department

Caracas, October 8, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – US District Judge Alvin Hellerstein denied a request by Venezuelan First Lady Cilia Flores to be released from jail and allowed to face trial under house arrest in New York following reported health problems.

The Southern District of New York judge argued in a bail hearing on Thursday that Flores posed a “substantial flight risk” and dismissed assurances from defense attorney Mark Donnelly that she would not flee. 

“With all the money at stake and all the contacts Ms. Flores has with the Venezuelan government and the people who make it up, the risk is serious. There is no combination of conditions that would make that risk any less serious,” Hellerstein said.

In a court filing submitted in early September, Flores’ defense team requested that the 69-year-old be transferred to a private residence in New York with armed guards around the clock, an electronic monitoring bracelet, restricted visitors, and monitored phone calls.

Flores and Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro were kidnapped by US special forces on January 3. They have been detained at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn while facing “narco-terrorism,” drug trafficking conspiracy, and weapons possession charges.

Flores’ lawyers have pleaded that she requires extensive cardiac treatment and that the prison does not provide the necessary conditions for her care. Attorneys added that the Venezuelan first lady, who is also a legislator, would cover the transfer costs and offered to surrender her passport as an additional assurance of remaining in custody.

The filing describes episodes of chest pain, arrhythmia, difficulty breathing, and a weight loss of more than 24 pounds since her detention. It also claims that Flores may have suffered a mild heart attack on July 29.

A group of demonstrators gathered outside the courthouse, demanding that the Venezuelan first lady’s health concerns be addressed and protesting the “illegal” abduction and prosecution of the presidential pair.

Hellerstein’s denial of bail coincided with US Justice Department prosecutors filing a new indictment against Maduro and Flores, expanding the charges they face in the United States.

The superseding indictment, backed by US Attorney General Todd Blanche, US Attorney for the Southern District of New York Jamie McDonald, DEA Administrator Terrance C. Cole, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, and FBI Director Kash Patel, accuses them of conspiring to torture political opponents, military personnel, and other detainees, including three US citizens.

The prosecution’s filing alleges coercion, electric shocks, and threats against family members, among other practices. Prosecutors claim that after taking office in 2013, Maduro “oversaw a system designed to employ torture, arbitrary detention, and violence as means of repression against the political opposition.”

“As alleged in the indictment, the Maduro regime subjected American citizens to torture while held in custody of the Venezuelan government […]. Today’s charges reflect the commitment from this FBI and this Department of Justice to accountability, the rule of law, and the protection of U.S. national security,” FBI Director Kash Patel stated.

Maduro’s attorney, Barry J. Pollack, said his client denies the allegations in the new indictment and looks forward to his day in court. The updated indictment added “narco-terrorism” to the accusations against Flores.

The document also names Nicolás Maduro Guerra, the former president’s son; current Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello; former minister Ramón Rodríguez Chacín; and Héctor Guerrero Flores, alias “Niño Guerrero,” the leader of the Tren de Aragua gang, who was reported killed in a US military operation inside Venezuelan territory in June.

Last week, US prosecutors challenged Maduro’s claim to sovereign immunity, arguing the White House had not recognized him as president and that the Venezuelan government had never requested that he be granted such status. They said, however, that Caracas had pursued a similar request for Acting President Delcy Rodríguez in a separate civil lawsuit.

Hellerstein is scheduled to hear oral arguments from both sides on the immunity question on November 17. The US government has asked the court to reject motions filed by Maduro and Flores seeking dismissal of charges. If the case proceeds, the trial is scheduled to begin in June 2027.

The Venezuelan government has not commented on the latest charges against the Venezuelan president and first lady or on their legal claims to immunity.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

Los Angeles County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath presented a motion Tuesday calling for “bold action” to better protect victims of domestic violence and stalking, seeking to help them more effectively navigate the county’s restraining order system and obtain court-ordered protection.

Horvath cited recent Los Angeles Times reporting on the challenges victims face when obtaining and enforcing restraining orders as an inspiration for the Board of Supervisors motion, which was co-authored by board chair Hilda Solis. The supervisors are scheduled to consider the measure during the board’s Nov. 10 meeting.

“A recent story from the L.A. Times spoke to the process of domestic violence restraining orders and the work done and not being done across the county to support survivors in need of this critical support,” Horvath said.

The Times’ reporting identified at least 63 women killed in 2024 and 2025 in L.A. County whose cases involved a former partner or close relative arrested or charged with their murder. The deaths accounted for more than 40% of the 156 women killed during that period. At least 10 of those women had filed for restraining orders.

In July 2024, the county Department of Public Health’s Office of Violence Prevention issued a report with more than a dozen recommendations for reducing domestic violence homicides by improving access to restraining orders. Today, most of those recommendations have not yet been implemented.

The office said the delay was the result of insufficient funding and challenges with coordinating between the many agencies responsible for the county’s restraining order system.

If passed, the motion would mandate reports from the county’s chief executive, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, and the departments of Public Health, Mental Health, Consumer and Business Affairs, Public Social Services, and Homeless Services to assess current efforts, improvement plans and additional funding needs.

