legal

CELEBRITY psychic Sally Morgan has threatened a rival with legal action — for using the stage name Psychic Sal.

The TV medium’s lawyers have warned Sally Cudmore to stop using the title or face court action.

They claim Sally, 74, dubbed Britain’s best-loved psychic, has trademarked Psychic Sally, Psychic Sal and Sally Psychic.

But mum-of-three Sally, 54, told The Sun last night: “To be honest, I didn’t see this coming.

“My name is Sally. It has been since birth. I didn’t borrow it, steal it, trademark it, or contact Sally Morgan for permission.”

She said her family had been doing readings for four generations and jokingly blamed her mum for her name, saying if she had foreseen it “perhaps she would have chosen Janet”.

READ MORE ON SALLY MORGAN

making a splash

Celebrity psychic Sally Morgan, 71, wows as she strips to black swimsuit

in spirit

Psychic Sally Morgan ‘visited by ghost of late husband John through her ALEXA’

Sally, from Eltham, South London, has appeared on Loose Women and This Morning.

She calls herself Psychic Medium Sally Cudmore and uses the handle @psychicsal100 on TikTok.

She said: “How can anyone confuse me with Sally Morgan?

“She is years older than me and looks nothing like me.”

Sally Morgan’s lawyers want her to stop using names such as Psychic Sally, Psychic Sal or similar and make a public statement over the confusion.

And her spokeswoman said: “She is acting in the best interest of her loyal followers to prevent further confusion caused by Sally Cudmore. She is protecting her professional name.”

Kateryna Golizdra has been dealing with uncertainty about her legal status in the United States for six months. She hopes to endure another six months as she waits for the Trump administration to make decisions regarding a humanitarian program that allowed around 260,000 Ukrainians, displaced by the war, to live and work in the U. S. When her legal status expired in May, Golizdra became at risk of deportation, lost her job as a manager at the Ritz-Carlton that paid over $50,000, and lost her health insurance for a liver condition. She can no longer send financial support to her mother who lives in Germany.

As of March 31, nearly 200,000 Ukrainians faced similar risks due to processing delays in renewing their legal status caused by the Trump administration. The humanitarian program, which started in April 2022, was meant to offer short-term refuge to Ukrainians but is only a small part of the larger refugee crisis, with 5.9 million Ukrainian refugees globally. Golizdra is left unsure of when, or if, her legal status will be renewed, which creates a sense of ongoing anxiety about her future.

During interviews with various Ukrainian individuals affected by the temporary loss of their work permits, many shared stories of struggling financially. They reported dipping into their savings, seeking community assistance, and going into debt while they wait for updates. Some are afraid of being arrested by immigration authorities, prompting them to stay indoors or even leave the U. S. for safer locations in Canada, Europe, or South America. Returning to Ukraine is not an option for Golizdra, as her home was destroyed during the conflict.

The Trump administration halted processing applications for the humanitarian program in January, citing security concerns stemming from a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. While the program was not completely canceled, and a federal judge ordered officials to resume processing, only a tiny fraction of renewal applications have been processed since then. Additionally, a new spending package increased fees for humanitarian applications, adding to the burdens faced by these displaced individuals.

U. S. Representative Mike Quigley noted that his office has received numerous requests for help from Ukrainians in similar situations, with fears of deportation looming large for those whose applications are incomplete. Anne Smith, from the Ukraine Immigration Task Force, reported an uptick in calls from families worrying about detained relatives. This has led to chaotic interactions, with some being arrested while working or out in public.

Some Ukrainians have decided to leave the U. S. to avoid the risk of detention. Yevhenii Padafa, a software engineer, sought to renew his status but faced delays that left him without legal standing. Worrying about future complications, he tried to “self deport” using a government app that promised assistance for those voluntarily leaving the country. However, he encountered obstacles that made it difficult to relocate to a safer country. Instead, he ended up traveling to Argentina, which offers a humanitarian program, despite feeling financially strained upon arrival. He expressed the grim reality of preferring to be homeless in a foreign country rather than return to Ukraine, which is fraught with danger.

