evidence

ST. PAUL, Minn. — A Minnesota county is investigating the arrest of a Hmong American man by federal officers that was captured on video as a potential case of kidnapping, burglary and false imprisonment, officials announced Monday.

Ramsey County Atty. John Choi and Sheriff Bob Fletcher said at a news conference they will pursue information from the Department of Homeland Security that they need for their investigation into the arrest of ChongLy “Scott” Thao in January. Ramsey County includes the state capital of St. Paul.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers bashed open the front door of Thao’s St. Paul home at gunpoint without a warrant, then led him outside in just his underwear and a blanket in freezing conditions.

“There are many facts we don’t know yet, but there’s one that we do know. And that is that Mr. Thao is and has been an American citizen. There’s not a dispute over that,” Fletcher said. “There’s no dispute that he was taken out of his house, forcibly taken out of his home and driven around.”

He continued: “Is that good law enforcement, to take an American citizen out of their home and drive them around aimlessly, trying to determine what they can tell them?’”

Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, has refused so far to cooperate with other state and local investigations into the killings by federal officers of two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis during the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.

Choi said they’re trying to determine whether any crimes were committed that they could prosecute under state or federal law.

“This is not about, any type of predetermined agenda other than to seek the truth and to investigate the facts,” he said.

Agents eventually realized Thao was a longtime U.S. citizen with no criminal record, Thao said in an interview with the Associated Press in January. They returned him to his home after a couple of hours.

Homeland Security later said ICE officers had been seeking two convicted sex offenders. Thao told the AP he had never seen the two men before and that they did not live with him.

Videos captured the scene, which included people blowing whistles and horns, and neighbors screaming at more than a dozen gun-toting agents to leave Thao’s family alone.

The state and the chief prosecutor in Hennepin County, which includes Minneapolis, sued the Trump administration last month to gain access to evidence they say they need to independently investigate three shootings by federal officers in Minneapolis, including the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti.

The lawsuit accuses the federal government of reneging on its promise to cooperate with state investigations after the surge of around 3,000 federal law enforcement officers into Minnesota.

Minnesota and Hennepin County have also appealed to the public to share information about federal officers’ potentially illegal activities, given the refusal by federal authorities to provide evidence.

The Trump administration has suggested Minnesota officials don’t have jurisdiction to investigate those cases. State and county prosecutors say they need to conduct their own inquiries because they don’t trust the federal government.

The Justice Department in January said it was opening a federal civil rights investigation into Pretti’s killing, and two officers have been placed on leave, but the agency said a similar federal probe was not warranted in Good’s death.

Vancleave and Karnowski write for the Associated Press. Karnowski reported from Minneapolis.

A California state senator alleges that police officers fabricated evidence to falsely accuse her of driving under the influence after she was T-boned at an intersection near the state Capitol.

Their motive, she claims, was discriminatory bias and a piece of legislation she wrote that law enforcement agencies did not like.

Now, she is suing the city of Sacramento alleging “a deliberate and unlawful campaign to falsely accuse, arrest, and discredit her.”

On Monday, state Sen. Sabrina Cervantes (D-Riverside) filed a federal lawsuit against the city as well as the police officers who cited her for driving under the influence in May. The Sacramento district attorney’s office declined to file charges after a blood test showed there were no traces of drugs or alcohol in her system.

Cervantes accuses officers of pushing forward with an arrest despite lacking probable cause and building a case against her based on false statements. She said officers submitted false information to the DMV, forcing her to retain a lawyer to stop her license from being suspended or revoked, according to the complaint.

The Riverside County legislator alleges that this conduct was in retaliation for a bill she authored seeking to restrict how law enforcement agencies store and use data from automatic license plate readers. She claims that officers discriminated against her as an LGBTQ Latina woman and provided more respectful treatment to the white woman who was at fault in the crash.

Cervantes further alleges that unknown parties within the Sacramento Police Department leaked news of her arrest to the press in a deliberate attempt to tarnish her reputation. Representatives for both the city and the Police Department said Monday that they were unable to comment on pending litigation.

