43 Cases, No Convictions: Prosecuting the Police Falters in New York

Protesters walk against traffic on Interstate 490, headed toward the Public Safety Building, in Rochester, N.Y., late Tuesday, Feb. 23, 2021. A grand jury voted not to charge officers shown on body camera video holding Daniel Prude down naked and handcuffed on a city street last winter until he stopped breathing. New York Attorney General Letitia James announced the decision Tuesday. The 41-year-old Black man's death last March sparked nightly protests in Rochester after the video was released nearly six months later. (AP Photo/Adrian Kraus)
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
Sarah Maslin Nir
·7 min read
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.

More than five years ago, Andrew Cuomo, the governor of New York, signed an executive order to address a persistent concern: Police officers were rarely held accountable for killing unarmed people. Often, those who died were Black.

The solution was to take the cases out of the hands of local prosecutors, whose close relationships with the police led to accusations of bias, and hand them over to the office of the state attorney general.

But the change in the legal process has not altered the results. Of the 43 investigations that the attorney general’s office has conducted in the years since, none has led to a conviction. Three officers have been charged — two with murder and another with assault, the office said.

Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times

On Tuesday, there was another familiar outcome. A grand jury convened by the attorney general’s office declined to indict any of the seven officers involved in the incident that led to the death of Daniel Prude in Rochester last year. Prude, who was Black, died after the police arrested him in the throes of an apparent psychotic episode, placed a hood over his head and pressed him into the street until he became unconscious.

The case shows that even as the demand that the police face more serious consequences has intensified, the legal system remains tilted in favor of law enforcement, said current and former prosecutors who have sought charges against officers.

New York’s system of investigating deaths caused by police officers is among the most far-reaching in the nation. But officers are afforded special legal protections when they use force in the course of their job. And juries are historically deferential to the police and receptive to arguments defending their actions. Officers often must make split-second decisions in dangerous circumstances, a reality that is not lost on jurors.

“The system was built to protect and shield officers from wrongdoing and accountability,” Letitia James, the New York attorney general, said when she announced the results of the investigation into Prude’s death. James added that she was “disappointed — extremely disappointed” in the grand jury’s decision.

Cuomo signed the executive order in 2015, a year after the killing of Eric Garner, a Staten Island man who died in a police chokehold. Gwen Carr, Garner’s mother, was present as the governor said he hoped the order would restore some faith in the legal system.

“I’m not aware of any state unit on the same level as the one in New York,” said Philip M. Stinson, a criminal justice professor at Bowling Green State University in Ohio and a former police officer. The special unit assigned to the investigations in New York is made up of “top-notch prosecutors, they know what they’re doing, they have a lot of experience. And they still can’t get grand juries to return indictments, let alone obtain convictions.”

The office has been limited in its mission by the order’s narrow design: Until a new law goes into effect in April, prosecutors can only pursue cases that result in a death. The victim also has to have been unarmed.

In one case, prosecutors determined they were unable to move forward with an investigation when a man was shot by police after he struck and seriously injured an officer with a chair. The chair, prosecutors decided, qualified as a weapon.

A spokesperson for the attorney general, as well as supporters of New York’s program, said the lack of charges and convictions belied the unit’s other achievement: enhancing public trust by extracting these cases from the hands of local prosecutors who might be loath to prosecute the police — in essence, their partners in law enforcement.

“The numbers alone do not account for the independence and transparency that is so critical and that we provide,” said Delaney Kempner, a spokesperson for James.

But to some members of the public — and those who have lost loved ones at the hands of the police — improved transparency provides little comfort.

“The justice system doesn’t give a damn about us,” Joe Prude, Prude’s brother, told The New York Times a day after the grand jury declined to charge anyone involved in his brother’s death. “That’s not built for anyone in the community; that’s built for the police to keep slaughtering people.”

The attorney general’s program, called the Special Investigations and Prosecutions Unit, has noted that Black and Latino people are disproportionately the victims of deadly police force. A 2019 biennial report from the unit pointed out a “disturbing trend” in the period covered by the report. Of the 13 civilians killed in police custody or in shootings involving police, seven were Black and four were Latino.

In her news conference about Prude’s case, James seemed to blame the outcome in the case on limitations inherent in the law. Police officers in New York have the legal right to use deadly force in numerous circumstances, such as when they feel their own lives are in danger. In cases that do not involve shootings, investigators are often unable to show conclusively that officers’ actions directly caused the deaths of people in their custody.

In one case in 2018, the unit did not seek charges after a Bronx man was restrained by seven officers and died. In another, in 2020, after a woman in Rockland County died after being restrained and shot with a Taser by police officers, the unit found it could not establish that the officers had committed a crime.

Even for prosecutors who are dedicated to investigating cases against police officers, doing so is not easy. Christy E. Lopez, a former Department of Justice lawyer who helped lead the investigation into the police department in Ferguson, Missouri, said that public opinion remains on the side of the police.

