Mediaboss Marketing

A prominent New Haven rabbi whos been accused of sexually assaulting a teenage boy has been ordered to testify at a civil trial. Jury selection for Rabbi Daniel Greer is set to begin Wednesday in federal court in Hartford.

A lawsuit filed last year accuses Greer, 76, of repeatedly raping and molesting a student who attended the Yeshiva of New Haven school. During that time, Greer was the rabbi, dean, and director.

The former student, now 29, is suing Greer and the school on allegations of sexual assault, infliction of emotional distress, and other claims.

The lawsuit also alleges that Greer sexually abused at least one other student.

Greer has denied the allegations and has not been criminally charged.

The rabbi invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during a deposition in the lawsuit. But a judge recently rejected his request not to testify.

Greer has been a respected member of the New Haven community. He served on multiple city boards, and played an active role in the revitalization of declining city neighborhoods. He was also a strong proponent of sexual morality.

Read the original post:
New Haven Rabbi Accused Of Sexual Abuse To Testify At Trial - WNPR News

In United States v. Apple Macpro Computer, No. 15-3537 (Third Cir. March 20), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that the district court properly found appellant John Doe in contempt of court for failing to comply with an order under the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. Section 1651, which required him to producein a fully unencrypted stateseveral devices that had been properly seized, but which were in an encrypted state. The court rejected the appellant's argument that his decrypting of the devices would force him to violate his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The court's proper ruling is an important one, as encryption of devices is prevalent in the digital world, and decryption by the target is more and more the best and least costly way for the government to access the data in devices seized.

Special to the Law Weekly Leonard Deutchman is a legal and technical consultant. Previously, he had been general counsel for KrolLDiscovery, which he helped build into the largest e-discovery provider in the United States, specializing in data recovery, data archiving, electronic discovery, data hosting, TAR and managed review, collections and digital forensics, with offices across the country and around the world. Before joining KrolLDiscovery, he was a chief assistant district attorney at the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office, where he founded the Cyber Crime Unit and conducted and oversaw hundreds of long-term investigations involving cybercrime, fraud, drug trafficking and other offenses.

See more here:
Order to Decrypt Digital Devices: A Violation of the Fifth Amendment? - The Legal Intelligencer

Invoking the Fifth Amendment wont protect Auditor General Frank Mautino from House Joint Resolution 9, Rep. Grant Wehrli (R-Naperville) said after the State Board of Elections hearing on Mautino recently.

Today we heard that his Fifth Amendment rights were invoked in response to a State Board of Elections subpoena, Wehrli told the Edgar County Watchdogs (ECW), a government oversight group. That should tell us everything we need to know about the ethics of Mr. Frank Mautino.

Wehrli said a bill to force Mautinos ouster is currently in the General Assembly.

I think its time for Frank Mautino to resign, he said. House Joint Resolution 9 was filed back in January; it calls for his resignation. It would give him the opportunity to come forward and answer these questions questions that he has had multiple, multiple opportunities to answer, and he simply decides not to.

The scandal surrounding Mautinos campaign contribution spending began in January 2016 after the Illinois Times reported that Mautino had continued to collect campaign donations between his appointment to the auditor general post in October 2015 and assuming the position on Jan. 1, 2016.

The ECW, intrigued by the story and the campaigns explanation that the donations were used to pay for office expenses and close up shop, conducted an investigation of Mautinos campaign spending, reviewing data in his Campaign Disclosure Expenditure List. The group found that the campaign had paid more than $213,000 to one service station for fuel and repairs between March 2005 and December 2015.

The campaign also wrote checks totaling a similar amount to Spring Valley City Bank, which the campaign said was a method to get cash for campaign-related payments, but no receipts for those payments have been provided.

Illinois resident David Cooke submitted a complaint to the State Board of Elections that led to that bodys investigation and the recent hearing. Mautinos campaign contribution spending is also now the subject of a federal investigation.

Despite mounting evidence of suspicious spending, Mautino has not answered questions to ease the concerns of some lawmakers and Illinoisans, culminating in his invoking Fifth Amendment protections at the State Board of Elections hearing. While Mautino has refused to offer explanations, his supporters, including Speaker of the House Michael Madigan (D-Chicago), have maintained that a full review of the case will prove his innocence.

One of the things that Speaker Madigan said was that Frank Mautino would be vindicated once all evidence was out there, and now here today we heard that Frank Mautino invoked his Fifth Amendment [rights] in response to a subpoena, Wehrli said. So, I dont know how were ever going to get to the bottom of this if Frank wont even testify on his own behalf.

The ECW pointed out in its interview with Wehrli, who was accompanied by fellow Mautino critic Rep. Jeanne Ives (R-Wheaton), that the documents presented in the hearing have been sealed, even though the hearing itself was open.

It once again just makes me question the transparency of all of this, Wehrli said. These records should be public. This was a public hearing in which documents were provided. Those records should absolutely be a matter of public record. Now, as of today [] Im not a lawyer, but they should be.

Wehrli has also pushed for greater transparency in campaign spending through House Bill 0415, which would require copies or images of receipts to be submitted along with expenditure reports. At the hearing, Wehrli and Ives were the only two of the states 118 representatives to have their campaign reporting brought to the table.

