jury

WASHINGTON — Steve Bannon, a longtime ally of President Trump, on Monday won a Supreme Court order that is expected to lead to the dismissal of his criminal conviction for refusing to testify to Congress.

Prodded by the Trump administration, the justices threw out an appellate ruling upholding Bannon’s conviction for defying a subpoena from the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack by a mob of Trump supporters on the U.S. Capitol.

The move frees a trial judge to act on the Republican administration’s pending request to dismiss Bannon’s conviction and indictment “in the interests of justice.”

The dismissal would be largely symbolic. Bannon served a four-month prison term after a jury convicted him of contempt of Congress in 2022. A federal appeals court in Washington had upheld the conviction.

The justices also issued a similar order in the case of former Cincinnati Councilman P.G. Sittenfeld, who was pardoned by Trump last year.

Sittenfeld had served 16 months in federal prison after a jury convicted him of bribery and attempted extortion in 2022. The high court order allows a lower court to consider dismissing his indictment.

The Justice Department brought the case against Bannon during Democrat Joe Biden’s presidency, but it changed course after Trump took office again last year.

Bannon had initially argued that his testimony was protected by Trump’s claim of executive privilege. But the House panel and the Justice Department contended such a claim was dubious because Trump had fired Bannon from the White House in 2017 and Bannon was thus a private citizen when he was consulting with the then-president in the run-up to the Capitol riot.

Bannon separately has pleaded guilty in a New York state court to defrauding donors to a private effort to build a wall on the U.S. southern border, as part of a plea deal that allowed him to avoid jail time. That conviction is unaffected by the Supreme Court action.

Sherman writes for the Associated Press.

March 26 (UPI) — A California jury has found Meta and YouTube liable for negligently designing addictive social media platforms that harm children, in a landmark verdict that could have lasting implications for the tech industry.

The Wednesday verdict marks the first time technology companies have been found liable for creating addictive online products, amid increased scrutiny of the industry and a wave of litigation.

“This jury saw exactly what we presented from the very first day of trial: that these companies built digital spaces designed to negatively influence the brains of children, and they did it on purpose,” Mark Lanier, lead trial counsel and founder of The Lanier Law Firm, said in a statement.

“The evidence showed that Meta and YouTube knew their platforms were hooking children and harming their mental health, and instead of fixing the problem they kept developing features to maximize the time kids spent on their apps. Now a jury has told them that is not acceptable, and you are being held accountable.”

UPI has contacted Meta and YouTube for comment.

The verdict follows a seven-week trial centered on a now-20-year-old plaintiff known to the court by her initials K.G.M., who testified that her use of Instagram, owned by Meta, and YouTube, an Alphabet product, from a young age caused her to develop anxiety, depression, body dysmorphia and suicidal thoughts.

During the trial, she testified that the platforms’ addictive design features, including algorithm-generated recommendations, beauty features and push notifications caused her severe mental harm.

“[The plaintiff] put a human face on what these companies have known for years: that their platforms were engineered to hook young users, and that the children most vulnerable to trauma were the ones they were most effectively reaching,” Rachel Lanier, co-lead counsel and managing attorney of The Lanier Law Firm’s Los Angeles office, said in a statement.

In its verdict, the jury found Meta 70% responsible for the harm the plaintiff suffered and YouTube 30% responsible, and ordered the Mark Zuckerberg-owned tech behemoth and Google‘s video-sharing service to pay her a combined $6 million, half for compensatory damages and half for punitive damages.

Of the punitive damages, Meta is to pay $2.1 million and YouTube $900,000.

This was the first trial in a much larger consolidated case involving more than 1,600 plaintiffs seeking to hold social media companies responsible for the harm they suffered from using those products.

“This is a major victory for the public, for social media users and for child safety,” Libby Liu, CEO of nonprofit legal organization Whistleblower Aid, told UPI in an emailed statement.

“Each successful lawsuit paints a crystal clear picture showing that Meta is not above the law and can and should be held accountable.”

The verdict came down a day after a New Mexico jury found Meta liable for misleading consumers about the safety of its products, ordering the company to pay $375 million in civil penalties for violating the state’s consumer protection laws.

During the trial, state prosecutors showed that Meta’s design features enabled predators to engage in child sexual exploitation, while demonstrating that Meta intentionally designed its platforms to addict young people.

Following the verdict in Los Angeles County, New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez, a Democrat, celebrated it as “another critical step toward justice that puts Meta and other big tech executives on notice that they cannot evade responsibility for design choices that jeopardize child safety.”

“We will seek court-mandated changes to Meta’s platforms that offer protections for kids,” he said in a statement.

The rulings come as more attention is being paid to the effects social media has on youth, resulting with Australia in December banning those under the age of 16 from social media, while other countries are considering similar restrictions.

A Los Angeles jury has found Alphabet’s Google and Meta liable for $6 million in damages in a landmark social media addiction lawsuit. The case involved a 20-year-old woman who said she became addicted to the apps at a young age due to their platform design. Meta says it plans to appeal the decision.