“This case is about the abuse of power,” Cervantes’ attorney James Quadra said in a statement Monday. “Officers ignored the facts, fabricated evidence, and tried to turn a victim into a criminal.”

In September, Cervantes filed a government claim against the city, a necessary precursor to taking further legal action. Her lawsuit, filed in the District Court for the Eastern District of California, seeks damages for violations of federal civil rights and state law, including false arrest, unlawful search and seizure, and defamation.

The crash took place at 12:55 p.m. on May 19, 2025, when Cervantes’ car was hit by a driver who failed to yield to the right of way at an intersection in downtown Sacramento. The state senator was transported to a nearby hospital for treatment where officers met and interviewed her for hours, according to the complaint.

The complaint alleges that “despite clear damage to the vehicles showing that the other driver, a young white woman, had t-boned Senator Cervantes’ vehicle” the responding officer “treated the at-fault driver with a deference and respect which was not accorded to Senator Cervantes.”

At the hospital, one of the officers requested that Cervantes submit to a “subjective sobriety test” that included measuring her eye’s response to stimuli, according to the complaint. Cervantes said she was troubled by this request given that she broke no traffic laws and was the victim of a dangerous driver.

In order to obtain a warrant to obtain a blood draw, the officer “falsely claimed that Senator Cervantes had an unsteady gait, slurred speech, and an appearance of drowsiness,” the complaint alleges.

After news of the crash became public, a spokesperson for the Sacramento Police Department told reporters that “based on the objective signs, officers believed that Cervantes was under the influence of a central nervous system depressant.” Redacted test results Cervantes chose to share with the media showed she had a near-zero blood alcohol level, and the district attorney declined to file charges later that month.

Her lawsuit accuses parties within the Police Department of falsely telling the media she was driving under the influence “with the intent to harm Senator Cervantes because of her sponsorship of SB Bill 274 and her status as a Latina member of the LGBTQ+ community.”

The bill sought to restrict law enforcement’s use of automatic license plate readers, following concerns that the technology was being used to violate driver’s privacy and that data was being unlawfully shared with agencies outside of the state.

Civil liberty groups such as the ACLU have demanded that California police stop sharing automatic license plate reader data with out-of-state agencies that could use it to prosecute women traveling to seek abortion care.

In June, an investigation by Calmatters found that law enforcement agencies across Southern California, including the Los Angeles Police Department, violated state law by sharing information from automated license plate readers with Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

Senate Bill 274 passed the state Senate and Assembly but was vetoed in October by Gov. Gavin Newsom, who sided with law enforcement agencies that expressed concerns over how the bill could hinder their ability to solve crimes.

The bill would have limited the lists agencies could use to monitor for certain cars, required enhanced data security and privacy training for officers and mandated that certain data be deleted after 60 days.

In a letter explaining his veto, Newsom wrote that the bill “failed to strike the delicate balance between protecting individual privacy and ensuring public safety.” He noted that, in instances such as cold cases, license plate data are needed to solve crimes beyond a 60-day window.

WASHINGTON — Pam Bondi is out of her job after failing to deliver criminal cases against President Trump’s political enemies.

But there’s no guarantee her successor will have any better success at placating the president.

Over the last year, Bondi’s Justice Department has encountered resistance from judges, grand jurors and its own workforce in trying to establish criminal conduct by one Trump foe after another. A new attorney general will confront not only Trump’s demand for political prosecutions — a constant dating back to his first term in the White House — but also the same skeptical court system, and factual and legal hurdles, that have impeded efforts to deliver the sought-after results.

“At the end of the day, it’s not like there were some magic steps that Pam Bondi could have taken to make bad cases look good to grand juries or judges,” Peter Keisler, a former acting attorney general in President George W. Bush’s administration, said in an email. “The problem is that the president is demanding that prosecutions be brought when there’s no evidence and no valid legal theory. A new Attorney General won’t change that.”

Bondi was just the latest Trump attorney general pressed to meet the president’s demands of loyalty and desire for retribution. Trump in his first term called for Jeff Sessions to investigate Democrat Hillary Clinton and ultimately pushed him out over his recusal from the Russia election interference investigation. He berated another attorney general, William Barr, over Barr’s refusal to back his false claims of election fraud in the 2020 contest. Barr resigned soon after.