“Despite all the protests this summer, the fact is that most Americans are incredibly protective of police, especially in these criminal cases,” said Lopez, who is now a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center. “And so that’s the thing to look at, is are we willing to hold police criminally accountable?”

Jim Burch, president of the National Police Foundation, an organization that seeks to help police do their jobs more effectively, said that he had heard from officers who had issues with police accountability measures.

“There are some who believe that some of these measures may not be necessary, maybe they’re an overreach, maybe they’re not going to solve the actual problems that some feel exist. They feel that the problems are more associated with things like training, or compensation,” he said.

But he added that his organization believed in accountability measures, including prosecutorial independence, and he felt that ultimately they helped the reputation and legitimacy of police officers.

In an email, a spokesperson for the governor, Peter Ajemian, said Cuomo was committed to accountability in the justice system beyond the executive order.

“The governor believes the best way to repair the rupture in police-community relations is for localities to re-imagine policing in a way that suits their unique needs,” Ajemian said.

Last summer, after years of political wrangling, lawmakers in Albany enshrined the executive order into law and expanded its scope to include cases of people who were armed.

“That clarity is really helpful because in these investigations, every second counts,” said Alvin Bragg, a lawyer who led the state unit under the former attorney general, Eric Schneiderman. The office said that the broadening of the law, which goes into effect in April, is likely to triple its caseload.

Bragg, a Democrat who is a candidate for Manhattan district attorney, said that without additional reforms, racial biases that lead juries to see Black victims as less sympathetic would continue to keep police free from legal consequences.

“We need some law reform, and we need the police not to kill people in the first instance,” Bragg said.

Assemblyman N. Nick Perry, a Democrat who represents southeast Brooklyn and was one of the main backers of the law, stressed that it was only a first step. Perry said establishing a legal definition of what qualifies as excessive force is central so that jurors can determine if the police have broken the law.

But absent such a definition, “there is no limit on the police officer’s perception and judgment in the situation,” Perry said, “which is what leads to a lot of acquittals when there are strong cases that what was done was criminal.”

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

© 2021 The New York Times Company

Recommended Stories

  • Biden weighs path forward for $15 minimum wage after Senate roadblock

    President Joe Biden is still committed to raising the U.S. minimum wage to $15 after a key Senate referee ruled the provision could not be included in the COVID-19 relief bill, a top White House economic adviser said on Friday. White House National Economic Council Director Brian Deese, in an interview on MSNBC, said the administration was disappointed by the Senate parliamentarian's Thursday ruling and would consult with congressional leaders about the path forward.