A California jury found ⁠Alphabet’s Google and Meta liable for $3m in damages in a landmark social media addiction lawsuit that accused the companies of being legally responsible for the addictive design of their platforms.

The decision was handed down by a Los Angeles-based jury on Wednesday after more than 40 hours of deliberation across nine days, and more than a month after jurors heard opening statements in the trial.

Among those who testified in the case were Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram head Adam Mosseri, although YouTube chief executive Neal Mohan was not called to testify.

The plaintiff in the case, referred to as KGM or Kaley, was awarded $3m in damages. The 20-year-old said she became addicted to social media at a young age, which exacerbated her mental health issues. She began using YouTube at age six and Meta-owned Instagram at age nine.

Kaley’s legal team alleged that the social media giants used designed features intended to hook young users, including notifications and autoplay features.

“Today’s verdict is a historic moment — for Kaley and for the thousands of children and families who have been waiting for this day. She showed extraordinary courage in bringing this case and telling her story in open court. A jury of Kaley’s peers heard the evidence, heard what Meta and YouTube knew and when they knew it, and held them accountable for their conduct. Today’s verdict belongs to Kaley,” lawyers for the plaintiff said in a statement shared with Al Jazeera.

Jurors were instructed not to consider the content of the posts and videos Kaley saw on the platforms. That is because tech companies are shielded from legal responsibility for user-posted content under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act.

Meta consistently argued that Kaley had struggled with her mental health separate from her social media use, often pointing to her turbulent home life. Meta also said, “not one of her therapists identified social media as the cause” of her mental health issues in a statement following closing arguments. But the plaintiffs did not have to prove that social media caused Kaley’s struggles — only that it was a “substantial factor” in causing her harm.

YouTube focused less on Kaley’s medical records and mental health history and more on her use of the platform itself. The company argued that YouTube is not a form of social media, but rather a video platform, akin to television, and pointed to her declining use as she got older.

According to company data, she spent about one minute per day on average watching YouTube Shorts since its inception. YouTube Shorts, which launched in 2020, is the platform’s section for short-form, vertical videos that include the “infinite scroll” feature that the plaintiffs argued was addictive.

“We disagree with the verdict and plan to appeal. This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site,” Jose Castaneda, a spokesperson for Google, told Al Jazeera.

Meta did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

Snap and TikTok were previously named in the suit but settled with the plaintiff for undisclosed terms before the trial began.

Shifting momentum

The verdict is the latest in a wave of lawsuits targeting social media companies. There is a looming federal social media addiction case slated to begin in June in Oakland, California.

On Tuesday in New Mexico, a jury found that Meta violated state law by misleading users about the safety of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, and by enabling child sexual exploitation on those platforms.

This case has been closely watched by legal experts, who say the verdict will shape future litigation.

“The fact the jury found Meta and Google liable represents that these cases have real exposure to the social media giants, and are going to frame how future litigation will proceed. Although this case will certainly be appealed, I would not be surprised if Meta and Google are already making changes within their platform to reflect the real exposure, and hopefully, the states will start to enact laws regulating social media in a manner congruent with the ruling,” entertainment lawyer Tre Lovell told Al Jazeera.

Professor Eric Goldman, associate dean for research at the Santa Clara University School of Law, echoed Lovell’s assessment.

“The Los Angeles jury verdict is the first of three bellwether trials in Los Angeles, with more bellwether trials to follow in summer, in the federal case. As such, today’s verdict is just one datapoint about liability and damages. The other trials could reach divergent outcomes, so this jury verdict isn’t the final word on any matter.”

Despite the ruling, Meta’s stock has not taken a hit, as it came the same day CEO Mark Zuckerberg was appointed to a new White House advisory council. The stock is up 0.7 percent. Alphabet’s stock, however, is trending downward in midday trading on the heels of the verdict, down 1 percent.

Jury finds that two tweets posted in May 2022 by Musk contained false statements responsible for a plunge in Twitter’s share price.

A federal jury in California has found that tech tycoon Elon Musk misled Twitter shareholders, driving down the company’s share price as he was poised to buy it in a $44bn deal.

The verdict delivered on Friday in the class action securities lawsuit means the world’s richest person could be ordered to pay billions of dollars, according to damages calculated by jurors.

After a three-week trial in a San Francisco federal court – which included in-person testimony from Musk – the jury found that two tweets posted in May 2022 by the Tesla and SpaceX CEO contained false statements responsible for a plunge in Twitter’s share price.

Investor Giuseppe Pampena had filed the suit on behalf of people who sold Twitter shares between mid-May and early October 2022.

Jurors agreed that Musk violated a securities rule that bars false and misleading statements that sink a stock price, in this case that of Twitter, the verdict form showed. A lawyer for the plaintiffs estimated the damages at about $2.6bn.

But the nine-person jury absolved Musk of some fraud allegations, finding that he did not “scheme” to mislead investors.

Minutes after the judgement was announced, lawyers for Musk, who acquired the social media platform in late October 2022 and later renamed it X, said their client will appeal the decision, characterising it as a “setback”.