With information from Reuters

Slovenia is voting on whether to legalise assisted dying for some terminally ill adults after other European countries have made the change.

The parliament of the small European Union nation passed a euthanasia bill in July, but a citizens initiative, led by right-wing politician Ales Primc, forced the referendum on Sunday.

The law will be rejected if at least 20 percent of participating voters oppose the bill. Slovenia has an electorate of 1.69 million people.

Supporters of the bill said it will alleviate unnecessary pain. Those against said society should care for the sick, not help them die.

Several European countries – including Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands and Switzerland – already allow terminally ill people to receive medical help to end their lives.

What are the Slovenes proposing?

Under the disputed law, which was set to take effect this year, lucid but terminally ill patients would have had the right to die if their suffering had become unbearable and all other treatment options had been exhausted.

The legislation is similar to the assisted dying bill passed by the United Kingdom Parliament in June. Britain’s bill allows assisted suicide for terminally ill adults with less than six months to live, the approvals of two doctors, judicial oversight and self-administration of the medication.

Slovenia’s law would require the approval of two doctors but also cooling-off periods and self-administration of the medication.

About 54 percent of citizens back the legalisation of assisted dying, almost 31 percent oppose it and 15 percent are undecided, according to a poll published this week by the Dnevnik daily based on 700 responses. In June 2024, 55 percent backed the law.

What are supporters saying?

Prime Minister Robert Golob urged citizens to back the law “so that each of us can decide for ourselves how and with what dignity we will end our lives”.

Marijan Janzekovic, an 86-year-old who lives in the town of Sveti Tomaz near the capital, Ljubljana, also supports the bill.

His wife, Alenka Curin-Janzekovic, was in pain from diabetes-related illnesses before she ended her life at a suicide clinic in Switzerland in 2023.

“She was in a wheelchair … and in pain so bad my heart hurt just by watching her,” he told the Reuters news agency.

What do opponents think?

The main political group opposing the law, called Voice for the Children and the Family, has accused the government of using the law to “poison” ill and elderly people.

Opponents said the law is inhumane and violates Slovenia’s Constitution, which declares human life inviolable.

Elsewhere, Slovenian Catholic Archbishop Stanislav Zore said the state should focus on palliative care instead.

“Let’s care for the sick and dying but not offer them suicide,” he said. The Catholic Church is opposed to euthanasia.

What other countries practise assisted dying?

Assisted dying is already permitted in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, several states in the United States, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Austria, Germany, Portugal, Spain and Switzerland.

In Australia, New Zealand, Canada and several US states, assisted dying laws are generally framed around medical aid. These jurisdictions typically require that patients be terminally ill, mentally competent and assessed by two independent doctors.

In many of these countries, the patient must self-administer lethal medication rather than have a doctor provide it directly. These regimes prioritise patient autonomy and strict procedural safeguards, such as waiting periods.

In the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Spain and Portugal, the approach to assisted dying is permissive. Active euthanasia or doctor-administered treatment is legal under defined conditions of unbearable suffering, even if the patient is not terminally ill.

In Germany, Austria and Switzerland, only assisted suicide is legally tolerated as opposed to active euthanasia. Switzerland is an outlier insofar as there is no dedicated regulatory regime for euthanasia, meaning nonresidents may access the service via organisations.

Which other countries are currently debating assisted dying laws?

In May, France’s National Assembly approved a “right-to-die” bill. The legislation would allow adults over 18 who are citizens or residents and suffer from incurable illnesses and “intolerable” physical or psychological suffering to request lethal medication.

Under the bill, a medical team must assess the patient’s condition before a mandatory reflection period before the prescription of a lethal substance. If the patient is physically unable to self-administer, a doctor or nurse may assist.

The proposal excludes people with severe psychiatric conditions or neurodegenerative disorders like advanced Alzheimer’s disease. The bill now has to go to the Senate and must return to the National Assembly for a second reading before it could become law.

Elsewhere, Britain’s lower house voted to legalise assisted dying in June. The House of Commons narrowly voted in favour of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, marking a major step towards legalising assisted dying in England and Wales.