“We know that domestic violence restraining orders protect survivors and I believe the board must take every step possible to better support and protect our survivors,” she said. “The county,” she added, “must step up and lead in this space.”

The motion calls for allocating millions of dollars annually to fully fund nine county-run self-help legal centers that assist people navigating the restraining order process.

It would also officially identify “Gender-Based Violence and Intimate Partner Violence” as a priority for the Board of Supervisors, and require a presentation from the Sheriff’s Department on how the agency plans to improve its handling of restraining orders.

The Office of Violence Prevention would be required to develop a plan for a “peer navigator model” to guide survivors through the restraining order system.

The Department of Homeless Services and Housing would be asked for an assessment of what additional resources would be necessary to provide emergency beds for all people fleeing intimate partner violence.

Citing lingering concerns about the potential misuse of police license plate readers, the Los Angeles City Council voted Tuesday to delay an agreement that would enable the deployment of hundreds of the controversial devices until officials are satisfied that the technology will be wielded responsibly.

By a 10-4 vote, the council opted to overrule approval of the 10-year, $235-million contract between the Los Angeles Police Department and Axon Enterprise, halting a deal that had previously been signed off on by the Board of Police Commissioners.

Axon is seeking to outfit hundreds of LAPD patrol squads with plate scanners, which track the movements of vehicles around the city. Under the agreement, the company would also replace thousands of body-worn cameras, supply new Tasers, provide cloud video storage, and roll out a program that uses artificial intelligence to assist officers in writing police reports.

In addition, Axon is seeking to launch a pilot program that would attach plate scanners to streetlights around Los Angeles, offering the LAPD a souped-up version of its current systems by using AI to identify vehicles, license plates, pedestrians and objects that appear on streets and sidewalks.

The council’s decision — which was preceded by several fiery comments from members of the public who oppose the use of license plate readers — sends the contract back to the Police Commission for reconsideration.

A commission spokesperson said that the board’s members weren’t immediately available for comment.

Several council members voiced unease about proceeding without a better sense of the LAPD’s internal policy on license plate reader use. Delaying the contract, Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez said, would give the public and city leaders more time to review the safeguards and policies written into the LAPD’s proposed memorandum of understanding with Axon.

Councilmember Traci Park, a staunch supporter of plate reader technology, said there is an urgent need to get the devices “up and running.”

Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez shot back that it would be irresponsible to deploy the technology, citing news reports about officers misusing plate readers to stalk romantic partners and track women seeking reproductive health services.

Earlier this year, the LAPD allowed its agreement with one of Axon’s chief competitors, Flock Safety, to lapse over concerns that the Trump administration is using the data it collects to locate immigrants targeted for deportation. Police officials say they no longer have access to the company’s cameras, many of which are owned by homeowners associations and other private groups.

LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell and other department leaders have pushed to expand the use of license plate readers, saying they are a valuable tool for solving crimes, enabling investigators to more easily locate stolen vehicles and fugitives.

Hernandez noted that other police technologies, such as a robot dog used in situations involving barricaded suspects, had quietly moved from a pilot to a full-fledged program without input from the council.

Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson said he still had privacy concerns about license plate readers, while noting that their deployment along the Figueroa corridor had assisted in the rescue of dozens of juvenile sex trafficking victims.

“Now having said that, if I’m honest I don’t know what else the cameras are doing,” he said.

Councilmember Monica Rodriguez said that as the license plate reader technology is adopted by other, non-police agencies such as sanitation and street services, the city needs a universal policy governing its use.

The matter will next be heard by the public safety committee — likely at its Oct. 20 meeting — before being taken up by the full council later that week.

In a presentation to the Police Commission last month, the LAPD’s technology czar, Dean Gialamas, said that the department understood the privacy and civil liberty concerns raised about companies such as Flock. This summer, the department announced it was pausing its relationship with the Atlanta-based firm, but police officials have said they are still hopeful to negotiate a new deal with the company that would include more data-sharing safeguards.

Much like the initial debate over the use of forensic DNA testing, Gialamas said, the answer wasn’t to abandon the technology but to create safeguards to “ensure responsible and trusted use.”

Gialamas told commissioners that Axon had agreed to terms that would give the LAPD complete ownership of the data captured and bar the sharing of data with federal authorities. The proposed deal, he said, would also limit the use of plate readers to criminal investigations, missing persons cases and other “serious public safety matters.” Investigators, for instance, would not be able to conduct searches based solely on protests or other 1st Amendment-protected activities, he said.

Under the proposed contract, investigators would no longer be given “unfettered access” to license plate data and the retention period would be significantly cut down, he said. The department would also be permitted to conduct regular audits to flag officers who use the system frequently or conduct unusual searches.

A report issued last month by the LAPD inspector general’s office found numerous “limitations” in the department’s existing agreements with its three plate reader vendors — Flock, Axon and Motorola — including a lack of clear language about how long data are retained and how they are shared with third parties or other law enforcement agencies.

The inspector general recommended that the department update its current license plate reader contracts to address data security and privacy concerns, conduct regular audits and develop standardized rules for traffic stops based on plate reader hits.