guilty

Mérida, October 16, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores have rejected a new indictment amid an ongoing prosecution by the US government.

I reject this document in its entirety,” Maduro told New York Judge Alvin Hellerstein in a hearing on Thursday. Similarly, Cilia Flores maintained her “absolute innocence” when asked to respond to the new charges, declaring: “I am completely innocent. I am not guilty.”

The judge entered formal not-guilty pleas on behalf of both defendants for all counts.

Maduro and Flores have been detained in Brooklyn’s Metropolitan Detention Center since being kidnapped by US special forces on January 3. 

In the Manhattan federal court, US Attorney Jamie McDonald presented the superseding indictment that introduces a “conspiracy to commit torture” charge alongside the previous charges of “narco-terrorism” and drug trafficking conspiracy, as well as weapons possession.

The accusation claims Maduro personally oversaw purported torture of prisoners and held authority over whether detainees were released or prosecuted.

“Maduro, Flores, and other high-ranking members of their inner circle used a violent system of torture and repression to maintain their power,” McDonald stated to reporters outside the courthouse.

According to the legal filing, the prosecution alleges that Maduro and Flores oversaw a violent state “apparatus of repression” spanning from the former’s election in 2013.

The document claims methods like electric shocks, asphyxiation, and simulated drowning, among others, were allegedly deployed against political dissidents, state officials suspected of disloyalty, and US citizens detained inside Venezuela.

Defense attorneys have repeatedly questioned the legitimacy of the entire prosecution, framing it as an unprecedented overreach of U.S. extraterritorial jurisdiction. Maduro and Flores have consistently maintained that they are political prisoners and that their capture constituted a flagrant violation of Venezuelan sovereignty.

Legal counsel has filed pre-trial motions requesting the dismissal of the charges on grounds that Maduro and Flores, as a sitting president and legislator, respectively, possess sovereign immunity from foreign criminal prosecution.

Hellerstein recently rejected a request from Flores’ defense team that she be moved to house arrest due to severe health concerns, arguing that the first lady poses a “substantial flight risk.”

The updated indictment forced the judge to adjust the calendar of proceedings. The hearing on sovereign immunity arguments has been moved to January. The trial was pushed back two weeks and is now slated to commence on June 14, 2027, with a final pretrial conference scheduled for June 8. 

In Venezuela, National Assembly Deputy Iris Varela blasted the new charges, arguing that Maduro and Flores remain victims of a forced kidnapping orchestrated by Washington.

“I wish to publicly express, once again, my absolute and total rejection of the despicable act that the U.S. government is brazenly carrying out against our president and our congresswoman,” Varela wrote on her X account.

She further described the latest charges as “a miserable ploy [and] a grotesque maneuver” and went on to label US President Donald Trump as a “pedophile pig.”

In contrast to Varela, the Venezuelan government has made no official statement regarding the latest developments in the legal case against Maduro and Flores.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

A man who fell from the upper tier of a stand during a football match and injured fans below has been found not guilty of assault.

Maidstone United supporter John Ryan fell on to Joanne Peters and her partner Aaron Rose at Ipswich Town’s Portman Road ground during an FA Cup clash in January 2024.

Ryan, 62, of Railway Street, Chatham, Kent, denied one count of assault by beating and one count of actual bodily harm and told Ipswich Crown Court he had been unable to stop himself during goal celebrations.

Ryan could be seen crying in the dock as the jury returned verdicts of not guilty to both charges and said afterwards “it’s been very stressful”.

Peters had been in tears when she told the court she initially thought the supporters’ box behind her had collapsed and she thought she “could have died”.

Ryan had been one of thousands of Maidstone United supporters who saw their non-league side win 2-1 over Ipswich, who were heading to promotion from the Championship that season.

He told the court the game had been “the biggest match in the club’s history” and he had been celebrating a “special” goal.

The jury was told he had been in Cobbold Stand upper tier when he fell, slid down the sloping roof that covers the boxes, and landed on the Ipswich supporters below.

Ryan told the jury he had been unsure if he had been pushed or his foot had slipped when he fell.

Manchester City‘s spending power unquestionably changed the world football transfer market – their willingness to pay higher fees and wages meant prices rose for everybody else too.

And once the world knows that a club has a wedge of cash burning a hole in its pocket courtesy of City, it can be difficult to spend it.

Asking prices may rise, and having an influx of money is no guarantee of it being well spent.

For many of the teams to whom City paid the most during this time, the money did not work out particularly beneficially.

Let’s take a look at some of the more interesting cases.

First up, Wolfsburg. They immediately signed winger Julian Draxler for about half the fee received for Kevin de Bruyne in 2016, as well as others including veteran defender Dante.

Having lost De Bruyne, they dropped from second to eighth in the Bundesliga before narrowly avoiding relegation in the subsequent two seasons.

And things did not go particularly well for second highest-ranked club Monaco either.

The most direct players they signed following the sales of Benjamin Mendy and Bernardo Silva in the same summer to Manchester City – Terence Kongolo and Keita Balde – did not work out in the long run, and the team went from winning Ligue 1 and reaching the Champions League semi-finals to almost being relegated within two years.