Musk, who has a near-constant presence on X, did not immediately react to the verdict, which marks a rare legal defeat for the billionaire often dubbed “Teflon Elon” for his ability to emerge unscathed from lawsuits he is expected to lose.

In 2023, a jury in the same San Francisco federal court cleared him within hours of similar charges brought by Tesla shareholders, following his 2018 tweets claiming he had the funding to take the automaker private.

Musk abandoned his effort to get out of buying Twitter in late 2022 after the company took him to court to uphold the contract. He has since merged the social media platform with his artificial intelligence startup xAI and his private space exploration firm SpaceX.

Forbes magazine earlier this month estimated Elon Musk’s net worth at $839bn, a figure based primarily on his stakes in his portfolio of companies including Tesla and SpaceX.

Despite the show’s approach to make their actors unrecognisable you might remember some from big series

A Prime Video series that was dubbed ‘best show ever’ is finally returning with a whole new cast and approach, although there are still some faces that you might recognise.

Jury Duty is returning with a second season and a new set up, with the first episodes available to stream from March 20. Part social experiment, part reality series and part sitcom, the show is unlike most of what you’ve seen before.

According to its synopsis, Jury Duty Presents: Company Retreat is a comedy series that captures a corporate offsite event at a family-owned hot sauce company from the perspective of Anthony, a recently hired temporary worker.

Unbeknownst to Anthony, the entire experience is staged. Every colleague around him is performing a role and each moment whether in conference rooms or during downtime has been meticulously orchestrated. As the founder prepares to step down, the getaway transforms into a clash between big corproate ambitions and small business values, with control of the company hanging in the balance.

While the premise of the show means that all the actors involved have to be unrecognisable to the one non-actor, there are actually a few faces you may have seen before. But who are they and what have they starred in that you may remember them from? Here’s all you need to know.

Jerry Hauck plays Doug, the CEO of Rockin Grandma’s Hot Sauce. He’s described as “a lovable papa bear with Big Dad Energy who cares deeply about the company he’s built and the people that work for it.” Hauck has had memorable small roles on huge shows including ER, Seinfeld, It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia and Paradise.

Alex Bonifer stars as Doug’s son and heir apparent to the business, Dougie Jr. He is “well-meaning but directionless” who is suddenly handed huge responsibilities. Eagle-eyed viewers will recognise Bonifer from Kevin Can F*** Himself where he played the role of Neil.

Amy, of customer relations is played by Emily Pendergast who has a lot of experience in comedy TV. She starred in multiple episodes of Veep and Netflix sitcom Leanne. Meanwhile the eventually nicknamed Other Anthony, who is he company’s Assistant Sourcing Manager, is played by Rob Lathan who previously appeared in Inside Amy Schumer and has served as a writer on other sketch shows.

Comedian Rachel Kaly plays remote worker and web designer Claire. While her character might be obsessed with the series Bones, she herself has appeared on animated comedy Digman! and High Maintenance.

Straight talking Helen, from accounting who has been at the business from the very beginning alongside Doug, is played by Stephanie Hodge. She is one of the most experienced cast members with past credits including NCIS, Young Sheldon and Scandal. She also had starring roles in the 90s on Nurses and Unhappily Ever After.

Jackie, who works in distribution and logistics when not taking charge of her kids at home, is played by LaNisa Renee Frederick. She’s previously appeared in smaller roles on Brooklyn Nine Nine, The Goldbergs and Mom.

Jim Woods, who was a writer on The Last O.G. starring Tracy Morgan, and starred on Reno 911!. takes on the role of warehouse manager Jimmy. He may have once been the non P.C. employee but he’s working maybe a bit too hard to be a better version of himself.

Erica Hernandez plays Kate from sales and marketing, who often gives the impression she should have a leadership role herself. Hernandez previously starred in the drama series True Lies, based on the 1994 Arnold Schwarzenegger film as well as New Amsterdam.

The other half of Team Skate (Steve & Kate), Steve is a “confident salesman that plays the calmer yin to Kate’s high-strung yang.” He is played by Warren Burke who has appeared in 13 episodes of Family Reunion and eight episodes of Bigger.

Snack obsessed receptionist PJ, is played by Marc-Sully Saint-Fleur who you may have seen before in Steve Carrell starring Netflix comedy Space Force or his brief appearances in Curb Your Enthusiasm and The Good Place. There’s also HR manager Kevin who is the one who seemingly hires Anthony to be his assistant.

He is played by Ryan Perez. Perez is actually a seasoned comedy actor, writer and director. He has written for Saturday Night Live and The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon while he has also directed Funny or Die shorts with Will Ferrell and Kevin Hart.

Ranch manager Marjorie who is looking after the company workers while on retreat is played by Blair Beeken. She most recently appeared in Apple’s hit sci-fi series Pluribus.

Jury Duty Presents Company Retreat is streaming on Prime Video.

For the latest showbiz, TV, movie and streaming news, go to the new ** Everything Gossip ** website