The bill would allow mentally competent adults with a prognosis of less than six months to live to request medical help to end their lives, subject to assessments by two doctors and a panel including a psychiatrist, a lawyer and a social worker.

The legislation is not yet law. It must still get through the House of Lords, where it will be further scrutinised and may be amended. If it does become law, the timeline for implementation may not be until 2029.

SAN FRANCISCO — In a remarkable rise, a San Francisco real estate broker left a checkered past in Hawaii and established herself as an important Democratic fund-raiser with access to some of the country’s most powerful politicians.

Just 18 months after she finished federal probation for income tax evasion, Chong Lo joined a small group of contributors at the White House for a coffee with the president and vice president in 1995.

A month later, President Clinton praised her during a fund-raising luncheon at a Nob Hill hotel. At that moment, the U.S. attorney’s office was preparing to prosecute her for mortgage fraud and the state was on the verge of revoking her broker’s license.

To cap her political ascent, she was elected a delegate to the 1996 Democratic National Convention, although she was not a registered Democrat and had never voted.

Before she was arrested last July on 14 counts of bank fraud, mail fraud and conspiracy, Lo boasted to friends that she had met with Clinton 30 times and visited the White House on seven occasions. Sources said the walls of her office and home were lined with photos of her with the president, vice president and first lady, as well as Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), California’s U.S. senators, San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown and Republican Gov. Pete Wilson.

Now Lo is a political pariah, and her fund-raising activities have become part of a widening national probe of improper campaign practices and illegal contributions. The FBI is investigating whether any of the campaign money she and others raised through a Bay Area nonprofit group called the Lotus Fund may have come from foreign sources.

With her trial on the mortgage fraud charges scheduled this fall, Lo and her attorney, Tony Serra, refused to discuss her case with reporters. She has pleaded not guilty, and Serra has complained publicly that she had been jailed without bail for two months for unspecified political reasons.

Her story has become a paradigm of modern American politics–of how aggressive fund-raising is rewarded with access to power and encouraged by campaign operatives who appear more interested in collecting contributions than questioning the source. To the Democrats, the emerging political involvement of the Asian community offered a new source of money and votes.

Lo portrayed herself as a community leader and a fund-raiser on a grand scale. Documents show that she and the Lotus Fund pledged to raise more than $500,000 for the Democratic National Committee, but it was unclear how much was collected. She personally contributed $24,000 to various candidates and the DNC, but much of that is being returned because it has been tainted by the fund-raising scandal.

If party officials had dug into Lo’s past, they might have discovered that she once was known as Ester Chung Shung Lo Chu and left Hawaii under a cloud. Records also show that she used at least two Social Security numbers.

The party “did not have a policy of checking everyone out,” said a Democratic official who spoke on condition of anonymity. “There was an attempt to bring in the Asian community, to get that segment of the population active. So they were more inclined not to check.”

Said one of Lo’s political allies: “Nobody knew who she was, but they took her money.”

‘A Tremendous Charmer’

Chong Shung Lo is a locomotive of a woman with a penchant for fine jewelry and clothes. Small of stature, she talks fast, walks fast and eats fast, according to those who know her. Working 16- to 18-hour days, this divorced mother of two kept up a frenetic pace as real estate broker and property manager, traveling the city in her champagne-colored Mercedes. At one point, her home was in elegant St. Francis Wood.

Friends describe her as a charming, if impulsive, woman who speaks her mind. “In life,” she has said, “you have to take risks. I am willing to take risks.”

She was born in the Sichuan province of China, most likely in 1942, although documents show various birth dates. Raised in Shanghai, she has told friends she came from a distinguished family that once included Confucian scholars, an ambassador to Germany and a Qing Dynasty official.

As a youngster, she lived in Hong Kong, Australia and Canada before becoming a naturalized U.S. citizen, sources said. In 1970, as Ester Chu, she was licensed as a nurse in Hawaii but moved into real estate. Her Ester Chu Realty Inc. had offices in Honolulu and Hong Kong, documents show.