  • Give Biden a Chance? On COVID Aid, Some Trump Voters Just Might

    In Washington, Republicans stand united in opposition to President Joe Biden’s first major legislative proposal, a $1.9 trillion economic rescue plan that they have labeled a bloated, budget-busting “blue state bailout.” But in rural Maine, Anthony McGill, a self-identified conservative Republican, describes the bill as something else entirely: “Most of it sounds like a good idea,” he said. While McGill does not agree with all the provisions, he supports the central thrust of the bill: another round of direct stimulus payments to nearly all Americans. Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times “There’s a lot of people that could use those checks. I don’t know about needing them, but we could all use them,” said McGill, 52, who voted for former President Donald Trump in November. “The debt is so far out of hand that it’s a fantasy number at this point. We might as well just blow it out till everything collapses.” As Democrats prepare to vote as soon as Friday to pass the relief package in the House, Republican elected officials are struggling to overcome intraparty divides over whether to embrace the major pieces of the proposal — as well as to reconcile with the fact that many Republican voters support the plan. While Democrats are working swiftly to move their bill, Republicans are consumed by sideshows like false claims of voter fraud and what they call cancel culture, which are two major themes of the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, known as CPAC, starting Friday in Orlando, Florida. The lack of a unified Republican economic message reflects an unsettled party that is unable to agree on how to chart a path through a Democratic-controlled Washington. While congressional Republicans take a scattershot approach to try to undermine the legislation, mayors and governors in their party push for the plan, saying their states and cities need the federal aid to keep police officers on their beats, to reopen schools and to help small businesses. Polling shows a significant number of Republican voters agree: More than 4 in 10 Republicans back Biden’s aid package, according to polling from the online research firm SurveyMonkey for The New York Times. Overall, 72% of Americans said they supported the bill, a number that includes 97% of Democrats. Interviews with more than two dozen Trump voters across the country found little consensus on fundamental questions that are central to the party’s future: Who won the election? Who should lead the GOP? And how much should Republicans try to work with the new administration? “There are things about President Biden that do concern me, but I’ve been told he’s kind of a moderate as far as Democrats go,” said Kelly Alexander, 62, a self-described right-wing conservative who owns a seasonal takeout restaurant in Mackinaw City, Michigan. “He’s our president. We need to give him a chance and not pick him apart for no good reason.” That is not the advice Robert Holland, a retiree from Rockland, Maine, would give to Republican leaders in Washington. “Biden and the Democrats are a bunch of stupid fools,” he said. “And the Republicans better get some spine and stop rolling over for them.” That disconnect over basic political strategy mirrors larger divisions within a party led for four years by a president who shredded mainstream conservative ideology on issues including the national debt, foreign policy and trade. While Trump moved a portion of the party’s base away from some of the right-wing economic orthodoxies that had characterized Republicanism for decades, he offered little in the form of a unified doctrine as a replacement. Republicans chose not to adopt a new platform at their national convention last year, instead simply carrying over the one from 2016, and Trump failed to articulate a second-term policy agenda as he campaigned for reelection. During his final weeks in office, he demanded that Congress more than triple the stimulus payments included in a December relief plan, a surprise maneuver that undermined Senate Republicans who had spent months opposing such spending. The current legislation would include another round of stimulus payments at $1,400 per person, an amount some Senate Republicans say is too high. Trump’s embrace of federal spending has complicated that messaging, downplaying traditional fiscal conservative concerns about the size of the debt and the deficit. This month, Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, argued that it was disingenuous for Republicans to raise such concerns considering their recent record. The national debt increased by about $7.8 trillion during Trump’s term, rising to the highest level since World War II. The surge was partly because of the economic stimulus passed during the pandemic but also because of the $1.5 trillion unpaid-for tax cut bill in 2017 and Trump’s unfettered spending. “When we had a Republican president and House and Senate, we kept on spending massively and adding almost a trillion dollars a year to the national debt,” Romney told the “Utah Politics” podcast. “Now we say, ‘This is outrageous, adding so much to the debt’?” Romney, who helped write the December stimulus bill, has argued that Biden’s legislation is a “clunker” that would waste money. Some Republicans share those concerns. Sean Wiley, who voted twice for Trump and describes himself as a conservative libertarian, said the government needed to provide assistance to people who have lost their jobs in the pandemic but argued that the current package was too large. Now that more people are being vaccinated and the country is getting back to work, he said, there is not as much need for a big government stimulus. Wiley, 52, who lives in Secane, Pennsylvania, and builds transmissions for racing cars, said he worried that the Biden bill would unnecessarily add to the national debt. “We’ve kind of mortgaged the future on this,” he said. Yet polling indicates that a notable portion of the Republican base is far more open to the bill. Last month, more than two-thirds of Republicans said they supported increasing individual payments to $2,000 from $600, which Trump had proposed but Senate Republicans had rejected. Nearly 7 in 10 Republicans said it was important for the current bill to include $1,400 direct checks, according to the SurveyMonkey poll. Many Republican voters who expressed concerns about the size of the stimulus package said they did not oppose the direct payments but worried about what they saw as extraneous provisions — like a proposal to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour and $350 billion in aid for state and local governments. “People need help right now, and I’m OK with my tax dollars doing that; I’d help feed my neighbors if they needed it,” said Melissa Karn, 53, a Trump voter from the Phoenix suburbs. “But I am not on board with sending money to rebuild and bail out cities that have not been run very well for years.” Karn and other Trump supporters find little to like among their leaders in Congress who are making the same arguments, preferring the bombastic, burn-it-down style of the former president. They praised Republicans closely aligned with Trump, like Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, and offered scorn for those he has clashed with, like Sen. Mitch McConnell, the minority leader. “It’s like the Republican establishment doesn’t have any common sense,” said Tara Davis, 40, a foster mother in Burlington, North Carolina. “We’re finding out all this money that’s just been wasted, and they couldn’t give people $2,000? It’s sickening. Anyone that the establishment hates, that’s who I like.” Judy Betty, a Republican and retired principal from Marana, Arizona, said she mostly opposed another round of stimulus payments but felt let down by congressional Republicans who she thinks did not fully investigate fraud claims surrounding the election — charges that were repeatedly shown to be baseless. “I don’t know about the Republican Party; it’s really gotten weird,” she said. “Everything is a lie. I think that is what Trump revealed for a lot of us who were open to him. This whole government is crap.” Sharon Tomski, 59, a teacher at a Catholic high school in the Milwaukee suburbs, said she believed that any stimulus plan should be targeted for those who lost income as a result of the pandemic. A self-described conservative, Tomski expressed little desire for the Republican Party to return to an era of fiscal austerity, even as she raised concerns about the possibility that Trump would again run for the White House. “I’d prefer he just goes away and lets someone else with his philosophy run,” Tomski said as she shopped at Bed Bath & Beyond in Waukesha, Wisconsin. “I think he’s too polarizing of a figure and needs to hand the baton to someone else.” Tomski is unlikely to get her wish anytime soon. Trump is headlining the conservative conference Sunday afternoon, an effort to keep control of the party firmly in his grasp. While his presence may buoy a large swath of Republicans, it is likely to turn off independents and any moderates who supported the former president. Patricia Dorenbosch, a Republican retiree from Henderson, Nevada, said she was turned off by Trump’s actions after the election, blaming him for stoking the attack on the Capitol and pushing baseless claims about voter fraud. She appreciates the new leadership emerging from Washington, even if it comes from a man she voted against. “I’m pleased so far; I really am surprised, but I am. I agree with a lot of things Biden is doing,” said Dorenbosch, 75, who supported Trump. “We don’t have a lot of this blowhard kind of attitude. We’re not attacking people so much.” This article originally appeared in The New York Times. © 2021 The New York Times Company