Bondi arrived at the Justice Department 14 months ago seemingly determined to remain in Trump’s good graces unlike her predecessors had, heaping praise on him, offering unflinching support and embarking on investigations into Democrats and the president’s adversaries — even amid concerns from career prosecutors about the sufficiency of evidence.

Days after Trump implored Bondi via social media last September to prosecute former FBI Director James Comey and New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James, the Justice Department did just that, securing indictments in Virginia.

But the win was short-lived: a judge weeks later dismissed the cases after finding that the prosecutor who filed them, Lindsey Halligan, was illegally appointed. Grand juries have since refused to bring new mortgage fraud charges against James and the Comey case is mired in a thorny evidentiary dispute and statute of limitations concerns. Both Comey and James have vigorously denied any wrongdoing and called the cases against them politically motivated.

Since then, a federal grand jury in Washington refused to return an indictment against Democratic lawmakers in connection with a video in which they urged U.S. military members to resist “illegal orders.” And a federal judge has quashed Justice Department subpoenas issued to the Federal Reserve as part of an investigation into testimony last June by Chair Jerome Powell about a $2.5 billion building renovation.

The judge, James Boasberg, said that the government has “produced essentially zero evidence to suspect Chair Powell of a crime” and called its justifications for the subpoenas a “thin and unsubstantiated” pretext to force Powell to cut interest rates. A prosecutor on the case subsequently conceded in court that the investigation had not found evidence of a crime.

An additional investigation into a Trump enemy remains underway with prosecutors in Florida scrutinizing former CIA Director John Brennan over testimony to Congress related to Russian interference in the 2016 election. That investigation has been open for months, but has not produced charges and it’s not clear that it will. Brennan’s lawyers have similarly called the investigation baseless.

One high-profile Trump critic who could face trial in the years ahead is his former national security adviser, John Bolton, though the investigation that produced that indictment and examined Bolton’s handling of classified documents began before Trump took office.

For now, the Justice Department will be led by Deputy Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche, who has a longstanding relationship with Trump after having served as one of his personal lawyers. Several people familiar with the matter told the Associated Press on Thursday that Lee Zeldin, a Trump loyalist and head of the Environmental Protection Agency, has been privately mentioned by Trump as a possible pick.

Whoever holds the job in the long term will almost certainly be expected to carry out Trump’s retribution campaign with more success, said Jimmy Gurule, a former Justice Department official and law professor at Notre Dame. Blanche appeared to acknowledge as much in a Thursday evening interview with Fox News, saying “I think the president is frustrated, everybody is frustrated ” and that “what we saw happen for the past four years is unforgivable and can never happen again.”

“If she was fired because Trump did not think that she was moving quickly enough in bringing criminal cases against his political enemies, then you would expect that the person that would replace her would probably agree to escalate those efforts,” Gurule said.

Tucker writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Minnesota officials sued the Trump administration on Tuesday for access to evidence they say they need to independently investigate three shootings by federal officers, including the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti.

The lawsuit claims that the federal government reneged on its promise to cooperate with state investigations after the surge of federal law enforcement in Minneapolis, and are seeking a court order demanding that the Trump administration comply.

“We are prepared to fight for transparency and accountability that the federal government is desperate to avoid,” Hennepin County Atty. Mary Moriarty told reporters.

The lawsuit marks an escalation in the clash between Minnesota leaders and the Trump administration over the investigations into the high-profile shootings by federal officers that sparked public outcry and protests. The Trump administration has suggested that Minnesota officials don’t have jurisdiction to investigate, but state officials insist they need to conduct their own probes because they don’t trust the federal government to investigate itself.

“There has to be an investigation any time a federal agent or a state agent takes the life of a person in our community,” Moriarty said.

The administration sent thousands of officers to the Minneapolis and St. Paul area for the immigration crackdown as part of President Trump’s national deportation campaign. The Department of Homeland Security considered its largest immigration enforcement operation ever a success but was staunchly criticized by Minnesota’s leaders who raised questions over officers’ conduct.

