China has commenced the first testing of its state-of-the-art electromagnetic catapults for launching jet fighters mounted on its type 003 Fujian aircraft carrier often touted as Beijing's answer to US Navy's Gerald R Ford. China's first supercarrier has set out of Shanghai for its first sea trials.

China's first Super Carrier heads to sea

Doctors have started trials on hundreds of patients for the world's first personalised mRNA cancer vaccine for melanoma, with experts praising its potential to revolutionise cancer treatment by offering a permanent cure.

Melanoma, the leading cause of skin cancer deaths globally, affects approximately 132,000 people annually. Although surgery is the primary treatment, other options such as radiotherapy, medications, and chemotherapy are also used.

The new vaccines being tested are individually tailored for each patient, instructing their immune system to target cancer cells and prevent the disease from recurring.

A phase 2 trial showed significant reduction in the risk of melanoma recurrence among patients who received the vaccines. A final phase 3 trial, led by the University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (UCLH), has now started.&nbsp;

Dr Heather Shaw, who oversees the trial nationally, told the Guardian that these shots could potentially cure melanoma and are also being tested for other cancers like lung, bladder, and kidney cancer.&nbsp;

“This is one of the most exciting things we’ve seen in a really long time,” said Shaw. “This is a really finely honed tool. To be able to sit there and say to your patients that you’re offering them something that’s effectively like the Fat Duck at Bray versus McDonald’s – it’s that level of cordon bleu that’s coming to them … The patients are really excited about them,” he said.&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/health-and-wellness/understanding-why-cancer-rates-are-rising-among-younger-generations-689181">Also read |&nbsp;Understanding why cancer rates are rising among younger generations</a>

<h2>How does it work?</h2>

The vaccine, called mRNA-4157 (V940), is a personalised treatment that&nbsp;activates the immune system to fight a patient's specific cancer.

It targets tumour neoantigens, which are unique markers found on tumours and can be recognised by the immune system.

The vaccine contains coding for up to 34 neoantigens and triggers an immune response against the tumour based on the specific mutations present in the patient's cancer.

To personalise the vaccine, a sample of the tumour is taken during surgery, followed by DNA sequencing and analysis using artificial intelligence. This process creates a tailored anti-cancer vaccine that matches the patient's tumour.

In Phase 2, data showed that patients with serious high-risk melanomas who received the vaccine along with Keytruda were almost half as likely to die or have their cancer return after three years compared to those who only received Keytruda.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/scientists-use-ai-to-ensure-tumor-cells-do-not-survive-after-cancer-treatment-707871">Also read |&nbsp;Scientists use AI to ensure tumour cells do not survive after cancer treatment</a>

Patients got 1mg of the mRNA vaccine every three weeks for up to nine doses, and 200mg of Keytruda every three weeks for about a year (up to 18 doses).

Now, in Phase 3, the global trial will include more patients, aiming for about 1,100. The UK part of the trial aims to enroll at least 60 to 70 patients across eight centres, including London, Manchester, Edinburgh, and Leeds.

(With inputs from agencies)

Doctors have started trials on hundreds of patients for the world's first personalised mRNA cancer vaccine for melanoma, with experts praising its potential to revolutionise cancer treatment by offering a permanent cure.

Doctors have started trials on hundreds of patients for the world's first personalised mRNA cancer vaccine for melanoma, with experts praising its potential to revolutionise cancer treatment by offering a permanent cure. Melanoma, the leading cause of skin cancer deaths globally, affects approximately 132,000 people annually. Although surgery is the primary treatment, other options such as radiotherapy, medications, and chemotherapy are also used. The new vaccines being tested are individually tailored for each patient, instructing their immune system to target cancer cells and prevent the disease from recurring. A phase 2 trial showed significant reduction in the risk of melanoma recurrence among patients who received the vaccines. A final phase 3 trial, led by the University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (UCLH), has now started. Dr Heather Shaw, who oversees the trial nationally, told the Guardian that these shots could potentially cure melanoma and are also being tested for other cancers like lung, bladder, and kidney cancer. “This is one of the most exciting things we’ve seen in a really long time,” said Shaw. “This is a really finely honed tool. To be able to sit there and say to your patients that you’re offering them something that’s effectively like the Fat Duck at Bray versus McDonald’s – it’s that level of cordon bleu that’s coming to them … The patients are really excited about them,” he said. Also read | Understanding why cancer rates are rising among younger generations How does it work? The vaccine, called mRNA-4157 (V940), is a personalised treatment that activates the immune system to fight a patient's specific cancer. It targets tumour neoantigens, which are unique markers found on tumours and can be recognised by the immune system. The vaccine contains coding for up to 34 neoantigens and triggers an immune response against the tumour based on the specific mutations present in the patient's cancer. To personalise the vaccine, a sample of the tumour is taken during surgery, followed by DNA sequencing and analysis using artificial intelligence. This process creates a tailored anti-cancer vaccine that matches the patient's tumour. In Phase 2, data showed that patients with serious high-risk melanomas who received the vaccine along with Keytruda were almost half as likely to die or have their cancer return after three years compared to those who only received Keytruda. Also read | Scientists use AI to ensure tumour cells do not survive after cancer treatment Patients got 1mg of the mRNA vaccine every three weeks for up to nine doses, and 200mg of Keytruda every three weeks for about a year (up to 18 doses). Now, in Phase 3, the global trial will include more patients, aiming for about 1,100. The UK part of the trial aims to enroll at least 60 to 70 patients across eight centres, including London, Manchester, Edinburgh, and Leeds. (With inputs from agencies)

Ultimate cure to cancer? World’s first personalised mRNA cancer vaccine for melanoma undergoing trials

A full jury of 12 people has been seated in the criminal case against Donald Trump, bringing the first criminal trial of a former president a significant step closer to the beginning. Watch in for more details!

Trump Hush Money Trial: First week of Trump's criminal trial ends with full jury selected

The US Senate on Wednesday (April 17) quickly dismissed two articles of impeachment against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, calling them "unconstitutional."

The trial brought to an end a months-long plan to take action against the secretary for the way he is handling the southern border.

The trial against top border security official Mayorkas, who has been&nbsp;a target of Republican criticism&nbsp;over the way he is handling southern border and immigration policy, continued for only three hours after senators were sworn in as jurors.

In the Senate, a 51-member Democratic majority voted to dismiss the two charges as unconstitutional, rejecting Republican members' objections.&nbsp;

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/meet-the-four-republicans-who-rescued-alejandro-mayorkas-from-impeachment-687680">Meet the four Republicans who rescued Alejandro Mayorkas from impeachment</a>

The Senate passed a motion in which it declared the first impeachment article, which accused Mayorkas of not being able to enforce immigration laws, “does not allege conduct that rises to the level of a high crime or misdemeanour” and “is therefore unconstitutional.”&nbsp;

In the Senate, 51 people voted to reject the impeachment charges, as Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, voted “present.” After this, the Senate then voted to end the trial "sine die," which means for good in, less than 3 1/2 hours after it started.

"Once and for all, the Senate has rightly voted down this baseless impeachment that even conservative legal scholars said was unconstitutional," said Ian Sams, a White House spokesperson.

“President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas will continue doing their jobs to keep America safe and pursue actual solutions at the border, and Congressional Republicans should join them, instead of wasting time on baseless political stunts while killing real bipartisan border security reforms," he added.&nbsp;

<h2>Mayorkas becomes second Cabinet secretary to face impeachment in US history</h2>

In the history of the United States, Mayorkas became the second Cabinet secretary to face impeachment when he was charged with "willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law" and a "breach of public trust" by the House in February.&nbsp;

The impeachment effort was strongly opposed by the Democrats who called it a political stunt and said that the allegations included a policy disagreement which fell short of the constitutional threshold for impeachment.

Watch:&nbsp;US: President Biden's immigration Chief Alejandro Mayorkas impeached over border crisis

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-president-bidens-immigration-chief-alejandro-mayorkas-impeached-over-border-crisis-690184/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

"We felt very strongly that we had to set a precedent that impeachment should never be used to settle policy disagreements," said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, on Wednesday evening (April 17).&nbsp;

"If we allowed that to happen, it would set a disastrous precedent for Congress — could throw our system of checks and balances into cycles of chaos," he added.&nbsp;

The Senate, under the Constitution, is responsible for conducting a trial to determine if impeached officials are guilty and need to be removed from office.