  • The Words That Are In and Out With the Biden Administration

    WASHINGTON — Days after President Joe Biden took office, the Bureau of Land Management put a scenic landscape of a winding river at the top of its website, which during the previous administration had featured a photograph of a huge wall of coal. At the Department of Homeland Security, the phrase “illegal alien” is being replaced with “noncitizen.” The Interior Department now makes sure that mentions of its stakeholders include “Tribal” people (with a capital “T,” as preferred by Native Americans, it said). The most unpopular two words in the Trump lexicon — “climate change” — are once again appearing on government websites and in documents; officials at the Environmental Protection Agency have even begun using the hashtag #climatecrisis on Twitter. And across the government, LGBTQ references are popping up everywhere. Visitors to the White House website are now asked whether they want to provide their pronouns when they fill out a contact form: she/her, he/him or they/them. Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times It is all part of a concerted effort by the Biden administration to rebrand the government after four years of former President Donald Trump, in part by stripping away the language and imagery that represented his anti-immigration, anti-science and anti-gay rights policies and replacing them with words and pictures that are more inclusive and better match the current president’s sensibilities. “Biden is trying to reclaim the vision of America that was there during the Obama administration, a vision that was much more diverse, much more religiously tolerant, much more tolerant of different kinds of gender dispositions and gender presentations,” said Norma Mendoza-Denton, a professor of anthropology at UCLA and an author of “Language in the Trump Era: Scandals and Emergencies.” Mendoza-Denton said Trump sought to “remake reality through language” during a tumultuous tenure. In her book, which she co-wrote with Janet McIntosh from Brandeis University, McIntosh wrote that the former president “changed some of the deepest expectations about presidential language, not just when it comes to style, but also the relationship between words and reality.” Now officials in Biden’s administration are using Trump’s own tactics to adjust reality again, this time by erasing the words his predecessor used and by explicitly returning to ones that had been banished. “The president has been clear to all of us: Words matter, tone matters and civility matters,” said Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary. “And bringing the country together, getting back our seat at the global table means turning the page from the actions but also the divisive and far too often xenophobic language of the last administration.” Some shift in the language used by government agencies is not uncommon when a new administration arrives in Washington. In addition to their symbolic power, the revisions can help usher in new policies. Allowing the phrase “climate change” gives a green light to government scientists, while banning the use of “illegal alien” can alter the real-life engagements between immigrants and border agents. But rarely has the contrast been quite so stark as it is between Biden and Trump. The rhetorical overhaul is underway in all corners of the government as executive orders are drafted, news releases are modified, scores of federal forms are tweaked, and online portals are revamped. Stephen Miller, who pursued similar changes at the beginning of the Trump administration as a top policy adviser, said the embrace of what he called politically correct language by officials in Biden’s government reflected the importance of framing important issues for the public. In addition to the changes on websites, he noted that Biden’s executive orders had been filled with words and phrases that would never have come from Trump’s mouth, including “equity,” “environmental justice,” “pathway to citizenship,” “pro-choice” and “undocumented immigrant.” “The struggle over the lexicon is actually the central struggle,” said Miller, who wrote many of Trump’s speeches and was the architect of his assault on the immigration system. “Equity is meant to harken to this idea that America is a nation that believes in everybody having this fundamental dignity of treatment. But the other side would say, ‘What you call equity, I call discrimination.’ ” Trump administration officials like Miller sought to engineer similar shifts in language when they were in office. Miller fought in 2017 for the use of the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism” during that year’s presidential address to Congress, arguing that it conveyed a seriousness of purpose by Trump in fighting terrorism. Critics said that using the phrase falsely suggested that all Muslims are terrorists. And Ben Carson, Trump’s secretary of housing and urban development, proposed removing the phrase “inclusive and sustainable communities free from discrimination” from the department’s mission statement. He later backed down. For the Biden administration, the vocabulary shift was immediate. Hours after taking office, officials responsible for updating WhiteHouse.gov removed pages highlighting Trump’s 1776 Commission, which likened progressivism to fascism and attacked liberals who charge that the founding of the United States was tainted by slavery. At the same time, the president’s aides restored the Spanish-language version of the website, which had been taken down by Trump’s digital team, and hired sign language interpreters for the livestream of the press secretary’s daily briefing. References to presidents as “he” were changed to “they” on some parts of the site. At the State Department, the incoming secretary, Antony Blinken, moved quickly to erase what Mike Pompeo, his predecessor, called an “ethos” statement for U.S. diplomats, which included a pledge to be a “champion of American diplomacy” and to work with “unfailing professionalism.” Many longtime members of the department saw it as an insulting warning to the so-called deep state who Pompeo and Trump believed were undermining their agenda. In its place, Blinken issued a statement that said “the ethos of public service permeates the workforce” and declared that State Department employees “do not need a reminder of the values we share.” And officials at the Bureau of Land Management, in addition to overhauling their website, have restored boilerplate language at the bottom of all documents, including the assertion that the agency’s mission is “to sustain the health, diversity and productivity of America’s public lands.” Melissa Schwartz, the Interior Department’s top communications official, said such changes were part of a new policy of encouraging voices that had not been heard during the Trump administration. “The words we choose are critical and set the tone, whether it’s press releases or social media or all-staff messages,” she said. “At Interior, that means not just acknowledging the disproportionate impact that the climate crisis is having on communities of color and Indigenous peoples but an embrace of the science and solutions that will help us tackle it.” Biden administration officials say the effort to modify the language used by government officials recognizes the powerful messages that certain words and phrases send. The term “alien” is written into immigration statutes and has been widely used in government for decades to describe foreigners, even showing up in memos from Obama-era officials. But it has increasingly been at the center of an ideological tug of war about whether it unfairly stigmatizes immigrants and whether those in the United States without authorization should be called “undocumented” rather than “illegal.” Three years ago, Attorney General Jeff Sessions ordered officials in his department to use the term “illegal alien” in all communications when describing someone who did not come to the United States through legal means. In a memo, Justice Department officials wrote that “the word ‘undocumented’ is not based in U.S. code and should not be used to describe someone’s illegal presence in the country.” Now the Biden administration is explicitly reversing that position. On Feb. 12, officials at Citizenship and Immigration Services, the agency that handles citizenship, said employees should not use the word “alien” in “outreach efforts, internal documents and in overall communication with stakeholders, partners and the general public.” The move, the agency’s acting director said, “aligns our language practices with the administration’s guidance on the federal government’s use of immigration terminology.” A few days later, the White House went further. In his legislative proposal for a far-reaching immigration overhaul, Biden would strip the word “alien” from the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act and substitute it with “noncitizen,” a suggestion that infuriates anti-immigration groups. “It’s kind of Orwellian — that’s what it is, really,” said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors limits on immigration. “The war against the word ‘alien’ is a continuation of this effort to destigmatize illegal immigration that started in the mid-1970s. This is in a sense the culmination of that process.” Some changes are still pending. The website of the Department of Homeland Security’s citizenship office, USCIS.gov, still bears the mission statement that Trump administration officials modified in 2018 to remove “America’s promise as a nation of immigrants” and replace it with “fairly adjudicating requests for immigration benefits.” That could soon switch course. At the Environmental Protection Agency, Trump’s aides had taken down the part of the website devoted to climate change. As of mid-February, the site had not yet been restored. But given Biden’s embrace of the subject, officials said they expected that to happen soon. But the Treasury Department is already moving ahead with plans to put Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill, a decision that had been delayed during the Trump administration. And at the Interior Department, employees have been told that they can use phrases like “science-based evidence” again. In a call with the agency’s public relations officials Jan. 21, Schwartz had a message for her colleagues. “Climate change is real, and science is back, and you should feel free to talk about both in your press releases,” she said. “I release you!” This article originally appeared in The New York Times. © 2021 The New York Times Company

