Mediaboss Marketing

BELLEFONTE Jim and Evelyn Piazza looked disgusted and disappointed as they sat front row for Tuesdays portion of the preliminary hearings into the death of their son,Timothy.

And defense attorney Andrew Shubin, representing former Beta Theta Pi member Nicholas Kubera, posed a question to Detective David Scicchitano that later made Jim Piazza's jaw drop.

Hes also a victim, right? Shubin asked referencing the hazing his client underwent for pledging in 2016.

Centre County District Attorney Stacy Parks Miller called it a disregard for the Piazza's.

His son has been killed, his son is dead, Miller said in a public address referring to Jims emotions in the courtroom.

Defense lawyer argues Piazza wasn't forced to drink

Tuesdays preliminary hearing came to a close in the Centre County Courthouse with at least two days of cross examinations left for the defense.

The date has not been officially decided, but Judge Allen Sinclair alluded to the proceedings continuing into next month.

A recurring theme in the hearings was for the defense to address those former Beta Theta Pi members not charged in the case.

When prompted by Rocco Cipparone, attorney for Michael Bonatucci, Scicchitano read a text message that was sent to Piazza before the rush event.

The text message sent by Kordel Davis read: Get ready to get f***** up, stipulating that Davis expected Piazza to consume extreme amounts of alcohol that night.

MORE: List of all charges the 18 former BTP brothers face

Cipparone rhetorically asked Scicchitano to point Davis out in the courtroom Davis is not facing any charges for his involvement in the case.

According to video surveillance, Davis was forcefully dismissed by his fraternity brothers when he told them to call 911 for Piazza as seen in the video footage.

During cross examination, Scicchitano agreed with Cipparone that there was no evidence Bonatucci was in the house at the time of Piazzas fall and that he exercised his fifth amendment right to forgo speaking with police.

Michael Leahey, attorney for the Alpha Upsilon chapter of the fraternity, received portions of the surveillance video not shown in court through another lawsuit.

It was Leaheys notes on the video that gave Cipparone a good faith basis that his client left the Beta house around 11:10 p.m., noting that Bonatucci is not seen in any part of the video after that time.

The video footage showed during the first day of preliminary hearings confirmed Davis presence in the fraternity and that he had seen Piazza unconscious after his first fall down a flight of stairs.

Davis joinsPenn State Football Head Athletic Trainer Tim Bream as others the defense believes should be facing charges.

Davis testimony with Scicchitano was again referenced when Michael Engle began his cross examination.

Engle is representing former Beta Theta Pi member Gary DiBileo, who he argued during his cross examination wanted to call 911 after Piazzas first fall.

Scacchiano agreed in questioning that DiBileo did not witness Piazzas fall and is never actually seen on the video footage until after Piazza was brought upstairs.

DiBileo reportedly told police that when his roommate Greg Rizzo informed him of Piazzas fall, they advocated for medical attention to be sought for Piazza.

No such call was made though, as DiBileo said they deferred the task to the executive board of the fraternity.

Engle pointed out that much like Davis, Rizzo also left the decision to call for medial assistance up to the higher ups in the fraternity and was not charged.

Listening to discussion as to why the former fraternity members waited so long to call for help leaves Jim almost shaking in his seat.

"Tim Piazza's father Jim Piazza told me yesterday walking out of the courthouse there isn't a moment during these hearings that he doesn't think about Tim and think about how much he and his wife miss him," said Tom Kline, attorney for the Piazzas.

Read this article:
Defense attorney of former BTP member says client also a 'victim' during Timothy Piazza preliminary hearing - The Daily Collegian Online

The Teamster chief whose members are charged with extorting a reality TV show in a case linked to City Hall will plead the Fifth if called to testify when the trial of four of his members begins later this month, a federal court filing states.

Martin G. Weinberg, attorney for Teamsters Local 25 president Sean M. OBrien, declined to comment yesterday on the disclosure made Friday by lawyers for John Fidler, Daniel Redmond, Robert Cafarelli and Michael Ross.

The issue is premature, Weinberg told the Herald. It may well be a non-issue since neither side has subpoenaed Mr. OBrien. Besides, the U.S. Supreme Court has made absolutely clear that the Fifth Amendment is the refuge of the innocent, not just the guilty.

The Top Chef trial remains slated to begin July 31 in U.S. District Court.

To date, OBriens name has not surfaced among only a handful of witnesses to be publicly identified beyond mere initials. The list does include the Emmy-nominated Bravo cooking shows host Padma Lakshmi, an international model, actress and author.

Fidler, Redmond, Cafarelli and Ross each face up to 20 years in federal prison if convicted of extortion charges alleging they physically and verbally threatened the cast and crew of a June 2014 Boston-area shoot, with one allegedly telling Lakshmi, Ill smash your pretty face, if they refused to hire Local 25 drivers.