“She was a tremendous charmer,” said Robert Taylor, a Honolulu businessman who worked in her office part time and parted company with her over a property dispute. “A great salesperson. It’s just that she misled some people.”

Her troubles centered on her role as managing partner in two condominium projects in Honolulu and on the Big Island of Hawaii. By 1984, the local real estate market had turned sour and both partnerships were in bankruptcy.

That year the Hawaiian Real Estate Commission filed a complaint against her and Ester Chu Realty for allegedly making misrepresentations to clients, exaggerating sales figures on faltering projects, failing to return renters’ security deposits and putting clients’ money in her personal account.

During the three years it took the commission to revoke her license, Chu explored business opportunities in China. In 1985, she told acquaintances, she developed a hotel in a joint venture with the Chinese government.

The Internal Revenue Service began investigating her. In 1988, the government charged her with reporting a $39,750 income loss in 1981 when she had actually made more than $290,000.

After moving to Las Vegas, she pleaded guilty to one count of tax evasion, was sentenced to five years’ probation, fined $5,000 and barred from working in real estate without her probation officer’s permission. It is unclear whether such permission was granted.

Lawsuits and an FBI Probe

As Chong Lo, she established herself as a real estate broker in California. But she fell into trouble again.

A tenant of a San Francisco apartment Lo managed charged in a lawsuit that she demanded he vacate the premises. When he refused, the lawsuit said, a man later threatened to kill him and threw a padlock, breaking two of the tenant’s teeth. The case was settled for an undisclosed amount, according to the plaintiff’s attorney. Lo’s attorney confirmed the settlement but declined to comment further.

In another suit, charging Lo and others with misrepresentation and breach of contract, a couple from Pacifica, Calif., said they lost their home because of a complicated loan deal that required them to deed the house to an associate of Lo. In a response, Lo said she had little to do with the transaction. The lawsuit, filed in 1990, remains unresolved.

By 1991, the FBI was investigating allegations that Lo, as chief financial officer for Able-Tao Financial Inc., was involved in an elaborate mortgage fraud scheme. The scheme allegedly included falsifying pay stubs and W-2 forms of borrowers who would not otherwise qualify for loans. To verify nonexistent jobs or salaries, banks were allegedly given the number of a phone in the same building as the Able-Tao offices, according to records and interviews.

That October, FBI agents, armed with a search warrant, raided Lo’s office, removing boxes of loan files and other papers.

While the investigation went on, Chong Lo plunged into the world of politics.

‘She Knew Everybody in Town’

Lo has told acquaintances that she was nonpartisan but admired Clinton because he successfully overcame his humble beginnings. She saw the president for the first time at his January 1993 inauguration, she told them.

Meanwhile, Lo joined the Lotus Fund, which was formed the previous year to unite Asian American and Pacific Islander communities behind candidates and issues.

It included such prominent people as Ginger Lew, who was named deputy administrator of the Small Business Administration under Clinton, and Michael J. Yamaguchi, who was appointed U.S. attorney in San Francisco by Clinton. It was Yamaguchi who would sign the bank fraud indictment of Lo last June but later would recuse himself.

While Lo worked her way up to the chairmanship of the Lotus Fund, she made political contributions, including $1,750 to state Treasurer Kathleen Brown’s bid to unseat Gov. Wilson in 1994. Lo contributed $400 to Wilson as well. But records show that most of her donations went to Democrats–$500 to U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, $1,350 to Sen. Barbara Boxer and $9,500 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

“She definitely was able to get her foot in the door. She knew everybody in town,” said Bill Ong Hing, visiting law professor at UC Davis, who has known Lo for five years and whose sister, Grace, is a Lotus Fund founder.

Hing, who attended a fund-raiser featuring Vice President Al Gore last year at Lo’s invitation, said she relished her connections. “She fell into the category of Asians who liked to say that they had contact with important people, and the way for her to have greater contact was to give more money,” he said. “I felt badly for her that people dropped her.”

One DNC document said Lo made a commitment to raise $150,000 for the party in 1995 alone.