There continues to be fallout from Operation Metro Surge in the form of a Homeland Security shutdown, as Democrats in Congress hold up funding in an effort to secure restraints on Trump’s immigration agenda.

Minnesota’s lawsuit said the federal government is not permitted to “withhold investigative evidence for the purpose of shielding law enforcement officers from scrutiny where a State is investigating serious potential violations of its criminal laws, targeting its citizens, within its borders.”

Moriarty said Tuesday that the federal government “has adopted a policy of categorically withholding evidence,” calling the practice unprecedented and alarming. She said the lawsuit followed formal demands for evidence after the federal government blocked Minnesota investigators from accessing evidence related to the shootings.

In addition to the Pretti and Good cases, the lawsuit demands access to evidence in the case of Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis, who was shot and wounded in his right thigh by a federal agent in January.

Federal officials initially accused Sosa-Celis and another man of beating an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer with a broom handle and a snow shovel. But federal prosecutors later dropped all charges against the men and authorities opened a criminal investigation into whether two immigration officers lied under oath about the shooting.

Emails seeking comment were sent to DHS and the Justice Department.

The Justice Department in January said it was opening a federal civil rights investigation into Pretti’s killing but has said a similar federal probe was not warranted in the killing of Good. The decision in Good’s case marked a sharp departure from past administrations, which moved quickly to investigate shootings of civilians by law enforcement officials for potential civil rights offenses.

Deputy Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche has said that the department’s Civil Rights Division does not investigate every law enforcement shooting and that there have to be circumstances and facts that “warrant an investigation.”

Moriarty has said a lack of confidence in the federal government’s review of these incidents makes the state’s independent investigations into the shootings, as well as officers’ actions during the immigration enforcement operation altogether, especially important. The county office received over 1,000 tips from the public on the shootings of Good and Pretti via an online portal they opened to collect evidence. Earlier this month, Moriarty initiated a second portal and said her office was investigating a number of incidents of potentially unlawful action by officers over the course of the immigration enforcement operation.

Fingerhut and Richer write for the Associated Press. Fingerhut reported from Des Moines, Iowa.

In the final hours of her life on January 29, 2024, Hind Rajab’s feeble voice could be heard desperately pleading with her mother and emergency workers for help, as she was trapped in a car surrounded by the bodies of six of her relatives.

After finally getting clearance from the Israeli military in Gaza City, a Red Crescent ambulance raced to save the five-year-old girl. But two paramedics were killed when their marked vehicle – whose sirens were blaring – came under Israeli tank fire. The remains of the nine victims were recovered 12 days later.

Two years after the tragedy, a report claims this was a “double tap” attack by the Israeli army. A double-tap strike essentially means carrying out two strikes on the same target, often wounding or killing medics and civilians who are coming to the aid of people harmed in the first attack.

Analysis by the legal campaign group Avaaz has found evidence that the killings contravened international combat law under the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute.

“By reconstructing the coordination and timing around the approved ambulance mission, it shows that there is substantial evidence of a deliberate ‘double-tap’ tactic – an initial military strike followed with a deliberately timed second strike targeting emergency responders and medical personnel who arrive to help,” Avaaz says in its report exclusively shared with Al Jazeera. “The brief brings together the timeline of events up to and beyond Hind’s death, showing what Israeli forces must have been aware of at each stage, and the frequent opportunities they had to pull back from murder.

“It documents over 40 human rights violations and ties together how those violations are evidence of a double-tap attack on the hospital workers. Each violation builds to an alarming possibility: Israel is not only killing Palestinians – it is systematically killing those who try to save them. The message is clear: If the medical community tries to help, it will be extinguished.”

More than 1,500 healthcare workers have been killed during Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, including several since a so-called “ceasefire” came into effect in October.

Avaaz, building on previous investigations by Al Jazeera in partnership with the Hind Rajab Foundation and other media organisations, claims there is clear evidence that this double strike constituted a war crime. The campaign group is now urging the International Criminal Court (ICC) to bring those responsible to justice.