  • Becerra Commits to Collecting Health Data by Race: ‘It’s Time’

    President Biden’s nominee for secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, Xavier Becerra, committed to collecting health data based on race during a Senate confirmation hearing on Wednesday. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) questioned Becerra on the subject of racial “equity” during the hearing. “It’s time to start treating structural racism like any other public health problem, investing research into its symptoms and its causes and finding ways to mitigate its effects,” Warren said. “Will you commit to collecting the data we need to see the racial disparities in our health care system and to attacking those disparities head on?” Becerra responded, “Senator, I’m looking forward to working with you on this because it’s time.” It isn’t clear if Becerra’s nomination will advance to confirmation. Becerra faces extensive opposition from Republicans over his pro-abortion record, both as California attorney general and a former member of Congress. Senate meetings on Biden’s nominee to head the Office of Management and Budget, Neera Tanden, were delayed on Wednesday morning. That delay came after Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, a moderate Democrat, announced his opposition to Tanden over her “overtly partisan statements.” Tanden came under scrutiny for multiple posts on Twitter attacking congressional Republicans, as well as a reportedly physical altercation in 2008 with Senator Bernie Sanders’s (I., Vt.) future campaign manager.

  • Letters to the Editor: These readers felt something would go wrong Jan. 6. Why didn't Capitol police?

    Readers who say they were worried about violence in Washington before Jan. 6 wonder why Capitol police were so unprepared.

  • The nation needs Biden’s immigration-reform plan, but the stench of Trumpism lingers | Opinion

    There’s nothing like the images of packed rickety rafts at sea and unaccompanied minors flocking to the border to torpedo President Joe Biden’s push to pass immigration reform.