On the invitation to a September 1995 luncheon at the Fairmont Hotel in San Francisco honoring Clinton and Gore, she is listed as a member of “The National Finance Board of Directors”–an honorific title indicating that she had pledged to raise at least $50,000 for the event, according to a Democratic source.

Clinton publicly thanked Lo, along with Feinstein’s husband, financier Richard Blum; winemaker Ernest Gallo, developer Walter Shorenstein, and Esprit clothing founder Susie Tompkins.

Lo had clearance for at least six White House visits, Washington sources confirm. These included the coffee with Clinton and Gore, as well as several dinners and receptions.

Back home, her legal problems mounted and she emerged as a ubiquitous presence in Bay Area Democratic circles.

The state Department of Real Estate revoked her broker’s license in 1995 for failing to keep adequate records and placing client funds in a non-trust account. A month later, she was granted a restricted license, but officials recently began reviewing it to find whether she failed to disclose her prior felony conviction.

When DNC staff and volunteers needed places to stay, she put them up in her home and an apartment above her business office, which also doubled as Lotus Fund headquarters. Sources said she also supplied visiting Democrats with fresh towels and sheets and use of a friend’s car.

At a party caucus in February 1996, Lo organized supporters to help elect her as a delegate to the Democratic National Convention from the 12th Congressional District. However, records show that she was registered outside the district as a member of the American Independent Party, making her ineligible to be a Democratic delegate.

Former Assemblywoman Jackie Speier (D-Burlingame), who chaired the session, remembered meeting Lo. “I recall the woman specifically because she made a point of showing me a picture of herself taken with President Clinton to establish her credentials.”

There was no attempt to check the party affiliations of those who attended or ran as delegates. “You just take everyone at their word,” Speier said.

Fund Vowed to Raise $400,000 for DNC

Lo soon began organizing an event that propelled her into the public spotlight months before the Washington fund-raising scandal erupted. The nonprofit Lotus Fund, which could legally make political contributions under its state charter, promised to raise at least $400,000 for the DNC.

The group promised that those contributing $12,500 or more to its event would fly to Washington a few days later to meet and be photographed with Clinton.

A May 30, 1996, letter from the DNC’s Northern California finance director, Michael Marubio, appears to confirm that the White House visit was in the works.

However, the Lotus Fund learned that Clinton would appear July 23 at an official DNC fund-raiser in San Francisco. So the group decided to hold its own event that evening at the same hotel, making it convenient for the president to stop by.

There is disagreement among DNC officials about whether the White House committed itself to a Clinton appearance at the Lotus Fund event.

But any possibility of a presidential visit apparently was dashed two weeks before the event when the San Francisco Chronicle reported that a Lotus Fund vice president was facing illegal weapons possession charges.

A few days after the news report, DNC fund-raiser Mark Thomann told Lo and other Lotus Fund leaders that the president would not be appearing at their event. To placate them, he provided 100 free tickets to the party event and said a small group of them could be photographed with Clinton.

The Lotus Fund planned to carry on with its own fund-raiser until Lo was arrested on suspicion of mortgage fraud July 19 and kept in jail until September as a flight risk.

Meanwhile, the San Francisco office of the FBI examined whether the Lotus Fund had committed mail fraud by falsely promising contributors an appearance by the president, FBI spokesman George Grotz said.

However, investigators found that the group’s leaders had good reason to believe Clinton would attend. One important piece of evidence, sources said, was a secretly recorded tape of Thomann apologizing to the group. The mail fraud probe then was dropped.

An FBI task force has continued to look into the origins of political campaign contributions raised by Lo and the Lotus Fund, sources said, to determine whether they were properly reported and whether any came from foreign interests.

Days after Lo’s arrest, the San Francisco Examiner reported that Chong Lo appeared to be Ester Chu, a former Hawaii resident with a tax evasion conviction.

By matching fingerprints and photos, federal authorities now have established that Chu and Lo are the same person, sources said.

Lo has told acquaintances that she never tried to hide her identity: that Chu was her married name, dropped after her divorce, and that among Chinese friends she has always been known as Chong (or Chung) Lo.