At the time of publishing, the Israeli military had not responded to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

‘I am absolutely convinced that this is another case of double tap’

Al Jazeera, in partnership with the Hind Rajab Foundation, last year revealed evidence of deliberate killings.

The Israeli government initially claimed that none of its forces was present at the time, later asserting that the 335 bullet holes found in the family’s car were the result of an exchange of fire between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian fighters.

However, a subsequent investigation of satellite imagery and audio from that day by the multidisciplinary research group Forensic Architecture, based at Goldsmiths, the University of London, identified only the presence of several Israeli Merkava tanks in the vicinity of the family’s car and no evidence of any exchange of fire.

The Avaaz report highlights that the ambulance obtained permission from COGAT, an arm of the Israeli military, to go to Hind’s aid, so Israeli forces knew exactly when the first responders would arrive and the route they would take. About three hours passed between the initial shooting of the family vehicle and the attack on the ambulance, indicating the Israeli army had ample opportunity for “situational awareness, communication, and command decision-making”, the report adds.

Avaaz says the ambulance was attacked by a tank in a way that could not have been a warning shot if the military had any reason to believe it was not there to rescue Hind. Instead, the assault “points to lethal targeting”.

The Israeli army gave no warning before attacking the ambulance, previous investigations have found.

“I have taken the investigations done by a number of independent journalistic outfits. I was really struck by the evidence at the end of the whole horrendous incident,” said Sarah Andrew, legal director of Avaaz, who added that as a mother, Hind’s death made her think of her own daughter. “In particular, the kind of weaponry that was used on the ambulance, the timing and the fact that no warning was given – it immediately triggered a question in my mind, and I am absolutely convinced that this is another case of double tap.”

She told Al Jazeera: “It is something that has not had attention, and we would like to take this with [an independent legal] partner to the ICC.”

“What I have done is establish a legal framework for the previous investigation. I think it is very important that we also look at what happened to the ambulance workers as well as what happened to Hind and her family.”

The report says, “Even where an attacking force claims it suspects misuse of a medical vehicle, international humanitarian law requires warnings and an opportunity to comply before an attack can be lawful.”

Andrew said the Israeli military has yet to explain why a tank fired on an ambulance.

“We have not heard from the people responsible. I want them to appear before the ICC and hear what on earth was in their mind when they ordered 120mm tank rounds to be fired into an ambulance,” she said. “Justice is first of all bringing the light of attention into this crime and secondly seeing the persons responsible being accountable for their actions.”

Professor James Sweeney, from the University of Lancaster, who is an expert on human rights and conflict, said in double-tap attacks, the second strike is usually within five to 10 minutes.

It can also mean letting off a small explosion to induce rescuers to respond, then exploding another bomb once they are near.

“The [Avaaz] brief says that the attack on the ambulance should be considered a double tap, but usually the second attack would be within five to 20 minutes and would be considered a trick,” he told Al Jazeera. “It would seem that [in this case] the passage of time was greater, but that does not take anything away from the fact that the attack on the ambulance was so unlawful. You could see it as a form of double-tap, but it is not my normal understanding of it. But in any case, it does not take away from the fact that these were war crimes.”

The Hind Rajab Foundation said in a statement, “The double tap arguments are consistent with our analysis as well. We are continuously preparing for new filings against responsible soldiers in various jurisdictions.

“We have 24 names of responsible perpetrators. We are open to work together with Avaaz on a filing specifically regarding the attack on the ambulance.”

WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Friday quashed Justice Department subpoenas issued to the Federal Reserve in January, a severe blow to an investigation that has already attracted strong criticism on Capitol Hill.

Judge James Boasberg said that a “mountain of evidence suggests” that the purpose of the subpoenas was simply to pressure the Fed to cut its key interest rate, as President Trump has repeatedly demanded.

Fed Chair Jerome Powell revealed the investigation Jan. 11, prompting Senator Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican to block consideration of Trump’s pick to replace Powell as Fed chair when his term expires May. 15.

Rugaber writes for the Associated Press.