In a December 2015 appearance on Herald Radios Morning Meeting, Mayor Martin J. Walsh, onetime head of the Boston Building Trades Council, acknowledged having personally called OBrien at the time, but would not discuss their conversation. Walsh made a guest appearance on Top Chef, causing his former chief of operations Joe Rull to raise concerns about political fallout from his pro-labor boss involvement with a nonunion TV show.

Walsh spokeswoman Laura Oggeri declined comment yesterday.

No one in Walshs administration has been accused of any criminal wrongdoing. Fridays defense motion seeks to strike evidence from the trial of extensive phone and email conversations between various employees of the Mayors office and others regarding Top Chef, including OBrien. The defense argues the conversations are irrelevant because they dont involve the defendants, but rather broader policy issues such as tax credits, labor relations, and political decision-making.

Original post:
Teamster chief plans to plead Fifth if called - Boston Herald

Photo: BRETT CARLSEN, NYT

Waymo dropped several patent claims against Uber on Friday, but the two companies are still involved in a bitter lawsuit.

Waymo dropped several patent claims against Uber on Friday, but the two companies are still involved in a bitter lawsuit.

Waymo scales back claims against Uber in driverless car dispute

Waymo, the autonomous vehicle business that operates under Googles parent company, dropped several patent claims against Uber on Friday, pulling back some of its major allegations in a bitter lawsuit over driverless technology.

In a federal court filing, Waymo said it was dropping three of its four claims over Uber violating its patents related to light detection and ranging sensor technology, or lidar. Lidar is a vital component in driverless car technology, helping the vehicle detect its surroundings to navigate roads.

The case, an acrimonious battle between Waymo and Uber, spotlights the arms race surrounding autonomous vehicle talent and technology. It is especially significant for the Google unit now Waymo that spent years working on driverless car technology before other tech companies took an interest. But as Waymo searches for a way to make money from self-driving cars, many of its best engineers have left for potential competitors, carrying valuable knowledge of its technology with them.

The case with Uber, the ride-hailing company, began when Waymo filed suit in February, claiming Uber was using intellectual property stolen by one of Googles former project leaders in its driverless vehicles. That set off months of wrangling, eventually leading Uber to fire the former Google project leader, Anthony Levandowski. The case is scheduled for trial in October, with the thrust of it centered on Uber misappropriating Waymos trade secrets.

Waymos dropping of three patent claims against Uber weakens its original argument for bringing the suit. Still, each side called the latest legal move a victory.

Waymo said it agreed to scale back its patent claims because Uber had halted work on a lidar design that violated Waymos patents and is proceeding with a different design. Waymo is permitted to reassert its claims if Uber returns to the design that Waymo challenged. The company said Ubers current lidar design still violates one of its original patents.

We continue to pursue a patent claim against Ubers current generation device and our trade secret claims, which are not at all affected by this stipulated dismissal, Waymo said. We look forward to trial.

Uber said the dropping of the three claims was yet another sign of Waymo overreaching and not delivering on its claims.

Last month, Waymo received a signal from federal court that the patent claims were not its strongest legal argument in the case. Judge William Alsup of U.S. District Court in San Francisco, who is overseeing the case, urged the companys lawyers at a hearing June 7 to drop the patent claims because youre going to lose on all these patent claims unless you pull some rabbit out of a hat.

Uber, meanwhile, has been trying to distance itself from the actions of Levandowski, who joined Uber last year.

Waymo has said that Levandowski worked with Uber to steal proprietary information from Google before joining Uber. Waymo said Uber was aware that Levandowski had stolen files.

Uber said it expressly told Levandowski not to bring any stolen documents to the company or apply any of Waymos intellectual property to Ubers autonomous vehicle efforts. The company said Waymos lawyers have not found the stolen documents in Ubers possession, despite extensive discovery.

The matter has been complicated by Levandowski asserting his Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination. Uber said it urged him to cooperate with Waymos lawyers and fired him when he continued to refuse.

In a separate filing Friday, Uber said Levandowski, before invoking his Fifth Amendment right, told Travis Kalanick, then Ubers CEO, that he had downloaded the documents from Google because he was worried that he might not receive full payment of a $120 million bonus owed to him. Uber said this indicated that his actions were unrelated to his work at Uber.

Daisuke Wakabayashi is a New York Times writer.

Original post:
Waymo scales back claims against Uber in driverless car dispute - SFGate

Waymos dropping of three patent claims against Uber weakens its original argument for bringing the suit. Still, each side called the latest legal move a victory.

Waymo said it agreed to scale back its patent claims because Uber had halted work on a lidar design that violated Waymos patents and is proceeding with a different design. Waymo is permitted to reassert its claims if Uber returns to the design that Waymo challenged. The company said Ubers current lidar design still violates one of its original patents.

We continue to pursue a patent claim against Ubers current generation device and our trade secret claims, which are not at all affected by this stipulated dismissal, Waymo said in a statement. We look forward to trial.

In a statement, Uber said the dropping of the three claims was yet another sign of Waymo overreaching and not delivering on its claims.