(With inputs from agencies)

The US Senate on Wednesday (April 17) quickly dismissed two articles of impeachment against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, calling them "unconstitutional.

The US Senate on Wednesday (April 17) quickly dismissed two articles of impeachment against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, calling them "unconstitutional." The trial brought to an end a months-long plan to take action against the secretary for the way he is handling the southern border. The trial against top border security official Mayorkas, who has been a target of Republican criticism over the way he is handling southern border and immigration policy, continued for only three hours after senators were sworn in as jurors. In the Senate, a 51-member Democratic majority voted to dismiss the two charges as unconstitutional, rejecting Republican members' objections. Also Read: Meet the four Republicans who rescued Alejandro Mayorkas from impeachment The Senate passed a motion in which it declared the first impeachment article, which accused Mayorkas of not being able to enforce immigration laws, “does not allege conduct that rises to the level of a high crime or misdemeanour” and “is therefore unconstitutional.” In the Senate, 51 people voted to reject the impeachment charges, as Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, voted “present.” After this, the Senate then voted to end the trial "sine die," which means for good in, less than 3 1/2 hours after it started. "Once and for all, the Senate has rightly voted down this baseless impeachment that even conservative legal scholars said was unconstitutional," said Ian Sams, a White House spokesperson. “President Biden and Secretary Mayorkas will continue doing their jobs to keep America safe and pursue actual solutions at the border, and Congressional Republicans should join them, instead of wasting time on baseless political stunts while killing real bipartisan border security reforms," he added. Mayorkas becomes second Cabinet secretary to face impeachment in US history In the history of the United States, Mayorkas became the second Cabinet secretary to face impeachment when he was charged with "willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law" and a "breach of public trust" by the House in February. The impeachment effort was strongly opposed by the Democrats who called it a political stunt and said that the allegations included a policy disagreement which fell short of the constitutional threshold for impeachment. Watch: US: President Biden's immigration Chief Alejandro Mayorkas impeached over border crisis "We felt very strongly that we had to set a precedent that impeachment should never be used to settle policy disagreements," said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, on Wednesday evening (April 17). "If we allowed that to happen, it would set a disastrous precedent for Congress — could throw our system of checks and balances into cycles of chaos," he added. The Senate, under the Constitution, is responsible for conducting a trial to determine if impeached officials are guilty and need to be removed from office. (With inputs from agencies)

US Senate rejects impeachment charges against Biden's top border official Mayorkas

Donald Trump is facing trial related to a hush money payment case. Trump is making history by becoming the first former US president to sit in a courtroom for a criminal trial just months ahead of the US presidential elections. Watch to know more.

Trump's hush-money trial resumes in New York

Donald Trump will appear in a New York courtroom on Monday, becoming the first former US president to face a criminal trial. Watch to know more.

Stormy times for Donald Trump as hush money trial is back on track

Former NFL star O.J. Simpson, acquitted of murder charges, died at 76 after battling cancer. Simpson's life was known for both legal scandal and athletic success. Watch in for more details!

OJ Simpson passes away after battle with cancer

Blood tests are set to begin across the UK to see if dementia can be accurately diagnosed through blood tests. Teams from Oxford University and the University of College London have been commissioned to research the use of cheap and simple tests to detect the disease.

UK: Thousands to trial blood tests for dementia

A jury in New Mexico found "Rust" armourer Hannah Gutierrez guilty of involuntary&nbsp;manslaughter&nbsp;on Wednesday.

Following 10 days of testimony, the trial over Hollywood's first fatal shooting on set in nearly three decades has concluded. &nbsp;

The trial centred on whether Gutierrez, who, as per Reuters, was a relatively inexperienced armourer, endangered crew and cast members by mishandling firearms on the low-budget production set in New Mexico.

<h2>The verdict</h2>

Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer ordered Gutierrez's immediate custody. The armourer faces a potential sentence of up to 18 months in state prison.

The jury deliberated for just three hours before finding her guilty of involuntary&nbsp;manslaughter. However, they acquitted&nbsp;Gutierrez of a second charge related to evidence tampering.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/getting-shot-on-rust-like-being-hit-with-baseball-bat-director-695726">Getting shot on Rust like being hit with baseball bat: Director</a>

As deputies escorted her from the courtroom, Gutierrez reassured her distressed mother, saying, "I'll be okay."&nbsp;

In the closing statement, prosecutor Kari Morrissey characterised the case as a series of safety failures leading to a tragic outcome.

"This case is about constant, never-ending safety failures that resulted in the death of a human being and nearly killed another," said Morrissey.

<h2>A fall person</h2>

Gutierrez's lawyer, Jason Bowles, has revealed plans to appeal the verdict.

"My sense was the evidence was insufficient, and it was a lot of speculation," said Bowles.

During the trial, Bowles argued that the production company's decision to employ Gutierrez as both an armourer and props assistant to save costs contributed to the safety lapses.&nbsp;

Bowles contended that Gutierrez, as a junior member on set, was unfairly shouldering blame for management failures.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/hollywood/news-alec-baldwins-manslaughter-trial-in-rust-shooting-case-to-begin-in-july-694185">Alec Baldwin's manslaughter trial in Rust shooting case to begin in July</a>

"You've got a convenient fall person, a convenient scapegoat," remarked the lawyer.

Movie-set firearms safety expert Bryan Carpenter testified that there was a need for additional armourers on set.

<h2>What happened on the "Rust" set</h2>

On October 21, 2021, Gutierrez mistakenly loaded a live round into a replica Colt .45 revolver, which was to be used by actor Alec Baldwin on the movie set near Santa Fe.&nbsp;

Baldwin discharged the firearm, resulting in the death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.&nbsp;Director Joel Souza was also injured in the incident. The actor has denied pulling the trigger, and his manslaughter trial is scheduled for July 10.

As per the Reuters report, circumstantial evidence suggested that Gutierrez unknowingly brought the live rounds from an earlier production.

(With inputs from agencies)

A jury in New Mexico found "Rust" armourer Hannah Gutierrez guilty of involuntary manslaughter on Wednesday. Following 10 days of testimony, the trial over Hollywood's first fatal shooting on set in nearly three decades has concluded.

A jury in New Mexico found "Rust" armourer Hannah Gutierrez guilty of involuntary manslaughter on Wednesday. Following 10 days of testimony, the trial over Hollywood's first fatal shooting on set in nearly three decades has concluded. The trial centred on whether Gutierrez, who, as per Reuters, was a relatively inexperienced armourer, endangered crew and cast members by mishandling firearms on the low-budget production set in New Mexico. The verdict Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer ordered Gutierrez's immediate custody. The armourer faces a potential sentence of up to 18 months in state prison. The jury deliberated for just three hours before finding her guilty of involuntary manslaughter. However, they acquitted Gutierrez of a second charge related to evidence tampering. Also read | Getting shot on Rust like being hit with baseball bat: Director As deputies escorted her from the courtroom, Gutierrez reassured her distressed mother, saying, "I'll be okay." In the closing statement, prosecutor Kari Morrissey characterised the case as a series of safety failures leading to a tragic outcome. "This case is about constant, never-ending safety failures that resulted in the death of a human being and nearly killed another," said Morrissey. A fall person Gutierrez's lawyer, Jason Bowles, has revealed plans to appeal the verdict. "My sense was the evidence was insufficient, and it was a lot of speculation," said Bowles. During the trial, Bowles argued that the production company's decision to employ Gutierrez as both an armourer and props assistant to save costs contributed to the safety lapses. Bowles contended that Gutierrez, as a junior member on set, was unfairly shouldering blame for management failures. Also read | Alec Baldwin's manslaughter trial in Rust shooting case to begin in July "You've got a convenient fall person, a convenient scapegoat," remarked the lawyer. Movie-set firearms safety expert Bryan Carpenter testified that there was a need for additional armourers on set. What happened on the "Rust" set On October 21, 2021, Gutierrez mistakenly loaded a live round into a replica Colt .45 revolver, which was to be used by actor Alec Baldwin on the movie set near Santa Fe. Baldwin discharged the firearm, resulting in the death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins. Director Joel Souza was also injured in the incident. The actor has denied pulling the trigger, and his manslaughter trial is scheduled for July 10. As per the Reuters report, circumstantial evidence suggested that Gutierrez unknowingly brought the live rounds from an earlier production. (With inputs from agencies)

Hannah Gutierrez, 'Rust' armourer, found guilty of involuntary manslaughter

Former US President Donald Trump has secured an easy victory in the Republican caucuses held in Michigan, Idaho and Missouri, beating Nikki Haley, his last remaining rival for the party's presidential nomination, in all the three states.

