Connect with us

News

Woman accused of shooting Longmont postal carrier charged with first-degree murder

Published

on

Woman accused of shooting Longmont postal carrier charged with first-degree murder

The woman accused of shooting and killing a postal carrier in Longmont has been formally charged with first-degree murder.

Devan Rebecca Schreiner, 26, was charged Tuesday in Boulder District Court with first-degree murder after deliberation in the death of her ex-boyfriend, Jason Schaefer, 33.

Schreiner, who appeared in custody, was advised of her rights by Boulder District Judge Thomas Mulvahill. Mulvahill noted that because Schreiner is charged with a Class 1 felony, she will not be eligible for bond until a hearing can be held.

Schreiner is now set for a proof-evident presumption great hearing on Jan. 10 to determine if there is probable cause for the case to continue and for Schreiner to continue to he held without bond.

Schreiner’s attorney, Jennifer Engelmann, said Schreiner was willing to waive her right to a preliminary hearing within 35 days of the filing of charges to accommodate the hearing.

Engelmann added that depending on the amount of evidence and the complexity of the case, she might ask for the hearing to be pushed back even further.

First-degree murder carries a mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.

According to an affidavit, Longmont police were called to Sicily Circle at 12:32 p.m. Oct. 13 for a report of shots fired, followed by another call from a resident saying a postal worker had been shot near their mailbox.

Schaefer, 33, was found with a gunshot wound to his face and life-saving attempts were unsuccessful, according to the affidavit.

Police said video surveillance indicated four shots were fired, followed by a person fleeing the area on foot.

According to an affidavit, when a postmaster arrived at the scene, they asked if the mother of Schaefer’s child was a suspect. Police then discovered Schaefer had filed documents on Oct. 11, two days before the shooting, pertaining to parenting time and that Schreiner was supposed to have been served with those documents.

In addition to the new filings, court records show two prior child custody cases involving Schreiner and Schaefer.

Schaefer had previously received threats from Schreiner, according to a witness in the case.

Schreiner had also worked at the Longmont post office until two weeks before the shooting, when she was fired because of an incident between her and Schaefer.

According to the affidavit, Schreiner recently had been working at the Loveland post office as a mail carrier. Police did obtain GPS information from the U.S. Postal Service on Schreiner’s scanner, but the location information obtained was redacted in the affidavit. However, the GPS information did indicate the scanner was stationary for an extended period of time, which a U.S. Postal Service investigator said was unusual.

At 5:27 p.m. Oct. 13, Schreiner called Longmont police and agreed to come in and speak with detectives. She drove to the station, and her vehicle was towed to an evidence lot.

Schreiner’s statements to police were redacted in the affidavit.

google news

News

Appeals court weighs Trump arguments to withhold records

Published

on

Appeals court weighs Trump arguments to withhold records

By NOMAAN MERCHANT

WASHINGTON (AP) — A panel of judges on Tuesday questioned whether they had the authority to grant Donald Trump’s demands and overrule President Joe Biden’s decision to grant Congress documents related to the Jan. 6 insurrection led by Trump’s supporters.

But the judges also noted that there may be times when a former president would be justified in trying to stop the incumbent from releasing records.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit heard arguments from lawyers for former President Trump and the House committee seeking the records as part of its investigation into the Capitol riot. Trump’s attorneys want the court to reverse a federal judge’s ruling allowing the National Archives and Records Administration to turn over the records after Biden waived executive privilege.

Hundreds of Trump supporters marched to the Capitol on Jan. 6 from a rally near the White House where the president had challenged them to go and “fight like hell” to stop Congress’ certification of Biden’s election victory. Some broke into the Capitol, fighting past police, and dozens now face federal charges.

Two Trump allies, former adviser Steve Bannon and former chief of staff Mark Meadows, have resisted efforts by the House panel to obtain documents and question them about possible meetings with Trump before the riot. The Justice Department has indicted Bannon on a contempt of Congress charge. Meadows, seeking to avoid the same, is now cooperating, the committee’s chairman said Tuesday.

The National Archives has said that the documents in question in the current Trump case include presidential diaries, visitor logs, speech drafts, handwritten notes “concerning the events of January 6” from the files of former chief of staff Meadows, and “a draft Executive Order on the topic of election integrity.”

Compared to Chutkan, the three judges on the appeals court have spent relatively little time weighing the importance of the documents themselves. They instead focused most of the hearing Tuesday on what role federal courts should have when an incumbent president and former president are at odds over records from the former’s administration.

The judges sharply questioned both sides and challenged them with hypothetical scenarios.

To Trump’s lawyers, Judge Patricia Millett suggested a situation where a current president negotiating with a foreign leader needed to know what promises a former president had made to that leader. The incumbent might seek to release a transcript of a phone call or other records from the previous administration “to protect our interests,” the judge said.

“To be clear, your position is a former president could come in and file a lawsuit?” Millett said. Trump lawyer Justin Clark responded, “That is our position.”

To a lawyer for the House committee, Millett raised a scenario where a newly elected president might seek retribution against a disliked predecessor. The new president and a Congress led by the same party might declare that there was a national security interest in releasing all of the former president’s records, even at the risk of endangering people’s lives, she said.

“Needless to say, the former president comes to court, (says), ‘Hang on,’” Millett said. “What happens?”

She did not say she was referring to any president and rejected committee lawyer Douglas Letter’s response referencing a president who “fomented an insurrection.”

“We’re not going to make it that easy,” she said.

Letter argued the determination of a current president should outweigh predecessors in almost all circumstances and noted that both Biden and Congress were in agreement that the Jan. 6 records should be turned over.

“It would be astonishing for this court to override the current president and Congress,” Letter said.