  • Prince Harry Tells Friend James Corden He Left the Royal Family Because It Was Destroying His Mental Health

    KOEN VAN WEELPrince Harry has said that he stepped back from royal duties because the British press was “toxic” and “destroying” his mental health.In an extraordinary interview unparalleled in the annals of royal history, Harry gave a candid interview to his close friend James Corden on The Late Late Show while they toured Los Angeles on an open-air double-decker bus. Corden was a guest at Harry and Meghan’s wedding in 2018 and arrived at the evening reception dressed as Henry VIII. Another guest at the wedding, Oprah Winfrey, has taped an interview primarily with Meghan that will be screened next weekend.Oprah Winfrey’s Interview With Meghan Markle and Harry Will ‘Shine a Light on What They Have Been Through’The two men were served afternoon tea, which Corden said he had provided to remind Harry of home, however the tea service was abandoned after the bus braked sharply, depositing the contents of a tea trolley on top of the prince.“Clear it up, Harry,” Corden joked as the prince picked up tea cups and scones.While the 17-minute long package had a humorous tone and was packed with jokes and gags, it also provided the most candid insight yet into why Harry withdrew from royal duties.Asked about his decision to leave royal life, Harry said he was left with no choice because the British press “was destroying my mental health.”He said of the “toxic” situation: “I did what any husband and father would do—I need to get my family out of here.”In what will be perceived as a dig at the royal establishment that refused to accept Harry and Meghan’s proposal of a hybrid public-private role, Harry said: “We never walked away, and as far as I’m concerned, what decisions are made on that side, I will never walk away.”Royal Family ‘Wringing Their Hands’ at Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s ActivismHarry said that his life now would continue to be about “public service” and added that he and Meghan were “trying to bring some compassion and try to make people happy and try to change the world in any small way we can.”When Harry said he and Meghan often watched Jeopardy! and Netflix (with whom the couple recently signed a $100 million production deal) in the evenings after putting Archie to bed, Corden asked him about The Crown and its controversial portrayal of his family’s history.Harry, who joked he would like to be played in the series by Damian Lewis, said he preferred it to the tabloid media coverage of the royals because it “does not pretend to be news.”He added: “It’s fictional. But it’s loosely based on the truth.“Of course it’s not strictly accurate, but it gives you a rough idea about what that lifestyle—the pressures of putting duty and service above family and everything else—what can come from that.”He continued: “I’m way more comfortable with The Crown than I am seeing the stories written about my family, or my wife or myself, because it’s the difference between fiction—take it how you will—and being reported on as fact because you’re supposedly news. I have a real issue with that.”Harry also opened up about meeting Meghan and how he knew she was the one on their second date.“We hit it off with each other, and we were just so comfortable in each other’s company,” he said.“Dating me or any member of the royal family is kind of flipped upside down. All the dates become dinners or watching the TV or chatting at home.“We went from zero to 60 in the first two months.”Meghan, who is pregnant with the couple’s second child, made a cameo in the interview via FaceTime when Harry and Corden paid a trip to the house from the ’90s TV show The Fresh Prince of Bel Air.When Corden suggested the couple should buy the house, Meghan said: “I think we’ve done enough moving.”During the visit to the house, Corden and Harry spoke to the owner and jokingly made an offer to buy it, before Harry asked if he could use the toilet.“I’m actually dying for a pee. Can I use your bathroom?” he asked.Showing that family relations are at least still somewhat functional, Harry said his grandmother, the queen, bought his son Archie a waffle maker for Christmas.He revealed Meghan now makes waffles with a “beautiful organic mix” and they eat them for breakfast with toppings including berries and syrup.He also said that both his grandparents know how to use Zoom, but joked that his grandfather slams the laptop shut physically to finish a call.Over to you, Oprah.Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

  • IS bride loses bid to return to UK to fight for citizenship

    A woman who ran away from London as a teenager to join the Islamic State group lost her bid Friday to return to the U.K. to fight for the restoration of her citizenship, which was revoked on national security grounds. Shamima Begum was one of three east London schoolgirls who traveled to Syria in 2015. Begum's lawyers appealed,, saying her right to a fair hearing was harmed by the obstacles of pursuing her case from the camp.

  • Stocks fall, bond rout sparks profit taking

    Central banks in Asia struggled to smother a selloff in global bonds on Friday (February 26), piling pressure on their bigger peers to do more.That spooked investors who sold assets to cover deepening losses.And rushed out of crowded positions in stocks.European stocks fell on Friday (February 26) as investors booked profits in high-flying technology shares.Concerns are growing over rising inflation and interest rates on the back of a jump in bond yields.The benchmark European stock index was down over 1%.And on track to record its first weekly fall this month.While London's FTSE 100 and Germany's DAX also slipped.Earlier, Asian markets had seen even bigger declines. Japan's Nikkei index shed almost 4%. Euro zone government bonds did at least stabilise.But Germany's benchmark yield was still headed for its biggest monthly jump since 2016.Assurances from European Central Bank chief Christine Lagarde and other policymakers failed to stem the rise in yields.Technology stocks bore the brunt of this week's sell-off after powering the global stock market recovery last year.