US: Donald Trump wins caucuses in Missouri and Idaho and sweeps Michigan GOP convention

A New York judge denied former president Donald Trump's request to dismiss the criminal charges relating to the hush money trial payment. The judge said Trump's trial will proceed as scheduled for the 25th of March and this would be the first trial of any former president of the United States of America in American History.

New York court judge denies Trump's dismissal request

Former US President Donald Trump's lawyer, during the trial of the E Jean Carroll&nbsp;defamation case, grilled her on Friday (Jan 19) with a peculiar focus on sexual commentary made by the American author in the past.

Trump’s attorney, Alina Habba, raised questions during cross-examination over the explicit tweets made by Carroll in 2013. “Did you ever post any tweets that could be considered sexually explicit?” Habba asked as she highlighted the sexual nature of Carroll’s social media posts.

Upon this, Carroll’s team objected, and the judge sustained the objection. The questioning took a bizarre turn.

Habba delved into a 2013 tweet where Carroll wrote, “What CAN be done about the penis? It gets large when you want it small, and stays small when you want it large.” “Those were your words, correct?” asked Habba.

“Yes,” Carroll replied. Trump's attorney continued asking, “And you posted them on a public social media account?”

“Yes.” Carroll also confirmed that the tweet remained on her Twitter account while the trial was ongoing.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/us-congress-passes-stopgap-funding-bill-to-avert-shutdown-681490">US Congress passes stopgap funding bill to avert shutdown</a>

While defending herself, Carroll termed the question posted by her on social media as a “philosophical question” which spoke of the dynamics of intimacy between partners.&nbsp;“Sometimes a woman doesn’t feel like making love and the man wants to,” Carroll said.&nbsp;

“You discussed penises?” queried Habba. Carroll responded, “Yes.”

<h2>Trump-E Jean Carroll trial&nbsp;</h2>

The trial, which will determine financial penalties against Trump over his denials of Carroll’s rape allegation in 2019, also saw a heated exchange between the judge and the former US president.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/millions-of-acres-of-american-farmland-become-properties-of-china-linked-people-681480">Millions of acres of American farmland become properties of China-linked people</a>

During Carroll’s opening testimony on Thursday (Jan 18), Trump’s disruptive behaviour drew a stern warning from the judge, who advised him to keep his voice down. “Mr Trump has the right to be present here. That right can be forfeited, and it can be forfeited if he is disruptive,” warned Judge Lewis Kaplan.

Watch |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/north-korea-says-tests-underwater-nuclear-drone-criticises-us-led-joint-drills-681460">North Korea says tests underwater nuclear drone, criticises US-led joint drills</a>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/north-korea-says-tests-underwater-nuclear-drone-criticises-us-led-joint-drills-681460/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Despite the warning, Trump continued to make statements that Carroll's attorneys claimed were disruptive.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

Former US President Donald Trump's lawyer, during the trial of the E Jean Carroll defamation case, grilled her on Friday (Jan 19) with a peculiar focus on sexual commentary made by the American author in the past.

Former US President Donald Trump's lawyer, during the trial of the E Jean Carroll defamation case, grilled her on Friday (Jan 19) with a peculiar focus on sexual commentary made by the American author in the past. Trump’s attorney, Alina Habba, raised questions during cross-examination over the explicit tweets made by Carroll in 2013. “Did you ever post any tweets that could be considered sexually explicit?” Habba asked as she highlighted the sexual nature of Carroll’s social media posts. Upon this, Carroll’s team objected, and the judge sustained the objection. The questioning took a bizarre turn. Habba delved into a 2013 tweet where Carroll wrote, “What CAN be done about the penis? It gets large when you want it small, and stays small when you want it large.” “Those were your words, correct?” asked Habba. “Yes,” Carroll replied. Trump's attorney continued asking, “And you posted them on a public social media account?” “Yes.” Carroll also confirmed that the tweet remained on her Twitter account while the trial was ongoing. Also Read | US Congress passes stopgap funding bill to avert shutdown While defending herself, Carroll termed the question posted by her on social media as a “philosophical question” which spoke of the dynamics of intimacy between partners. “Sometimes a woman doesn’t feel like making love and the man wants to,” Carroll said. “You discussed penises?” queried Habba. Carroll responded, “Yes.” Trump-E Jean Carroll trial The trial, which will determine financial penalties against Trump over his denials of Carroll’s rape allegation in 2019, also saw a heated exchange between the judge and the former US president. Also Read | Millions of acres of American farmland become properties of China-linked people During Carroll’s opening testimony on Thursday (Jan 18), Trump’s disruptive behaviour drew a stern warning from the judge, who advised him to keep his voice down. “Mr Trump has the right to be present here. That right can be forfeited, and it can be forfeited if he is disruptive,” warned Judge Lewis Kaplan. Watch | North Korea says tests underwater nuclear drone, criticises US-led joint drills × Despite the warning, Trump continued to make statements that Carroll's attorneys claimed were disruptive. (With inputs from agencies)

'What can be done about the penis?': E Jean Carroll's 2013 social media post takes centre stage in Trump trial

Former US President Donald Trump faced a stern warning from New York federal judge Lewis Kaplan during the trial in the sex assault defamation case by E. Jean Carroll. However, the judge's threat was met by a casual and defiant response from the Republican.&nbsp;

The judge on Wednesday (Jan 17) threatened to kick Trump out of the trial for making disruptive comments, to which Trump responded, "I would love it."

Carroll's lawyer had complained about Trump's audible comments, including calling it a "con job." Upon this, Judge Kaplan cautioned Trump to keep his voice down and said that though the former US president had the right to be present there, "it can be forfeited if he is disruptive, and if he disregards court orders.”&nbsp;

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/germans-protest-nationwide-after-far-right-meeting-on-deportation-plan-680981">Germans protest nationwide after far-right meeting on deportation plan</a>

“Mr. Trump, I hope I don’t have to consider excluding you from the trial. I understand you are very eager for me to do that,” the judge said.

These comments by the judge led to a defiant response by Trump, which later spiralled even more.&nbsp;

In the courtroom, Trump responded to the judge saying, “I would love it, I would love it.” Reacting to this casual comment by the former US president, Kaplan said, “I know you would because you just can’t control yourself in this circumstance.”

<h2>Trump's tirade on social media&nbsp;</h2>

In a post on his Truth Social site, Trump criticised Judge Kaplan while citing a perceived bias.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/calls-for-tax-the-rich-echo-again-at-world-economic-forum-when-will-you-tax-extreme-wealth-680999">Calls for 'tax the rich' echo again at World Economic Forum: 'When will you tax extreme wealth?'</a>

“I feel an obligation to be at every moment of this ridiculous trial because we have a seething and hostile Clinton-appointed Judge, Lewis Kaplan, who suffers from a major case of Trump Derangement Syndrome,” Trump wrote.

The trial also saw a heated exchange between Kaplan and Trump's lawyer Alina Habba regarding a request to postpone the trial due to his mother-in-law’s funeral.

Watch |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/russia-ukraine-war-russia-steps-up-offensive-near-bakhmut-681025">Russia-Ukraine war | Russia steps up offensive near Bakhmut</a>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/russia-ukraine-war-russia-steps-up-offensive-near-bakhmut-681025/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

“I said sit down!” Kaplan told Habba.&nbsp;Habba reacted by saying, “I don’t like to be spoken [to] like that … I will not speak to you like that.”

Carroll testified about the emotional and reputational harm caused by Trump's defamatory statements.&nbsp;The trial, focused on monetary damages for defamation, follows a previous verdict where Trump was ordered to pay Carroll $5 million for defamation and civil liability. The current trial aims for at least $10 million in damages.

(With inputs from agencies)

Former US President Donald Trump faced a stern warning from New York federal judge Lewis Kaplan during the trial in the sex assault defamation case by E. Jean Carroll.