You know youre over the target when youre taking flak, Wehrli said. That was a shot right at us [], but its simply a low form of intimidation, and it wont stick. If we can get the speaker to get HB 415 out of Rules and get that as law, then all of this goes away because everything will be out there for all to see.

See the rest here:
Fifth Amendment won't save Mautino, Wehrli argues - DuPage Policy Journal

On Tuesday, as the FEC case restarted in Salt Lake City's U.S. District Court, Johnson's attorney said his decision not to cooperate with the government stems in part from the Swallow case.

Johnson was ordered to a 30-day jail sentence for refusing to testify and has been held in solitary confinement since he was returned to a California federal prison where he is serving an 11-year sentence for his conviction in another case.

"He had not been in this situation until after he refused to testify in the John Swallow case," Kara Porter told U.S. District Judge Dee Benson. Johnson understands that failing to respond to the FEC's demands for evidence comes with consequences, Porter said, but he doesn't trust the government.

FEC attorney Kevin Hancock said Johnson should have to explain with specificity just why he fears the government if he plans to invoke the Fifth Amendment.

Porter disagreed and said she wasn't aware of any requirement for defendants to "identify their fear level." Johnson, she said, has good reason for his caution. Past promises of immunity offered to Johnson by federal prosecutors in exchange for information in other cases were ignored, triggering both the criminal case brought against him and the FEC civil action, she said.

Any missteps or statement he makes could be seen as inconsistent by government attorneys and grounds for new criminal charges.

"Mr. Johnson is understandably skeptical about the federal government's intentions toward him," Porter said.

Swallow's attorney Scott C. Williams told Benson he believes Johnson has cause for concern. The FEC case, he told Benson, is based largely on supposedly confidential statements Johnson was "incentivized" to make in 2013 interviews with state and federal agents investigating alleged acts of corruption by Swallow and his predecessor Mark Shurtleff.

Since then, Johnson has told the Swallow defense team that his statements to agents are "not reliable" and that if deposed or called to testify he would deny that Swallow had aided and abetted him in any election-fraud scheme.

Benson sided with the FEC's attorneys, however, ordering Porter to file a response to the government's motions for evidence that offers some explanation of Johnson's refusals.

Johnson and Swallow have denied involvement in any scheme or effort to illegally bundle campaign contributions.

FEC attorneys say the funds went to the campaigns of U.S. Sens. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Harry Reid, D-Nev., as well as Shurtleff during the 2009-2010 election cycle.

Court papers say all the money came from Johnson, once a successful internet marketer, who was directed by Swallow to push the money through conduit contributors.

Under FEC rules, individual campaign contributions are capped at $2,400.

On Tuesday the FEC said it is preparing subpoenas for each of the individuals they believe were repaid by Johnson or his companies for making contributions.

jdobner@sltrib.com

Continued here:
Jeremy Johnson to invoke Fifth Amendment in campaign scheme ... - Salt Lake Tribune

Anthony Levandowski, the Uber executive and former Waymo employee at the center of a trade-secrets lawsuit between the two firms, wont be able to use the Fifth Amendments protections against self-incrimination to prevent Uber from turning over documents in the case, an appellate court ruled today.

Levandowski is the key figure in the suit that Waymo, the self-driving car unit spun off by Google parent Alphabet, filed in February. Waymo has accused Levandowski of stealing 14,000 files, amounting to 9.7 gigabytes of highly confidential data, before leaving the company in January 2016. He went on to start Otto, a driverless trucking startup that was acquired by Uber last year for $680 million.

Waymo alleges that Levandowski started talking with Uber about forming a self-driving car startup Uber would be interested in buying as early as mid-2015. It has urged the court to bar him from any work related to Ubers self-driving-car efforts.

Levandowski isnt a named defendant in the suitthose are Uber and Ottobut as a central figure he has retained his own counsel. In late March, Levandowski invoked the Fifth because of the potential for criminal action, precluding Uber from disclosing certain information requested by the court.

After multiple appeals, the court denied Levandowskis request as it applies to the documents sought from Uber. We are not persuaded that the district court erred in its ruling requiring defendants to produce an unredacted privilege log, states an order from the US court of appeals for the federal circuit, according to a copy viewed by Quartz. The unredacted privilege log is the evidence the court ordered Uber to produce and which Levandowski said could potentially incriminate him.

Mr. Levandowski has therefore failed to establish that he has a clear and indisputable right to the issuance of a writ of mandamus, the order concludes.

Levandowskis failed bid to use the Fifth here could prove very bad for Uber if it forces the company to serve up incriminating documents. Even without those documents, William Alsup, the federal judge overseeing the case, has called Waymos case against Uber extraordinary, saying earlier this month, I have never seen a record this strong in 42 years.

Correction: An earlier version of this story suggested the court denied Levandowskis ability to take the Fifth Amendment; what it specifically rejected was the argument that his Fifth Amendment rights should preclude Uber from turning over potentially incriminating documents sought in the case.

Read next: Waymo is hitting Uber where it hurts

See original here:
The Uber engineer accused of stealing 14000 documents from Waymo can't use the Fifth Amendment to stop Uber from ... - Quartz