The club City purchased most players from in the 2009-18 period – Arsenal (four) – did not mount a serious Premier League title challenge during that time.

Some clubs who did not receive payments from City could also argue that the spending of money from their “inflated” accounts compromised their chances.

For example, Manchester City paid very similar totals to Benfica and Porto during the era, but nothing to Sporting, the club which makes up the big three in Portugal.

Sporting did not win a title between 2009 and 2018. There are many reasons for that, but could one of them be the fact that their direct rivals received money from City that would perhaps not have been on offer had they followed football’s financial rules?

The Spanish coach won 20 trophies during a glittering 10 years as City manager before departing in May.

Former Manchester ‌City manager Pep Guardiola has spoken out ⁠in support ⁠of the Premier League club after they were found guilty of serious ⁠breaches of financial rules.

The Spaniard handed over to former assistant Enzo Maresca at the end ⁠of last season after a decade in charge.

“I want every single @ManCity fan to know I am here; more than ever. I am, always have ‌been, always will, be behind my club, my owner, my chairman, Ferran, the players, staff, Enzo and you, our unique supporters,” Guardiola said on Wednesday ⁠in a first reaction on his ⁠X account.

“Let me be clear: we will get through this together. I love you all.”

City’s Chief Executive Ferran Soriano addressed staff in a video on Tuesday in which he rejected the independent commission’s findings.

Guardiola ⁠took charge of City in 2016 and under his management, ⁠they won six Premier League titles – ⁠including four in a row – three FA Cups, five League Cups and the Champions League.

The Premier League charges, relating ‌to “sham” commercial contracts used as part of schemes to inflate revenue and understate costs by more ‌than 900 ‌million pounds ($1.2bn) over nearly a decade, cover the period from 2009-18.

In doing so, they concealed the true state of their finances and avoided breaching Premier League and UEFA spending limits during a period in which they won three league titles.

An independent commission found the club guilty on all charges related to breaches of financial rules over the nine-year period.

They have also been found guilty of most of the charges they faced in relation to a failure to cooperate with a Premier League investigation.

City, who continue to deny any wrongdoing, have said they will appeal and have until Friday to do so.

The ruling has sent shockwaves through English football and cast doubt over the future of a club that has become a European giant.

The likely punishment is uncertain but according to Premier League rules, City could face a substantial points deduction, a fine or even expulsion from the top division.

Everton and Nottingham Forest were handed points deductions in the 2023/24 season for single breaches of financial sustainability rules.

On that basis, City would likely face relegation given the sheer weight of the case against them.

There is speculation they could even be stripped of their titles.

“If the appeal fails, Manchester City cannot stay in the league, they have to suffer. And I say that as a supporter and a fan,” said the club’s former chairman, David Bernstein.

Another factor is a potential flood of compensation claims that could cost the club hundreds of millions.

Former Liverpool managing director Christian Purslow told the BBC that clubs would be “queueing up to seek compensation”.

The Fraud Act 2006 states that dishonestly making a false representation with the intention of making a gain or avoiding a loss can lead to individuals being imprisoned for 10 years and facing an unlimited fine, if charges are brought and proven.

“Surely the Man City findings are now a police matter,” said Lord Cruddas, a banker and businessman.

“If accounts have been falsified and auditors have been misled then it is potentially a criminal matter. The auditors will call in the police, directors are personally liable for any fraud of a UK company even if it is foreign-owned.”

For the case to move from football wrongdoing to something more, there would first need to be an investigation by the relevant authorities.

The bodies who can investigate potential financial crimes in the UK include regional police forces, the National Crime Agency, HMRC and the Serious Fraud Office.

BBC Sport has contacted each of those bodies and been given no indication that any kind of investigation has begun, but some do not routinely confirm investigations owing to confidentiality.

But former Manchester City chairman David Bernstein – who left the club five years before its current owners took control – raised the possibility during an interview on BBC Radio 5 Live.

“This is very serious and I wonder whether some of these issues might need to be referred to authorities outside of the league,” Bernstein said.

“My immediate thoughts are – can the board of directors continue and should the people involved be suspended immediately?”

Football finance expert Kieran Maguire feels wider investigation may be unlikely.

“HMRC might consider it but there is not a lot for them to go on,” he said. “There is certainly no corporation tax to recover. Football clubs lose money and City would have lost more money had it not been for the activities it undertook.”

Manchester City say they are ‘disappointed and surprised’ by the verdict and will appeal.

Manchester City have been found guilty of ⁠all charges ⁠of serious breaches of the Premier League’s financial rules between the 2009/10 and 2017/18 seasons, the league has said in ⁠a statement.

City were charged in February 2023 with breaches of the league’s financial rules spanning nine seasons following ⁠a four-year investigation.

The club said in a statement it would appeal.

An independent commission found that City “arranged ‘sham’ contracts (which ‌misrepresented the true agreement between the parties) with a number of its commercial partners”, the league said on Tuesday.

The league added that the commission had found City used schemes “to artificially inflate the club’s revenues, and reduce its costs, by more than 900 million pounds during the affected period, to appear to comply with financial rules”.