Former US President Donald Trump faced a stern warning from New York federal judge Lewis Kaplan during the trial in the sex assault defamation case by E. Jean Carroll. However, the judge's threat was met by a casual and defiant response from the Republican. The judge on Wednesday (Jan 17) threatened to kick Trump out of the trial for making disruptive comments, to which Trump responded, "I would love it." Carroll's lawyer had complained about Trump's audible comments, including calling it a "con job." Upon this, Judge Kaplan cautioned Trump to keep his voice down and said that though the former US president had the right to be present there, "it can be forfeited if he is disruptive, and if he disregards court orders.” Also Read | Germans protest nationwide after far-right meeting on deportation plan “Mr. Trump, I hope I don’t have to consider excluding you from the trial. I understand you are very eager for me to do that,” the judge said. These comments by the judge led to a defiant response by Trump, which later spiralled even more. In the courtroom, Trump responded to the judge saying, “I would love it, I would love it.” Reacting to this casual comment by the former US president, Kaplan said, “I know you would because you just can’t control yourself in this circumstance.” Trump's tirade on social media In a post on his Truth Social site, Trump criticised Judge Kaplan while citing a perceived bias. Also Read | Calls for 'tax the rich' echo again at World Economic Forum: 'When will you tax extreme wealth?' “I feel an obligation to be at every moment of this ridiculous trial because we have a seething and hostile Clinton-appointed Judge, Lewis Kaplan, who suffers from a major case of Trump Derangement Syndrome,” Trump wrote. The trial also saw a heated exchange between Kaplan and Trump's lawyer Alina Habba regarding a request to postpone the trial due to his mother-in-law’s funeral. Watch | Russia-Ukraine war | Russia steps up offensive near Bakhmut × “I said sit down!” Kaplan told Habba. Habba reacted by saying, “I don’t like to be spoken [to] like that … I will not speak to you like that.” Carroll testified about the emotional and reputational harm caused by Trump's defamatory statements. The trial, focused on monetary damages for defamation, follows a previous verdict where Trump was ordered to pay Carroll $5 million for defamation and civil liability. The current trial aims for at least $10 million in damages. (With inputs from agencies)

I would love it: Trump courts controversy in Jean Carroll trial, responds to judge's threat to throw him out

Trump back in courthouse for second defamation trial. Elle magazine columnist claims Trump defamed her in 2019. E. Jean Carroll seeks $10 million in defamation case against trump. Watch to know more!

US: Trump attends defamation damages trial in NY | E. Jean Carroll's Civil Damages Trial

Chinese researchers have successfully cloned a rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta) using an innovative technique that addresses common developmental defects observed in cloned embryos. The new method is different from what was used to clone Dolly the sheep. The monkey, named ReTro, is now over two years of age, marking a milestone in primate cloning. Watch to know more!

China: Researchers use new technique to create first Rhesus monkey clone

Security is tight outside Hong Kong court as media tycoon and pro-democracy activist arrives at the court to face his biggest trial. The 76-year-old can face life imprisonment.

Hong Kong: Media mogul Jimmy Lai on trial

In what is being hailed as Italy's biggest&nbsp;mafia trial in three decades, an Italian court has delivered convictions and sentences to over 200 people, marking a significant blow against the notorious 'Ndrangheta.

This "maxi trial" concluded after three years in a high-security courtroom in Calabria, specially designed to accommodate the extensive network associated with the powerful organized crime syndicate.

<h2>But first, who form the&nbsp;'Ndrangheta?</h2>

Situated in the southern region of Calabria, the 'Ndrangheta' has established a virtual monopoly on the European cocaine trade, extending its influence globally.

Originating in the impoverished rural area of Calabria, at the southern tip of Italy, its roots date back to at least the country's unification in 1861.

The name 'Ndrangheta, derived from Greek, conveys the notion of valour, and its top members undergo formal initiation ceremonies. Initially regarded as primarily a rural phenomenon, it gained public prominence in the 1980s and 1990s through a series of kidnappings across Italy.

While often overshadowed by the more visible Costa Nostra, 'Ndrangheta affiliates gained notoriety for the kidnapping of the grandson of the US-born oil tycoon John Paul Getty in 1973, a crime that involved the severing of the victim's ear to facilitate a ransom.

Notably, it wasn't until 2010 that Italy officially classified the 'Ndrangheta as a mafia group&nbsp;under the law.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/italy-bans-lab-grown-frankenstein-meat-citing-health-concerns-and-need-to-safeguard-livestock-industry-659640">Also read |&nbsp;Italy bans lab-grown 'frankenstein' meat citing health concerns and need to safeguard livestock industry</a>

<h2>The&nbsp;scale of the 'maxi trial'</h2>

The verdicts bring to a close a trial that has been unprecedented in scale. Held in Lamezia Terme, the courtroom was built to host up to 350 defendants, 400 lawyers, and hear from 900 witnesses.

More than 100 people&nbsp;were acquitted, but the sheer number of convictions makes this a landmark legal victory against a gang&nbsp;&nbsp;that has long held a near-monopoly on the European cocaine trade.

<h2>Origins of the trial: A comprehensive analysis</h2>

The roots of this maxi trial trace back to a comprehensive investigation launched in 2016, covering at least 11 Italian regions.

The culmination of this effort occurred in December 2019 when over 2,500 officers conducted raids focused on suspects in Vibo Valentia, Calabria—the heart of the 'Ndrangheta's Mancuso clan.

<h2>Arrests beyond Italian borders</h2>

This operation went beyond Italy's borders, leading to arrests in Germany, Switzerland, and Bulgaria. Even a former Forza Italia MP, Giancarlo Pittelli, faced an 11-year jail term for aiding a mafia clan.

At the forefront of this legal battle is Nicola Gratteri, an anti-mafia prosecutor who led the investigation. His team's work involved collecting 24,000 wiretaps and intercepted conversations, forming the backbone of the charges brought against the defendants.

<h2>'Ndrangheta's tactics</h2>

The trial provided a chilling glimpse into the ruthless tactics employed by the 'Ndrangheta. Evidence presented showed a pattern of violent attacks, extortion, corruption in public contracts, weapon stockpiling, manipulation of elections, and bribery.

The 'Ndrangheta's stranglehold on local communities became painfully evident, revealing the extent to which the organisation had embedded itself in various aspects of society.

A notable departure from traditional mafia trials was the inclusion of non-mafia people among the defendants. This marked a significant shift in strategy, targeting not just the foot soldiers of the criminal organisation but also high-ranking police officials, mayors, public servants, and businesspeople.

The trial aimed to expose the network of collaborators enabling the 'Ndrangheta's criminal activities.

&nbsp;

The 'Ndrangheta, faces a significant blow as over 200 people receive convictions and sentences in the country's largest mafia trial in three decades. This maxi trial concluded after three years in a high-security courtroom in Calabria, targeting the 'Ndrangheta's extensive network. Originating in Calabria, the 'Ndrangheta holds a virtual monopoly on the European cocaine trade and gained global influence. The trial, unprecedented in scale, involved comprehensive investigations across 11 Italian regions and revealed the mafia's ruthless tactics, including violent attacks, corruption, election manipulation, and deep entrenchment in local communities.&nbsp;

In the aftermath of the sentencing, most of the convicted individuals announced their intention to appeal.&nbsp;&nbsp;

<h2>Embedded in local life</h2>

The criminal group, known by colorful nicknames like "The Wolf" and "Sweetie," has deeply entrenched itself in the local economy of Vibo Valentia.

Witnesses revealed the 'Ndrangheta's control, striking fear into the hearts of business owners and farmers while enjoying protection from white-collar professionals and politicians.

The trial brought to light harrowing details of weapons hidden in cemetery chapels, drugs transported in ambulances, and the diversion of municipal water supplies for illegal activities.

The 'Ndrangheta, once derided by other Italian mafias, has emerged as the most powerful criminal group in Italy and one of the wealthiest globally.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo">Also watch |&nbsp;War crimes of Russia-Ukraine war: Who's responsible?</div>

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo">&nbsp;</div>

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/war-crimes-of-russia-ukraine-war-whos-responsible-dark-world-600386/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Studies estimate its financial prowess to surpass that of Deutsche Bank and McDonald's combined, with an annual turnover of $53 billion. The organisation's success lies in its deep roots in Calabria, where bosses rarely abandon their remote villages, maintaining control over global operations worth millions.

Italy's maxi trial against the 'Ndrangheta marks a defining moment in the ongoing fight against organised crime.

&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

&nbsp;

In what is being hailed as Italy's biggest mafia trial in three decades, an Italian court has delivered convictions and sentences to over 200 people, marking a significant blow against the notorious 'Ndrangheta.