Democratic presidents nominated all three judges who heard arguments Tuesday. Millett and Robert Wilkins were nominated by former Barack Obama, and Ketanji Brown Jackson is a Biden appointee.

Given the stakes of the case, either side is likely to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Despite Trump’s false claims about a stolen election — the primary motivation for the violent mob that broke into the Capitol and interrupted the certification of Biden’s victory — the results were confirmed by state officials and upheld by courts. Trump’s attorney general, William Barr, has said the Justice Department found no evidence of widespread fraud that could have changed the results

In explaining why Biden has not shielded Trump’s records, White House counsel Dana Remus has written that they could “shed light on events within the White House on and about January 6 and bear on the Select Committee’s need to understand the facts underlying the most serious attack on the operations of the Federal Government since the Civil War.”

Trump has called the document requests a “vexatious, illegal fishing expedition” that was “untethered from any legitimate legislative purpose,” in his lawsuit to block the National Archives from turning over the documents.

In their appeal to the circuit court, Trump’s lawyers said they agreed with Chutkan that presidents were not kings. “True, but in that same vein, Congress is not Parliament — a legislative body with supreme and unchecked constitutional power over the operations of government,” they wrote.

Trump has argued that records of his deliberations on Jan. 6 must be withheld to protect executive privilege for future presidents and that the Democrat-led House is primarily driven by politics. The House committee’s lawyers rejected those arguments and called Trump’s attempts to assert executive privilege “unprecedented and deeply flawed.”

“It is difficult to imagine a more critical subject for Congressional investigation, and Mr. Trump’s arguments cannot overcome Congress’s pressing need,” the committee’s lawyers said.

google news
Continue Reading

News

Jeffrey Epstein pilot says he never saw sex acts on flights

Published

on

Jeffrey Epstein pilot says he never saw sex acts on flights

By LARRY NEUMEISTER and TOM HAYS

NEW YORK (AP) — A longtime pilot for Jeffrey Epstein told a jury Tuesday at Ghislaine Maxwell’s sex trafficking trial that he never saw evidence of sexual activity on planes as he flew his boss and others — including a prince and ex-presidents — for nearly three decades.

Lawrence Paul Visoski Jr., the trial’s first witness, was responding to questions by a defense lawyer when he acknowledged that he never encountered sexual activity aboard two jets he piloted for roughly 1,000 trips between 1991 and 2019.

He said he stayed in the cockpit for the majority of flights, but would sometimes emerge to go to the bathroom or get coffee.

Although he was called as a witness by the government, Visoski’s testimony seemed to aid the defense of Maxwell as he answered questions posed by Maxwell attorney Christian Everdell about what he saw when he straightened up the aircraft after a flight.

Visoski didn’t hesitate when Everdell asked him if he ever saw sexual activity when he went for coffee or found sex toys when he cleaned up.

“Never,” the pilot answered to both questions. He said he never saw used condoms either.

And when he was asked if he ever saw sex acts with underage females, he answered: “Absolutely not.”

The pilot said Epstein never warned him to stay in the cockpit during flights and also encouraged him to use a bathroom near the rear of the plane that would require him to walk past the plane’s couches.

He said he never saw any children on his planes who were not accompanied by their parents.

When Everdell asked him about a teenager who prosecutors say was sexually abused by Epstein before she became an adult, Visoski said he believed she was “mature” when he was introduced to her.

He also acknowledged that Clinton was a passenger on a few flights in the 2000s and he had piloted planes with Britain’s Prince Andrew, the late U.S. Sen. John Glenn of Ohio — the first American to orbit Earth — and former presidents Donald Trump and Bill Clinton, “more than once.”

Visoski said Epstein gave him 40 acres of land to build a house on the financier’s New Mexico property and paid for his daughters’ college education.

Epstein’s plane was derisively nicknamed “The Lolita Express” by some in the media after allegations emerged that he had used it to fly teenage girls to his private island, his New Mexico ranch and his New York City townhouse.

Flight records, made public as part of civil litigation, also showed that Epstein had used the plane to fly celebrities, influential academics and politicians around the globe.

Luminaries who flew with Epstein have had to beat back speculation that their presence on the flights meant they must have been aware of the millionaire’s crimes. Clinton, like others who took rides from Epstein, has said he was unaware of any misconduct.

Maxwell, 59, traveled for decades in circles that put her in contact with accomplished and wealthy people before her July 2020 arrest.

Asked by Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey where Maxwell stood in the hierarchy of Epstein’s world, Visoski said Maxwell “was the Number 2.” He added that “Epstein was the big Number 1.”

The testimony supports what Assistant U.S. Attorney Lara Pomerantz told jurors in her opening statement Monday when she said Epstein and Maxwell were “partners in crime.”

Pomerantz said Maxwell recruited and groomed girls for Epstein to sexually abuse from 1994 to at least 2004.

Maxwell has pleaded not guilty and one of her lawyers said in an opening statement Monday that she’s being made a scapegoat for Epstein, who killed himself in his Manhattan jail cell at age 66 in August 2019 as he awaited a sex trafficking trial.

Visoski testified briefly on Monday before beginning Tuesday on the witness stand.

google news
Continue Reading

News

Arc’teryx climbs out of Cherry Creek

Published

on

Arc’teryx climbs out of Cherry Creek

Arc’teryx is venturing out of its Cherry Creek space.

The 3,500 square feet the Vancouver-based outdoor apparel and gear company occupies at 250 Columbine St. is being marketed for lease, according to materials obtained by BusinessDen.

Arc’teryx did not confirm when it plans to move out of its only Denver retail store.

“Our team is still in the midst of finalizing details for this location, but we are committed to having an Arc’teryx location in Denver,” a spokesperson told BusinessDen.

Courtesy of Legend Partners

The Arc’teryx store in Cherry Creek opened in 2018.

google news
Continue Reading

Trending