“The ⁠core decision … details how the club systematically ⁠broke Premier League Rules for nearly a decade,” said Richard Masters, the chief executive of the Premier League.

“There are elements of the case that remain to be ⁠decided, including, importantly, what sanction must follow for these breaches.”

City, who deny any wrongdoing, said ⁠they were “disappointed and surprised” by the ⁠commission’s opinion.

“The club is innocent of the accusations made by the Premier League and a comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence exists in support of all of its ‌positions, relating to this case,” the club said.

“Manchester City FC will now pursue the appeal avenues open to it, on the ‌basis ‌that the opinion contains clear material errors, of law, principle and fact, and is unsafe.”

The Premier League has confirmed that Manchester City have been found guilty of all charges related to breaches of Premier League financial rules between 2009-10 and 2017-18.

An independent Commission found that during that time period, the club arranged “sham contracts” with a number of its commercial partners, as well as “relying on sham agreements to artificially inflate the club’s revenues and reduce its costs”.

The statement also said that City were guilty of the majority of charges in relation to its failure to co-operate, but an exact figure was not given.

More to follow.

Spain’s Swiftair was fined 225,000 euros ($256,000) in France for corporate manslaughter over the 2014 Air Algerie disaster in Mali.

A Paris court has found Swiftair guilty of corporate manslaughter over the 2014 Air Algerie crash that killed 116 people in northern Mali.

On Monday, a French judge ordered the Spanish airline to pay the maximum fine in France of 225,000 euros ($256,000) for corporate manslaughter after a three-week trial earlier this year.

Air Algerie Flight AH5017 was flying from Ouagadougou, the capital of Burkina Faso, to Algiers, Algeria when it crashed less than an hour after takeoff in July 2014, killing everyone on board.

The Swiftair-owned McDonnell Douglas MD-83 was operated by the Spanish airline on behalf of the Algerian carrier.

Investigators said the aircraft went into a stall when it was hit ‌by ⁠ice as an anti-icing system remained switched off.

On Monday, the court ⁠said “negligence” in Swiftair’s training with icy conditions had played a role.

The captain had failed to complete an adequate proficiency check, while the crew lacked the required refresher flights following a period of inactivity.

“This ruling comes as a relief to families who have been fighting for more than 12 years for justice to be done,” said Sebastien Busy, a lawyer representing a group of relatives.

The airline has 10 days to appeal the ruling.

Swiftair attempted to have the trial dropped on the grounds that a Spanish court previously dismissed the case without any charges.

In a statement to AFP, Swiftair reiterated that the trial should not have gone ahead and that safety regulations had been followed.

The ruling marks the second time an airline has been found guilty of corporate manslaughter in France after Air France and Airbus were both ⁠found guilty earlier this year over the 2009 crash of a jetliner flying from Rio de Janeiro to Paris. The crash killed all 228 people on board, marking the worst aviation disaster in French history.

Sri Lanka’s High Court has convicted 15 men who had been charged with plotting the 2019 Easter Sunday bomb attacks that killed 270 people and injured more than 500.

Those found guilty include Naufer Moulavi, who prosecutors said masterminded the suicide bombings. Nine other men were acquitted.

The co-ordinated blasts at three churches and three luxury hotels were the deadliest in Sri Lanka since the end of its civil war in 2009. Forty-five foreigners were among the dead.

All the bombers who carried out the attacks died in the blasts. Investigators have previously blamed the bombings on Islamist extremists, and the 25 men indicted were from Sri Lanka’s Muslim minority. One died in custody.

The accused had been charged with more than 23,000 offences, including murder, conspiracy to commit terrorism and possessing firearms.

More than 2,300 people gave evidence for the prosecution.

There were also 2,076 pieces of evidence, including explosives, swords and firearms.

In the wake of the attacks, Sri Lankan authorities pointed to a “major intelligence lapse”. Its parliament heard that a tip-off from India about the attacks was not properly shared with the authorities.

In 2023, the Supreme Court ordered former president Maithripala Sirisena to pay millions in compensation to the victims of the bombings, after finding him responsible for national security failures that led to the attacks.

Last month, two former senior officials were sentenced to death for criminal negligence that led to the bombings. Death sentences are usually commuted to life in prison in Sri Lanka due to a decades-old moratorium on executions.

For years, Sri Lankans have held regular demonstrations demanding justice for the victims of the Easter attacks.

The verdict comes as a separate investigation on former intelligence chief Suresh Sallay is under way. Sallay is accused of orchestrating the bombings with Islamist extremists.

The allegations echo those aired in a 2023 documentary by British broadcaster Channel 4, which heard whistleblower testimony claiming the attacks were allowed to happen to boost the popularity of the Rajapaksa family, which long dominated Sri Lankan politics.

Sallay, who was arrested in February, denies the allegations. Former president Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who was elected months after the 2019 attacks, with a campaign of tackling Islamist extremism has also denied the allegations.

Rajapaksa, who has been banned from leaving the country, has asked the court to prevent his potential arrest in connection with the ongoing investigations.