In what is being hailed as Italy's biggest mafia trial in three decades, an Italian court has delivered convictions and sentences to over 200 people, marking a significant blow against the notorious 'Ndrangheta. This "maxi trial" concluded after three years in a high-security courtroom in Calabria, specially designed to accommodate the extensive network associated with the powerful organized crime syndicate. But first, who form the 'Ndrangheta? Situated in the southern region of Calabria, the 'Ndrangheta' has established a virtual monopoly on the European cocaine trade, extending its influence globally. Originating in the impoverished rural area of Calabria, at the southern tip of Italy, its roots date back to at least the country's unification in 1861. The name 'Ndrangheta, derived from Greek, conveys the notion of valour, and its top members undergo formal initiation ceremonies. Initially regarded as primarily a rural phenomenon, it gained public prominence in the 1980s and 1990s through a series of kidnappings across Italy. While often overshadowed by the more visible Costa Nostra, 'Ndrangheta affiliates gained notoriety for the kidnapping of the grandson of the US-born oil tycoon John Paul Getty in 1973, a crime that involved the severing of the victim's ear to facilitate a ransom. Notably, it wasn't until 2010 that Italy officially classified the 'Ndrangheta as a mafia group under the law. Also read | Italy bans lab-grown 'frankenstein' meat citing health concerns and need to safeguard livestock industry The scale of the 'maxi trial' The verdicts bring to a close a trial that has been unprecedented in scale. Held in Lamezia Terme, the courtroom was built to host up to 350 defendants, 400 lawyers, and hear from 900 witnesses. More than 100 people were acquitted, but the sheer number of convictions makes this a landmark legal victory against a gang that has long held a near-monopoly on the European cocaine trade. Origins of the trial: A comprehensive analysis The roots of this maxi trial trace back to a comprehensive investigation launched in 2016, covering at least 11 Italian regions. The culmination of this effort occurred in December 2019 when over 2,500 officers conducted raids focused on suspects in Vibo Valentia, Calabria—the heart of the 'Ndrangheta's Mancuso clan. Arrests beyond Italian borders This operation went beyond Italy's borders, leading to arrests in Germany, Switzerland, and Bulgaria. Even a former Forza Italia MP, Giancarlo Pittelli, faced an 11-year jail term for aiding a mafia clan. At the forefront of this legal battle is Nicola Gratteri, an anti-mafia prosecutor who led the investigation. His team's work involved collecting 24,000 wiretaps and intercepted conversations, forming the backbone of the charges brought against the defendants. 'Ndrangheta's tactics The trial provided a chilling glimpse into the ruthless tactics employed by the 'Ndrangheta. Evidence presented showed a pattern of violent attacks, extortion, corruption in public contracts, weapon stockpiling, manipulation of elections, and bribery. The 'Ndrangheta's stranglehold on local communities became painfully evident, revealing the extent to which the organisation had embedded itself in various aspects of society. A notable departure from traditional mafia trials was the inclusion of non-mafia people among the defendants. This marked a significant shift in strategy, targeting not just the foot soldiers of the criminal organisation but also high-ranking police officials, mayors, public servants, and businesspeople. The trial aimed to expose the network of collaborators enabling the 'Ndrangheta's criminal activities. The 'Ndrangheta, faces a significant blow as over 200 people receive convictions and sentences in the country's largest mafia trial in three decades. This maxi trial concluded after three years in a high-security courtroom in Calabria, targeting the 'Ndrangheta's extensive network. Originating in Calabria, the 'Ndrangheta holds a virtual monopoly on the European cocaine trade and gained global influence. The trial, unprecedented in scale, involved comprehensive investigations across 11 Italian regions and revealed the mafia's ruthless tactics, including violent attacks, corruption, election manipulation, and deep entrenchment in local communities. In the aftermath of the sentencing, most of the convicted individuals announced their intention to appeal. Embedded in local life The criminal group, known by colorful nicknames like "The Wolf" and "Sweetie," has deeply entrenched itself in the local economy of Vibo Valentia. Witnesses revealed the 'Ndrangheta's control, striking fear into the hearts of business owners and farmers while enjoying protection from white-collar professionals and politicians. The trial brought to light harrowing details of weapons hidden in cemetery chapels, drugs transported in ambulances, and the diversion of municipal water supplies for illegal activities. The 'Ndrangheta, once derided by other Italian mafias, has emerged as the most powerful criminal group in Italy and one of the wealthiest globally. Also watch | War crimes of Russia-Ukraine war: Who's responsible? Studies estimate its financial prowess to surpass that of Deutsche Bank and McDonald's combined, with an annual turnover of $53 billion. The organisation's success lies in its deep roots in Calabria, where bosses rarely abandon their remote villages, maintaining control over global operations worth millions. Italy's maxi trial against the 'Ndrangheta marks a defining moment in the ongoing fight against organised crime. (With inputs from agencies)

Explained | Who are the 'Ndrangheta? Ultrawealthy Italian drug mafia to get 2,200 years in jail

As Donald Trump testified at his civil fraud trial on Monday in New York, he used the witness stand to lash out at the judge handling the case and brag about his wealth.

As Donald Trump testified at his civil fraud trial on Monday in New York, he used the witness stand to lash out at the judge handling the case and brag about his wealth. During the trial, Trump faced questions about his net worth and the value of his assets. However, instead of answering the questions directly, he rambled about his wealth, properties and his grievances with the justice system. He also lashed out at Justice Arthur Engoron overseeing the case. Engoron said Trump's answers were repetitive and irrelevant, Reuters reported. Here's what Donald Trump said in his fight with the judge at his civil fraud trial. ‘I have a castle’ Kevin Wallace, a New York state lawyer, questioned the former US President if he built any houses in Aberdeen, Scotland, between 2013 and 2014, as the value of his property raised significantly. To this, Trump replied, "I have a castle." He did not answer the posed question directly. Trump also referred to a residential development in Aberdeen and said, "I just don't want to build it now. You've probably read that I'm doing other things." ‘You've made it important, but it wasn't’ During his testimony, Trump admitted that his company provided inaccurate property value estimates to banks. He said that properties like his Mar-a-Lago estate and Doral golf course in Florida were undervalued, while others like his Trump Tower residence in New York and his Seven Springs estate were overvalued. However, the former president claimed that it should not matter as the property estimates stated that they might not be accurate, and banks did not take them seriously. "You've made it important, but it wasn't," Trump said to the New York Attorney General's office that brought the case. ‘This is a very unfair trial, very, very, very unfair’ As the day wore on, Donald Trump grew agitated. He made incendiary remarks about Justice Arthur Engoron and New York Attorney General Letitia James, which he routinely made in the previous trial last month. "This is a very unfair trial, very, very unfair, and I hope the public is watching," said Trump. ‘The fraud is on the court, not on me’ Trump slammed Letitia James, the petitioner, multiple times during the trial. He said, "This is a political witch hunt, and I think she should be ashamed of herself." He also attacked the attorney general by saying, "People don't know how good a company I've built. Because people like you go around trying to demean me and hurt me." He also criticised the judge by saying, "He called me a fraud and didn't know anything about me." However, the judge retaliated, "Read my opinion perhaps or for the first time." Trump replied, "I think it's fraudulent, the decision. The fraud is on the court, not on me." (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE

'I have a castle',' This is a very unfair trial': Top quotes from Trump's appearance in civil fraud case

After delivering a short Shakespearean scene, Kevin Spacey received a standing ovation at an Oxford theater on Monday night, his first performance since being cleared of sexual assault charges.

Kevin Spacey receives standing ovation in first stage appearance since sexual assault trial

Here we bring you a quick round-up of all the latest news and top headlines from all across the globe: Fresh legal trouble for former US president Donald Trump as a civil fraud trial against him and members of his family gets underway in New York. Trump and his family and business are facing the trial to determine how much they owe in penalties after a judge has found that the former US president's assets were inflated by billions of dollars to secure more favourable loan and insurance terms.

Ex-President Trump reaped $100+ million through fraud: New York State Lawyer

In a major setback for the former US President Donald Trump, a New York court has ruled that Trump along with his sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr. has committed a fraud. Watch the video to know more on the case and the hearing.

Court rules ex-US President committed fraud

According to the court presiding over the case, the trial in the $250 million lawsuit filed by the New York attorney general against former president Donald Trump, which is set to start on October 2, is anticipated to last close to three months.

