previous one, adding more weight to the government’s case and signaling that federal investigators have uncovered further damning evidence against him.A superseding indictment is a legal tool used by prosecutors when they obtain new information that strengthens their case. In Combs' situation, this means the government has broadened its charges, likely as a result of witness cooperation, forensic evidence, or ongoing investigations into his alleged sex trafficking network. The new indictment not only increases the potential penalties Combs faces—raising the possibility of a life sentence—but also alters the legal landscape of the case. With new charges and additional victims included, his defense team is now forced to rework their strategy while prosecutors push forward with a more comprehensive case.This development is a major turning point in the trial and could have several immediate effects. First, it may delay the trial, originally set for May 2025, as both sides will need time to prepare for the expanded scope of the prosecution’s case. Second, the new charges make plea negotiations more difficult, as prosecutors now hold even more leverage. Third, the inclusion of allegations involving minors could further shift public perception and make it harder for Combs’ legal team to counter the growing pressure from both the media and law enforcement. Ultimately, this superseding indictment confirms what I anticipated months ago—that the government was building a larger case behind the scenes, and that Diddy’s legal troubles are far from oveOn January 30, 2025, federal prosecutors in New York filed a superseding indictment against Sean "Diddy" Combs, expanding the scope of the existing charges to include two additional alleged victims. The indictment now covers a 20-year period from 2004 to 2024, alleging that Combs engaged in a pattern of coercing multiple women into sexual acts through intimidation, threats, and the use of narcotics. One particularly disturbing allegation describes Combs dangling a victim over a hotel balcony to enforce compliance. These actions are said to have been facilitated by his business enterprises, including Bad Boy Entertainment, which prosecutors claim he used to lure and exploit victims. Combs, who has been detained without bail since his arrest in September 2024, continues to deny all allegations. His attorney, Marc Agnifilo, has criticized the updated indictment, asserting that the prosecution's theory is flawed and that the relationships in question were consensual.(commercial at 8:54)to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.144.0_2.pdf

On January 17, 2025, members of the Sinaloa Cartel executed a heist on a BNSF cargo train traveling north of Phoenix, Arizona. The cartel members reportedly severed the train's air brakes, forcing it to stop near Perrin, Arizona. They then offloaded approximately $202,500 worth of Nike merchandise from the train into a waiting box truck. Authorities were alerted after BNSF employees discovered the severed air hose and noticed suspicious activity nearby. Subsequent investigations led to the arrest of eleven individuals connected to the theft, nine of whom were in the United States illegally and six identified as natives of Sinaloa.This incident is part of a broader trend of cargo train robberies attributed to Mexican cartels. Over the past two years, such thefts have been on the rise, with cartels targeting trains carrying valuable goods like electronics, tools, and footwear. Their methods often involve sabotaging train systems, such as cutting air hoses or tampering with signal boxes, to halt the trains and facilitate the theft. The stolen merchandise is typically sold through online platforms or to cooperative retailers. Law enforcement agencies are intensifying efforts to combat this growing threat to supply chain security.to contact me:[email protected]:Sinaloa Cartel's cargo train Nike shoe heist latest in criminal trend: experts | Fox News

In Case No. 24-cv-12647, United States District Judge Judith E. Levy issued an opinion and order granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss the case. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish sufficient grounds for their claims, leading to the dismissal of the case in favor of the defendant. Additionally, the court denied the plaintiff’s motion for permission to file an interlocutory appeal, indicating that the appeal did not meet the criteria for such a request at this stage of the proceedings.The court also addressed the defendant's motion for sanctions, ultimately denying it. While the dismissal of the case resolved the central legal issues, the court determined that sanctions were not warranted under the circumstances. The rulings collectively ended the litigation in favor of the defendant without imposing additional penalties or restrictions on the plaintiff.to contact me:[email protected]:Microsoft Word - Cardello-Smith Opinion and Order Final.docx

In Case No. 24-cv-12647, United States District Judge Judith E. Levy issued an opinion and order granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss the case. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish sufficient grounds for their claims, leading to the dismissal of the case in favor of the defendant. Additionally, the court denied the plaintiff’s motion for permission to file an interlocutory appeal, indicating that the appeal did not meet the criteria for such a request at this stage of the proceedings.The court also addressed the defendant's motion for sanctions, ultimately denying it. While the dismissal of the case resolved the central legal issues, the court determined that sanctions were not warranted under the circumstances. The rulings collectively ended the litigation in favor of the defendant without imposing additional penalties or restrictions on the plaintiff.to contact me:[email protected]:Microsoft Word - Cardello-Smith Opinion and Order Final.docx

Recent allegations have surfaced against Sean "Diddy" Combs, claiming he employed individuals to recruit young women for intimate encounters at his parties. At a 2004 White Party in the Hamptons, men allegedly approached female attendees, suggesting it was an honor to spend private time with Combs. One woman, identified as Lisa, recounted being propositioned but declined, perceiving the true nature of the request. Another attendee accepted and later regretted the experience.These claims align with statements from former employee Phillip Pines, who alleges he was responsible for organizing and cleaning up after Combs's "Wild King Nights" between 2019 and 2021. Pines asserts he was tasked with procuring supplies for these events and is currently suing Combs for sexual battery, harassment, and trafficking. Combs faces multiple legal challenges, including criminal charges of racketeering and sex trafficking, which he denies.In the case Doe v. Combs et al., No. 1:24-cv-07975-AT, defendant Shawn Carter (professionally known as Jay-Z) filed a motion on December 9, 2024, seeking to expedite a hearing concerning the plaintiff's request to proceed anonymously. The plaintiff, identified as Jane Doe, alleges that Carter and co-defendant Sean Combs sexually assaulted her in 2000 when she was 13 years old. Carter's motion argues that allowing the plaintiff to remain anonymous hampers his ability to mount an effective defense and that public interest favors disclosure of all parties' identities in legal proceedings.Carter's legal team contends that the allegations are baseless and part of a calculated attempt to tarnish his reputation. They emphasize the need for an expedited hearing to address the anonymity issue promptly, citing the significant media attention and potential harm to Carter's personal and professional life. The court has yet to rule on the motion to expedite or the underlying request concerning the plaintiff's anonymity.In our next segment...In a letter to the court dated December 30, 2024, Plaintiff Jane Doe's legal team responded to Defendant Shawn Carter's request to file a motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint (FAC) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Carter's request argues that the FAC fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The plaintiff's counsel maintains that the FAC sufficiently alleges detailed and substantiated claims of sexual assault and other misconduct, asserting that Carter's motion to dismiss is without merit and should not proceed.Jane Doe's legal team emphasizes that the FAC meets the required pleading standards and provides a robust factual basis to sustain the claims. They argue that the dismissal motion is an attempt to delay the proceedings and detract from the core allegations. The plaintiff's response underscores the importance of moving forward with the case to ensure that Jane Doe's claims are addressed promptly and fairly in court. The court will consider the parties' submissions in determining whether to grant Carter leave to file the motion.to contact me:[email protected]