  • 'Op Silent Viper': How an Indian rape suspect was caught after 22 years

    The case went cold after the man disappeared following a brutal 1999 gang rape in India.

  • Britain sets out blueprint to keep fintech 'crown' after Brexit

    Brexit, COVID-19 and overseas competition are challenging fintech's future in Britain and the country should act to stay competitive, a government-backed review said on Friday. Britain's departure from the European Union has cut the fintech industry's access to the world's biggest single market, making the UK less attractive for fintechs wanting to expand cross-border. The review headed by Ron Kalifa, former CEO of payments fintech Worldpay, sets out a "strategy and delivery model" that includes a new billion pound start-up fund and fast-tracking work visas for hiring the best talent globally.

  • Journalist Tim O'Brien, who's seen Trump's taxes, thinks Trump's accountant will now flip in D.A. inquiry

    Bloomberg's Tim O'Brien, one of the few journalists who has seen former President Donald Trump's tax returns, told MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell on Thursday night he will sleep better now that Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance finally has eight years of Trump's financial documents, from 2011 to 2019. Trump "is very afraid of what's in these documents, I think," because they put him in serious criminal jeopardy, O'Brien said, but he isn't the only one implicated. O'Brien went on to explain why he thinks it's likely Trump's chief accountant, Allen Weisselberg, will flip on Trump. "The thing to really focus in on here is that it's not just the tax records that Cy Vance has now," O'Brien said. "He probably has reams and reams of the accountant's work product. This is a criminal case, they're going to need to prove criminal intent on the part of Trump, his three eldest children, Allen Weisselberg, and anyone else in the Trump Organization who's fallen under the parameters of this investigation. And if there are email and notes and other records of communication about what they intended to do when they inflated the value of buildings so they could get loans against them and then turned around and deflated the value of the buildings so they could pay lower taxes on them, and there's a communication around that that predates any of these tax entries, that is gold for a prosecutor." A few hours earlier, O'Brien told MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace that the particular eight years of documents Vance's team has "is important, because it predates Trump's ascent into the White House, and I think helps build the narrative around the money trail and Trump's motivations for his destructive and obscene dance with people like Vladimir Putin. It's a shame they couldn't go back further — think this is one of the tragic misses of Robert Mueller's investigation, he could have gone back further, I think, than Cy Vance is able to into Trump's finances." O'Brien also underscored that the investigation implicates at least Eric Trump and Ivanka Trump, and "it also targets people inside the Trump Organization who might flip on Trump if they're exposed to criminal liability," but "the brass ring in all of this is that if Trump has a criminal conviction, he cannot run for president again, and that's looming over this entire thing as well." More stories from theweek.comDemocrats should take the Romney-Cotton proposal seriouslyHusband of Hitler-quoting GOP congresswoman parked his militia-stickered truck outside Capitol Jan. 6The MyPillow guy might be Trump's ultimate chump

  • Ryan Fitzpatrick eyes new team. And a leading candidate to back up Tua Tagovailoa

    You know the scenario by now: Tua Tagovailoa is the Miami Dolphins starter but what if Deshaun Watson gets traded and what if Russell Wilson gets traded and what if...

  • ‘Welcome Insurrectionists’ sign to be flown over CPAC by protester

    ‘Grim Reaper’ lawyer is fundraising to remind Republicans about last month’s Capitol riots

  • Native American nominee's grilling raises questions on bias

    When Wyoming U.S. Sen. John Barrasso snapped at Deb Haaland during her confirmation hearing, many in Indian Country were incensed. The exchange, coupled with descriptions of the Interior secretary nominee as “radical” — by other white, male Republicans — left some feeling Haaland is being treated differently because she is a Native American woman. At Wednesday's hearing, Barrasso wanted assurance that Haaland would follow the law when it comes to imperiled species.

  • 2 US Navy warships in Mideast hit by coronavirus outbreaks

    Two U.S. Navy warships operating in the Mideast have been struck by coronavirus outbreaks, authorities said Friday, with both returning to port in Bahrain. A dozen troops aboard the USS San Diego, an amphibious transport dock, tested positive for COVID-19, said Cmdr. Rebecca Rebarich, a spokeswoman for the Bahrain-based 5th Fleet. The guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea also has “confirmed several cases of COVID-19," she said.