US: Trump's trial in New York AG's $250M lawsuit expected to take almost 3 months

Former co-CEO of FTX's Bahamian subsidiary and&nbsp;Sam Bankman-Fried's top lieutenant, Ryan Salame pleaded guilty&nbsp;on Thursday (September 7) in Manhattan federal court to making&nbsp;tens of millions of dollars&nbsp;in unlawful campaign donations.&nbsp;

The plea has been submitted less than one month before the scheduled October 3 trial of Bankman-Fried on conspiracy and fraud charges stemming from the November 2022 collapse of now-bankrupt FTX. 
 
The prosecutors stated that billions of dollars were stolen by Bankman-Fried from FTX customer deposits to cover the losses of his hedge fund Alameda Research, and the lenders and investors were lied to about the financial condition of his companies. 
 
Salame, 30,&nbsp;was&nbsp;scheduled to appear before United States District Judge Lewis Kaplan in Manhattan, who is also overseeing the case of Bankman-Fried, at 3 pm EDT (1900 GMT). Salame guilty plea makes him Bankman-Fried's companies' fourth former executive to plead guilty.

ALSO READ |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/former-ftx-ceo-sam-bankman-frieds-bail-plea-rejected-ordered-to-jail-624714">Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried’s bail revoked for witness tampering, heads to prison</a>

He has now joined the list of former Alameda Chief Executive Officer Caroline Ellison, former FTX technology chief Gary Wang and former FTX engineering chief Nishad Singh, who are all likely to testify against Bankman-Fried at trial.

Salame has pleaded guilty at the hearing in the Manhattan court to&nbsp;one count of conspiracy to make unlawful political contributions and one count of conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business, as per Reuters.

This comes after&nbsp;prosecutors said Salame, along with Bankman-Fried and Singh was responsible for using FTX&nbsp;customer funds to donate to political candidates supporting crypto-friendly legislation.

<h2>Bankman-Fried and the collapse of FTX</h2>

31-year-old Bankman-Fried led to a boom in the values of bitcoin as well as other digital assets to become an influential political donor and multi-billionaire. However, amid a number of customer withdrawals, his exchange collapsed. 
 
Prosecutors stated that the stolen customer funds were used by Bankman-Fried for donations of more than $100 million to political campaigns so as to draw more support for favourable cryptocurrency regulations and that some donations were concealed through two "straw donors," Salame and Singh.

WATCH |&nbsp;Disgraced FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried put behind bars

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/disgraced-ftx-founder-sam-bankman-fried-put-behind-bars-624761/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Salame was working for Ernst &amp; Young and Circle Internet Financial before he joined FTX Digital Markets. Republican candidates as well as the causes during the 2022 election cycle were given more than $24 million by him which made him one of the top donors of that year, according to Federal Election Commision data. 
 
In August, the prosecutors said that Salame informed a family member in a message, sent in the month of November 2021, that Bankman-Fried believed that political donations would "weed out" anti-crypto Republican and Democratic lawmakers, and would likely "route money through me to weed out that Republican [sic] side."

(With inputs from agencies)

You can&nbsp;now write for&nbsp;wionews.com&nbsp;and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

<main>
<section>
WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" data-gtm-yt-inspected-20="true" data-gtm-yt-inspected-25="true" data-gtm-yt-inspected-31="true" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="lazy" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=0" title="live tv" width="100%"></iframe>
</section>
</main>

Former co-CEO of FTX's Bahamian subsidiary and Sam Bankman-Fried's top lieutenant, Ryan Salame pleaded guilty on Thursday (September 7) in Manhattan federal court to making tens of millions of dollars in unlawful campaign donations.

Former co-CEO of FTX's Bahamian subsidiary and Sam Bankman-Fried's top lieutenant, Ryan Salame pleaded guilty on Thursday (September 7) in Manhattan federal court to making tens of millions of dollars in unlawful campaign donations. The plea has been submitted less than one month before the scheduled October 3 trial of Bankman-Fried on conspiracy and fraud charges stemming from the November 2022 collapse of now-bankrupt FTX. The prosecutors stated that billions of dollars were stolen by Bankman-Fried from FTX customer deposits to cover the losses of his hedge fund Alameda Research, and the lenders and investors were lied to about the financial condition of his companies. Salame, 30, was scheduled to appear before United States District Judge Lewis Kaplan in Manhattan, who is also overseeing the case of Bankman-Fried, at 3 pm EDT (1900 GMT). Salame guilty plea makes him Bankman-Fried's companies' fourth former executive to plead guilty. ALSO READ | Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried’s bail revoked for witness tampering, heads to prison He has now joined the list of former Alameda Chief Executive Officer Caroline Ellison, former FTX technology chief Gary Wang and former FTX engineering chief Nishad Singh, who are all likely to testify against Bankman-Fried at trial. Salame has pleaded guilty at the hearing in the Manhattan court to one count of conspiracy to make unlawful political contributions and one count of conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business, as per Reuters. This comes after prosecutors said Salame, along with Bankman-Fried and Singh was responsible for using FTX customer funds to donate to political candidates supporting crypto-friendly legislation. Bankman-Fried and the collapse of FTX 31-year-old Bankman-Fried led to a boom in the values of bitcoin as well as other digital assets to become an influential political donor and multi-billionaire. However, amid a number of customer withdrawals, his exchange collapsed. Prosecutors stated that the stolen customer funds were used by Bankman-Fried for donations of more than $100 million to political campaigns so as to draw more support for favourable cryptocurrency regulations and that some donations were concealed through two "straw donors," Salame and Singh. WATCH | Disgraced FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried put behind bars Salame was working for Ernst & Young and Circle Internet Financial before he joined FTX Digital Markets. Republican candidates as well as the causes during the 2022 election cycle were given more than $24 million by him which made him one of the top donors of that year, according to Federal Election Commision data. In August, the prosecutors said that Salame informed a family member in a message, sent in the month of November 2021, that Bankman-Fried believed that political donations would "weed out" anti-crypto Republican and Democratic lawmakers, and would likely "route money through me to weed out that Republican [sic] side." (With inputs from agencies) You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here. WATCH WION LIVE HERE

FTX former executive Ryan Salame pleads guilty in Bankman-Fried trial

Federal judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing the prosecution of United States former president Donald J Trump in the 2020 election subversion conspiracy case, on Monday (August 28) set the date to start trial on March 4, 2024, rejecting the proposal of the accused to postpone it till 2026. 
 
The announcement of the date has placed the trial of one of the country's biggest criminal cases&nbsp;in the history of America in its peak election season. 
 
The trial date, which has been set two years ahead of the date which was requested by the defence, will fall on the eve of "Super Tuesday," when nearly a dozen states will cast votes between Trump and one of his rivals in the 2024 Republican presidential election. 
 
"Setting a trial date does not depend on the defendant's professional obligations so Mr Trump will have to make a date work," US District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan informed the hearing in Washington.

ALSO READ |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-trump-co-defendants-to-face-arraignment-in-georgia-on-september-6-630007">US: Trump, co-defendants to face arraignment in Georgia on September 6</a>

The trial date is likely to leave a pivotal impact on the hopes of Trump to recapture the White House. Taking to his social network Truth Social, Trump demanded the dismissal of the case and called&nbsp;lead prosecutor Jack Smith "deranged" and&nbsp;complained of "election interference."&nbsp;

"Today a biased, Trump Hating Judge gave me only a two month extension, just what our corrupt government wanted, SUPER TUESDAY. I will APPEAL!" he stated.

The 77-year-old former president has been facing four criminal indictments this year – one each by state prosecutors in Georgia and New York and twice by Smith. In an early August court appearance, Trump had pleaded not guilty to the charges, after which he was not needed to attend the procedural hearing on Monday. 
 
Smith had appealed to start the trial on January 2, however, Trump's lawyer John Lauro described that proposition as "a request for a show trial, not a speedy trial," calling the idea of having just four months to prepare "absurd and ridiculous." 
 
"We will certainly abide by Your Honor's ruling, as we must," he said to Chutkan, after the judge announced her decision. "The trial date will deny President Trump the opportunity to have effective assistance of counsel,” he added.