Last month, Waymo received a signal from federal court that the patent claims were not its strongest legal argument in the case. Judge William Alsup of Federal District Court in San Francisco, who is overseeing the case, urged the companys lawyers at a hearing on June 7 to drop the patent claims because youre going to lose on all these patent claims unless you pull some rabbit out of a hat.

Uber, meanwhile, has been trying to distance itself from the actions of Mr. Levandowski, the former head of Googles driverless car project who joined Uber last year.

Waymo has said that Mr. Levandowski worked with Uber to steal proprietary information from Google before joining Uber. Waymo said Uber was aware that Mr. Levandowski had stolen files from Waymo.

Uber said it expressly told Mr. Levandowski to not bring any stolen documents to the company or apply any of Waymos intellectual property to Ubers autonomous vehicle efforts. The company said Waymos lawyers have not found the stolen documents in Ubers possession, despite extensive discovery.

The matter has been complicated by Mr. Levandowski asserting his Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination. Uber said it urged him to cooperate with Waymos lawyers and fired him when he continued to refuse.

In a separate filing on Friday, Uber said Mr. Levandowski, before invoking his Fifth Amendment right, told Travis Kalanick, then Ubers chief executive, that he had downloaded the documents from Google because he was worried that he might not receive full payment of a $120 million bonus owed to him. Uber said this indicated that his actions were unrelated to his work at Uber.

Read more:
Waymo Scales Back Claims Against Uber in Driverless Car Dispute - New York Times

Benton County officials are preparing to make policy changes after a federal appeals court ruled in-custody defendants should not be shackled in the courtroom.

A presumptively innocent defendant has the right to be treated with respect and dignity in a public courtroom, not like a bear on a chain, the decision states.

The decision, which was handed down May 31 by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, a court with jurisdiction over many Western states including Oregon, relies heavily on the constitutional liberties ensured under the Fifth Amendment.

The decision says a judge must make a determination that a defendant be required to wear restraints. Otherwise, all presumptively innocent detainees must appear without shackles at all proceedings, including sentencing hearings.

I think its a very expansive decision that will probably be reviewed further, said Benton County Circuit Court Presiding Judge David B. Connell.

The U.S. Attorneys Office applied for and was granted a 90-day stay on the issue, according to documents filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals. Therefore, the new policy has not yet gone into effect. The stay allows the U.S. Attorneys Office time to file a motion asking for the Ninth Circuit to rehear the issue.

The U.S. Attorney's Office also could appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, Connell said.

The decision is surprising because it greatly expands the scope of a defendants right not to be shackled in the courtroom, the judge said. The courts have long held that defendants should not be restrained during jury trials, the judge said.

Its not only the law, but I think its the right thing to do, Connell said.

For all other hearings that are not before a jury, defendants who are being held in the Benton County Jail typically are brought into court wearing cuffs around their ankles and wrists that are connected by a chain in front of their bodies, the judge said.

Should this decision go into effect, the sheriffs office would decide if someone poses a danger or risk for escape and should be shackled, Connell said. If a defendant contests that decision, a hearing would be held. The judge would look at factors including criminal history, the circumstances of the arrest and whether the defendant has been disruptive in the jail to decide if restraints are appropriate.

Since criminal cases take docket priority, these hearings may push aside civil cases, which already can take years to litigate, Connell said.

What an impact this would have is very hard to say since weve never faced it before, the judge said.

Benton County Sheriff Scott Jackson said more deputies would be needed to transport unrestrained offenders into courtrooms. He said he hopes the courts would use video appearances more often if the decision went into effect. Such video calls are currently used during some arraignments, but their use could be expanded for plea changes and sentencing hearings, Jackson said.

What were trying to avoid is having to bring on a bunch of staff that is costly to taxpayers, the sheriff said.

Jackson said he is also working to understand the legal definition of restraints. He said the Sheriffs Office has neoprene stun belts that wrap around the stomach and fit under clothing, so theyre not visible. A deputy could deploy the stun belt and incapacitate the defendant if the need arises, the sheriff said.

I question how valid (the decision) is, Jackson said. If you consider a violent person-to-person case or a rape case or significant domestic violence case where the victim has to come in to testify and theres no restraints there, it can be a really delicate situation to navigate, through.

Jennifer Nash, a Corvallis defense attorney, said she is pleased the sheriff and the courts are addressing the decision and safeguarding the constitutional rights of detainees.

All citizens are presumed to be innocent until the state proves that they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, Nash said. Placing the accused in restraints when they do not pose a public safety threat belies that presumption.

Benton County District Attorney John Haroldson said those who participate in the judicial process must be mindful of ensuring both safety and fair trials. He said he will rely on the Ninth Circuits interpretation of the law in doing so.

Even under the proposed framework, if there is a risk, there is an opportunity to be able to address that with the court to ensure there are safeguards, Haroldson said.

Continue reading here:
County responds to ruling against shackling in courtroom - Corvallis Gazette Times