  • Three Percenter Truck at Capitol on Jan. 6 Belongs to Hitler-Quoting Rep’s Husband

    Photo Illustration by The Daily Beast/Getty/TwitterA pickup truck parked at the United States Capitol and bearing a Three Percenter militia sticker on the day of the Jan. 6 riot belongs to the husband of freshman U.S. Rep. Mary Miller of Illinois, who approvingly quoted Adolf Hitler a day earlier.Researchers on Twitter first noticed the Ford pickup truck with the far-right militia’s decal parked on the Capitol grounds in footage posted to social media and taken by CBS News.The presence of a vehicle with a militia decal so close to the Capitol, inaccessible to normal vehicle traffic, raised questions about how it got there—and whether it belonged to any of the hundreds of suspects involved in the deadly riot.But in an email to The Daily Beast, Chris Miller, Rep. Miller’s husband and a member of the Illinois House of Representatives, conceded the truck belonged to him even as he pleaded ignorance about the militia group.Mitch McConnell Says He’ll Support Trump in 2024 After Blaming Him for Capitol Riot“Army friend gave me decal. Thought it was a cool decal. Took it off because of negative pub,” Miller wrote in an email late Thursday. He says he “never was member” of the militia and “didn’t know anything about 3% till fake news started this fake story and read about them.” A request for comment to the office of U.S. Rep. Miller was not returned prior to publication.The link between the truck and Rep. Miller was first reported on Twitter on Thursday by the @capitolhunters account, which is organizing research about rioters seen in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot from a large community of volunteers reviewing thousands of hours of footage.The #Sedition3PTruck with government plates parked in a restricted zone from 1:02. #SeditionHunters #Sedition3PSource: https://t.co/DubmxJhjSZ pic.twitter.com/INCs6geEYg— Phoenix on Wheels (@phoenixonwheels) February 25, 2021 A pickup truck with the same make, model, color, and Illinois plate number as the one at the Capitol on Jan. 6 is also visible in a July 2020 photo carrying Mary Miller for Congress banners during a Fourth of July parade in Illinois. That same day, Rep. Miller’s Facebook page posted a picture of what appeared to be the same truck with the same Trump-Pence and Mary Miller for Congress banners attached to the same PVC pipe frame as she campaigned in the towns of Mattoon, Sullivan, Herrick, and Moweaqua.https://www.facebook.com/BaileyforIllinois/photos/888345101571058Previously, the Millers have proudly posted pictures of the same model of Ford pickup truck, often emblazoned with the same stickers—like “herd quitter” and Guns Save Life, a website affiliated with an Illinois-based gun rights group—as the truck at the Capitol bore on Jan. 6. In at least one case, before Chris Miller’s election to the State House in 2018, the truck in question had a different license plate.The couple have appeared with that truck at campaign events, sometimes with the vehicle plastered in pictures of their faces or “taxpayers lives matter” posters. The license plate of the vehicle at the Capitol on Jan. 6—registered to Illinois, but with a drawing of the state’s Capitol building—appears to be a design reserved for Illinois politicians, like Chris Miller, who took office in 2019.The Three Percenter decal may have been a relatively new addition to the car, as it was not visible in images from this summer.https://www.facebook.com/ChrisMillerForStateRep/photos/2438928539529305Elected last November, Mary Miller, a Republican, is perhaps best known for speaking at a “Moms for America” rally in front of the Capitol one day before the riot. “Hitler was right on one thing: whoever has the youth has the future," she told the crowd. She later apologized for the remarks and said “some are trying to intentionally twist my words to mean something antithetical to my beliefs.”Militia groups have garnered new attention from law enforcement given the number of members arrested and charged with riot-related crimes since Jan. 6. Robert Gieswein, an alleged rioter identified by The Daily Beast who’s visible in footage of the first rioters to break into the Capitol, "appears to be affiliated with the radical militia group known as the Three Percenters," according to an FBI affidavit filed in the court case against him.The group, which first formed in 2008, is part of a loose network of “anti-government extremists” who liken their crusade against the U.S. government to that of Revolutionary War-era patriots, according to the Anti Defamation League. Their name comes from the false claim that only 3 percent of U.S. colonists fought in that war.Ties between militia groups and Congress have also come under greater scrutiny after some lawmakers suggested their colleagues may have played a role in the riot. Rep. Steve Cohen pointedly claimed that U.S. Rep Lauren Boebert led a “large” tour through the Capitol shortly before the riot. Boebert said she gave no tours to anyone outside her family at the time and there is no evidence as yet that any of the rioters benefited from inside help.Boebert has, however, been criticized for her links to militia groups after she posed for a picture at a December 2019 gun rights rally where rally-goers flashed Three Percenter hand signs.Read more at The Daily Beast.Got a tip? Send it to The Daily Beast hereGet our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

  • Jets spoil Dominique Ducharme’s debut as Montreal’s coach

    Kyle Connor scored twice and the Winnipeg Jets spoiled Dominique Ducharme's debut as Montreal's coach, rallying to beat the Canadiens 6-3 on Thursday night to open a two-game series. The Jets rallied after Montreal took a 2-0 lead into the second period.

  • Covid-19: Sri Lanka reverses 'anti-Muslim' cremation order

    Critics said the forced burial order was intended to target minorities and did not respect religions.

  • Marjorie Taylor Greene faces backlash after attacking congresswoman with transgender daughter

    Marjorie Taylor Greene drew backlash from lawmakers of both parties who said a video she posted was cruel toward transgender Americans.