WATCH |&nbsp;Trump raises $7.1 MN since Georgia arrest

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/trump-raises-71-mn-since-georgia-arrest-629631/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

<h2>Trump's multiple trials</h2>

Trump will go on trial on charges of paying election-eve hush money to a porn star in New York in March and the trial for allegedly mishandling top secret government documents will take place in Florida in May. 
 
Trump, along with 18 co-defendants, are also facing racketeering charges in Georgia for trying to overturn the results 2020 election in the southern state. 
 
No firm date to begin the trial of the Georgia case has been decided by the presiding judge.

(With inputs from agencies)

You can&nbsp;now write for wionews.com&nbsp;and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" data-gtm-yt-inspected-20="true" data-gtm-yt-inspected-25="true" data-gtm-yt-inspected-31="true" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="lazy" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=0" title="live tv" width="100%"></iframe>

Federal judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing the prosecution of United States former president Donald J Trump in the 2020 election subversion conspiracy case, on Monday (August 28) set the date to start trial on March 4, 2024, rejecting the proposal of the accused to postpone it till 2026.

Federal judge Tanya Chutkan, who is overseeing the prosecution of United States former president Donald J Trump in the 2020 election subversion conspiracy case, on Monday (August 28) set the date to start trial on March 4, 2024, rejecting the proposal of the accused to postpone it till 2026. The announcement of the date has placed the trial of one of the country's biggest criminal cases in the history of America in its peak election season. The trial date, which has been set two years ahead of the date which was requested by the defence, will fall on the eve of "Super Tuesday," when nearly a dozen states will cast votes between Trump and one of his rivals in the 2024 Republican presidential election. "Setting a trial date does not depend on the defendant's professional obligations so Mr Trump will have to make a date work," US District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan informed the hearing in Washington. ALSO READ | US: Trump, co-defendants to face arraignment in Georgia on September 6 The trial date is likely to leave a pivotal impact on the hopes of Trump to recapture the White House. Taking to his social network Truth Social, Trump demanded the dismissal of the case and called lead prosecutor Jack Smith "deranged" and complained of "election interference." "Today a biased, Trump Hating Judge gave me only a two month extension, just what our corrupt government wanted, SUPER TUESDAY. I will APPEAL!" he stated. The 77-year-old former president has been facing four criminal indictments this year – one each by state prosecutors in Georgia and New York and twice by Smith. In an early August court appearance, Trump had pleaded not guilty to the charges, after which he was not needed to attend the procedural hearing on Monday. Smith had appealed to start the trial on January 2, however, Trump's lawyer John Lauro described that proposition as "a request for a show trial, not a speedy trial," calling the idea of having just four months to prepare "absurd and ridiculous." "We will certainly abide by Your Honor's ruling, as we must," he said to Chutkan, after the judge announced her decision. "The trial date will deny President Trump the opportunity to have effective assistance of counsel,” he added. WATCH | Trump raises $7.1 MN since Georgia arrest Trump's multiple trials Trump will go on trial on charges of paying election-eve hush money to a porn star in New York in March and the trial for allegedly mishandling top secret government documents will take place in Florida in May. Trump, along with 18 co-defendants, are also facing racketeering charges in Georgia for trying to overturn the results 2020 election in the southern state. No firm date to begin the trial of the Georgia case has been decided by the presiding judge. (With inputs from agencies) You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here. WATCH WION LIVE HERE

Trump's historic trial in federal election case to begin on March 4, one day before Super Tuesday

The UK's public debt load has soared by more than 40% to almost £2.6 trillion (US$3.4 trillion or RM15.8 trillion)) since the pandemic struck, leaving the country owing more than its entire annual economic output for the first time since 1961.

UK faces reckoning over US $3 trillion debt pile

A judge in Montana, United States,&nbsp;who heard the country’s first constitutional climate trial earlier this year, has&nbsp;ruled in favour of the more than a dozen young plaintiffs, on Monday (August 14). This comes after 16 young people filed a lawsuit that sought to hold the officials in the state accountable for their inaction on climate change, in the US state.&nbsp;

<h2>About the court order</h2>

In the order, District Court Judge Kathy Seeley ruled that Montana’s continued development of fossil fuels violates a clause in the state constitution that guarantees its citizens the right to a “clean and healthful environment.”&nbsp;

“Plaintiffs have a fundamental constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment, which includes climate as part of the environmental life-support system,” said Seeley&nbsp;in more than a 100-page ruling after the case closed on June 20.&nbsp;

Notably, Montana is one of several states that have explicit environmental guarantees in their state constitution.&nbsp;

While the verdict will not stop the state from burning fossil fuels, it will reverse a recently passed state law that prevented government agencies from considering the impacts of greenhouse gases when issuing permits for development projects involving fossil fuels.&nbsp;

<h2>What was&nbsp;the case about?</h2>

The case, Held v. Montana, has been closely watched as similar litigations have been filed across the country. The lawsuit centres around the state’s constitutional right to a <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/explained-montana-youth-take-us-state-to-court-in-landmark-trial-over-climate-change-604101">“clean and healthful environment,”</a> and was filed by plaintiffs whose ages range from five to 22.&nbsp;

Roger Sullivan, an attorney for the young plaintiffs, from the non-profit Our Children’s Trust, had alleged that Montana’s ongoing permitting of polluting fuels like coal and gas is contributing to a global crisis, including, “heat, drought, wildfires, air pollution, violent storms, loss of wildlife, watching glaciers melt.”&nbsp;

He also argued that because of these effects, the young people he represents are disproportionately suffering psychologically and healthily. While some plaintiffs testified, the trial also witnessed the rare instance in which climate experts were questioned on the witness stand.

<h2>Lawyers are ‘over the moon’</h2>

“My initial reaction is, we’re pretty over the moon,” said Melissa Hornbein, an attorney who represented the plaintiffs in the 2020 lawsuit, according to The Guardian. She added, “It’s a very good order.”&nbsp;

In a statement, the attorneys for the plaintiffs called the court’s decision a “sweeping win”.&nbsp;

Julia Olson, chief legal counsel and executive director of Our Children’s Trust said, “Today, for the first time in US history, a court ruled on the merits of a case that the government violated the constitutional rights of children through laws and actions that promote fossil fuels, ignore climate change, and disproportionately imperil young people.”&nbsp;

It added, “This is a huge win for Montana, for youth, for democracy, and for our climate. More rulings like this will certainly come.” Notably, the non-profit has brought similar youth-led constitutional climate lawsuits in four other states, including Hawaii, which is set to go to trial in June 2024.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp; 
 
 
&nbsp;

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

A judge in Montana, United States, who heard the country’s first constitutional climate trial earlier this year, has ruled in favour of the more than a dozen young plaintiffs, on Monday (August 14).

A judge in Montana, United States, who heard the country’s first constitutional climate trial earlier this year, has ruled in favour of the more than a dozen young plaintiffs, on Monday (August 14). This comes after 16 young people filed a lawsuit that sought to hold the officials in the state accountable for their inaction on climate change, in the US state. About the court order In the order, District Court Judge Kathy Seeley ruled that Montana’s continued development of fossil fuels violates a clause in the state constitution that guarantees its citizens the right to a “clean and healthful environment.” “Plaintiffs have a fundamental constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment, which includes climate as part of the environmental life-support system,” said Seeley in more than a 100-page ruling after the case closed on June 20. Notably, Montana is one of several states that have explicit environmental guarantees in their state constitution. While the verdict will not stop the state from burning fossil fuels, it will reverse a recently passed state law that prevented government agencies from considering the impacts of greenhouse gases when issuing permits for development projects involving fossil fuels. What was the case about? The case, Held v. Montana, has been closely watched as similar litigations have been filed across the country. The lawsuit centres around the state’s constitutional right to a “clean and healthful environment,” and was filed by plaintiffs whose ages range from five to 22. Roger Sullivan, an attorney for the young plaintiffs, from the non-profit Our Children’s Trust, had alleged that Montana’s ongoing permitting of polluting fuels like coal and gas is contributing to a global crisis, including, “heat, drought, wildfires, air pollution, violent storms, loss of wildlife, watching glaciers melt.” He also argued that because of these effects, the young people he represents are disproportionately suffering psychologically and healthily. While some plaintiffs testified, the trial also witnessed the rare instance in which climate experts were questioned on the witness stand. Lawyers are ‘over the moon’ “My initial reaction is, we’re pretty over the moon,” said Melissa Hornbein, an attorney who represented the plaintiffs in the 2020 lawsuit, according to The Guardian. She added, “It’s a very good order.” In a statement, the attorneys for the plaintiffs called the court’s decision a “sweeping win”. Julia Olson, chief legal counsel and executive director of Our Children’s Trust said, “Today, for the first time in US history, a court ruled on the merits of a case that the government violated the constitutional rights of children through laws and actions that promote fossil fuels, ignore climate change, and disproportionately imperil young people.” It added, “This is a huge win for Montana, for youth, for democracy, and for our climate. More rulings like this will certainly come.” Notably, the non-profit has brought similar youth-led constitutional climate lawsuits in four other states, including Hawaii, which is set to go to trial in June 2024. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

US: Court rules in favour of Montana youth in landmark climate trial

Former US President Donald Trump is back in the news. In his latest and third indictment, Trump's pleaded not guilty.

Trump indictment: Former US President appears in court to face 4 criminal charges

In a significant ruling, a Brussels court delivered convictions for French citizen Salah Abdeslam and Belgian-Moroccan Mohamed Abrini and found them guilty of “terrorist murder”&nbsp;for their roles in the 2016 bombings in the Belgian capital&nbsp;which resulted in the death&nbsp;of 32&nbsp;people.

This judgement comes after the largest-ever criminal trial in Belgium and adds to the life sentences both Abdeslam and Abrini had already received in France for their involvement in the 2015 Paris massacre.

Alongside them, four others were also found guilty of "murder linked to terrorism" in connection with the devastating attacks on March 22, 2016, at Brussels' main airport and metro system, which were claimed by the Islamic State group, as reported by AFP.

<h2>The trauma and aftermath of the 2016 attacks</h2>

The bombings caused widespread devastation, leaving hundreds of travellers and transport staff severely injured.

Even seven years after the attacks, many victims, their families, and rescuers continue to suffer from the trauma inflicted on that&nbsp;day. The trial proceedings aimed to bring justice to those affected and hold the perpetrators accountable.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/gilgo-beach-serial-killings-walk-in-vault-with-big-iron-door-found-inside-rex-heuermanns-home-619322">Gilgo Beach serial killings: Walk-in vault with big iron door found inside Rex Heuermann’s home</a>

<h2>Salah Abdeslam's connection to the Paris and Brussels attacks</h2>

Salah Abdeslam, now 33 years old, was the lone surviving perpetrator of the infamous 2015 Paris attack that resulted in the death&nbsp;of 130 people.

After participating in the Paris attacks, he fled to Brussels and hid in an apartment where members of the local terrorist cell resided. Authorities arrested him a few days before the Brussels attacks took place.

During the trial, Abdeslam denied any involvement in planning the violence, but the jury ultimately rejected his defence.

<h2>The role of Mohamed Abrini and others in the attacks</h2>

Mohamed Abrini faced charges for being part of the team of suicide bombers who targeted Brussels' airport and a metro station.

During the trial, Abrini claimed that he had decided at the last minute not to carry out the suicide bombing at the airport, a statement corroborated by another defendant, Osama Krayem, a Swedish national of Syrian descent.

The court also found Krayem guilty of murder, along with defendants Ali El Haddad Asufi and Bilal El Makhoukhi.

<h2>Verdicts and acquittals</h2>

The court handed down life sentences to those found guilty of murder in Belgium. However, sentencing was deferred until after the summer recess, scheduled to end in September.

While Salah Abdeslam and Mohamed Abrini were convicted of murder, two other suspects, Tunisian Sofien Ayari and Rwandan Herve Bayingana Muhirwa, were acquitted of murder charges but found guilty of participating in a terrorist group. Smail and Ibrahim Farisi, two brothers, were acquitted of the charges they faced.

Also watch |&nbsp;The West Asia Post | 2020 Beirut blast: Fight for justice continues

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/the-west-asia-post-2020-beirut-blast-fight-for-justice-continues-554633/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The trial, which commenced at the end of the previous year, took place under strict security at the converted former headquarters of the NATO military alliance in Brussels.

The proceedings sought to ensure a fair trial while maintaining utmost safety and protection.

The verdicts against key suspects Salah Abdeslam and Mohamed Abrini mark a significant step towards justice for the victims and their families affected by the 2016 Brussels attacks.

The trial serves as a reminder of the importance of holding individuals responsible for acts of terrorism and providing closure to those impacted by such heinous acts.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

&nbsp;

WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

<iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe>

In a significant ruling, a Brussels court delivered convictions for French citizen Salah Abdeslam and Belgian-Moroccan Mohamed Abrini and found them guilty of “terrorist murder” for their roles in the 2016 bombings in the Belgian capital which resulted in the death of 32 people.

In a significant ruling, a Brussels court delivered convictions for French citizen Salah Abdeslam and Belgian-Moroccan Mohamed Abrini and found them guilty of “terrorist murder” for their roles in the 2016 bombings in the Belgian capital which resulted in the death of 32 people. This judgement comes after the largest-ever criminal trial in Belgium and adds to the life sentences both Abdeslam and Abrini had already received in France for their involvement in the 2015 Paris massacre. Alongside them, four others were also found guilty of "murder linked to terrorism" in connection with the devastating attacks on March 22, 2016, at Brussels' main airport and metro system, which were claimed by the Islamic State group, as reported by AFP. The trauma and aftermath of the 2016 attacks The bombings caused widespread devastation, leaving hundreds of travellers and transport staff severely injured. Even seven years after the attacks, many victims, their families, and rescuers continue to suffer from the trauma inflicted on that day. The trial proceedings aimed to bring justice to those affected and hold the perpetrators accountable. Also read | Gilgo Beach serial killings: Walk-in vault with big iron door found inside Rex Heuermann’s home Salah Abdeslam's connection to the Paris and Brussels attacks Salah Abdeslam, now 33 years old, was the lone surviving perpetrator of the infamous 2015 Paris attack that resulted in the death of 130 people. After participating in the Paris attacks, he fled to Brussels and hid in an apartment where members of the local terrorist cell resided. Authorities arrested him a few days before the Brussels attacks took place. During the trial, Abdeslam denied any involvement in planning the violence, but the jury ultimately rejected his defence. The role of Mohamed Abrini and others in the attacks Mohamed Abrini faced charges for being part of the team of suicide bombers who targeted Brussels' airport and a metro station. During the trial, Abrini claimed that he had decided at the last minute not to carry out the suicide bombing at the airport, a statement corroborated by another defendant, Osama Krayem, a Swedish national of Syrian descent. The court also found Krayem guilty of murder, along with defendants Ali El Haddad Asufi and Bilal El Makhoukhi. Verdicts and acquittals The court handed down life sentences to those found guilty of murder in Belgium. However, sentencing was deferred until after the summer recess, scheduled to end in September. While Salah Abdeslam and Mohamed Abrini were convicted of murder, two other suspects, Tunisian Sofien Ayari and Rwandan Herve Bayingana Muhirwa, were acquitted of murder charges but found guilty of participating in a terrorist group. Smail and Ibrahim Farisi, two brothers, were acquitted of the charges they faced. Also watch | The West Asia Post | 2020 Beirut blast: Fight for justice continues The trial, which commenced at the end of the previous year, took place under strict security at the converted former headquarters of the NATO military alliance in Brussels. The proceedings sought to ensure a fair trial while maintaining utmost safety and protection. The verdicts against key suspects Salah Abdeslam and Mohamed Abrini mark a significant step towards justice for the victims and their families affected by the 2016 Brussels attacks. The trial serves as a reminder of the importance of holding individuals responsible for acts of terrorism and providing closure to those impacted by such heinous acts. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

Brussels 2016 attack trial: Six found guilty of murder in terrorist act that killed 32

Donald Trump says that he's received a letter from a prosecutor suggesting that he is likely to be criminally indicted. The reasons may include the January 6 riot at the capital United States capital.

Ex-President Donald Trump's trial in classified document case to be held in May 2024

At the Kevin Spacey sexual assault trial in London, David Funish and Elton John both testified in favour of Kevin Spacey. John Fanish participated in the London court via video link from Monaco after his husband David Fanish testified that Spacey did not attend the annual party at their Windsor home the year their victim said he was attacked.

Kevin Spacey Sexual Assault Trial: Elton John testifies in the ongoing London trial

trial

Trial, News on Trial, stories on Trial, articles on Trial, Trial stories at Wion, Trial news, Trial latest news