Some say she was guarded about her past. Richard Mar, a mortgage loan representative who knew Ester Chu in Hawaii, said he ran into her again in San Francisco several years later. “She told me not to mention Ester, ‘because my name is Chong Lo and I don’t want people to know. . . .’ ”

Lo, who was freed on $100,000 bond, has told acquaintances that she feels bitterness toward the DNC but remains an admirer of Clinton.

She could not attend the national convention in August because she was in jail. But Lo requested court permission to leave the state to attend the Clinton inauguration in January.

A copy of her invitation and a detailed itinerary were submitted–and permission was granted. Lo told acquaintances she got a good seat for the swearing-in and attended an inaugural ball.

Times staff writer Dan Morain and researcher Janet Lundblad contributed to this story.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Delegate Was No Democrat

Chong Lo, a San Francisco real estate broker with a history of legal problems, was elected a delegate to the Democratic National Convention at a party caucus last year. However, records show that she was not a registered Democrat, as party rules require, and had never voted. This document certifies her election as a Bill Clinton delegate, but she could not attend the convention because she was in jail.

As California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta ponders a run for governor, he faces scrutiny for his ties to people central to a federal corruption investigation in Oakland and payments to private attorneys.

Bonta has not been accused of impropriety, but the questions come at an inopportune time for Democrat, who says he is reassessing a gubernatorial bid after repeatedly dismissing a run earlier this year.

Bonta said the decisions by former Vice President Kamala Harris and Sen. Alex Padilla not to seek the office altered the contours of the race.

“I had two horses in the governor’s race already,” Bonta said in an interview with The Times on Friday. “They decided not to get involved in the end. … The race is fundamentally different today, right?”

Bonta said he has received significant encouragement to join the crowded gubernatorial field and that he expects to make a decision “definitely sooner rather than later.” Political advisors to the 54-year-old Alameda politician have been reaching out to powerful Democrats across the state to gauge his possible support.

Historically, serving as California attorney general has been a launching pad to higher office or a top post in Washington. Harris, elected to two terms as the state attorney general, was later elected to the U.S. Senate and then as vice president. Jerry Brown served in the post before voters elected him for a second go-around as governor in 2010. Earl Warren later became the chief justice of the Supreme Court.

Bonta, the first Filipino American to serve as the state’s top law enforcement official, was appointed in March 2021 by Gov. Gavin Newsom after Xavier Becerra resigned to become U.S. Health and Human Services secretary. Bonta easily won election as attorney general in 2022.

Bonta was a deputy city attorney in San Francisco and vice mayor for the city of Alameda before being elected to the state Assembly in 2012. During his tenure representing the Alameda area, Bonta developed a reputation as a progressive willing to push policies to strengthen tenants’ rights and to reform the criminal justice system.

In his role as the state’s top law enforcement official, Bonta has aggressively fought President Trump’s policies and actions, filing 46 lawsuits against the administration.

Bonta also faced controversy this past week in what Bonta’s advisers say they suspect is an attempt to damage him as he considers a potential run.

“Political hacks understand it’s actually a badge of respect, almost an endorsement. Clearly others fear him,” said veteran Democratic strategist Dan Newman, a Bonta adviser.

On Monday, KCRA reported that Bonta had spent nearly $500,000 in campaign funds last year on personal lawyers to represent him in dealings with federal investigators working on a public corruption probe in Oakland.

On Thursday, the website East Bay Insider reported that as that probe was heating up in spring 2024, Bonta had received a letter from an Oakland businessman warning him that he might soon be subject to blackmail.

The letter writer, Mario Juarez, warned Bonta that another businessman, Andy Duong, possessed “a recording of you in a compromising situation.”

Duong was later indicted, along with his father David Duong and former Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, on federal bribery charges. All have pleaded not guilty. An attorney for David Duong this week said that Juarez, who is widely believed to be an informant in the case against the Duongs and Thao, was not credible. Juarez could not be reached for comment.

Bonta said his legal expenditures came about after he began speaking with the U.S. Attorney’s office, who approached him because prosecutors thought he could be a victim of blackmail or extortion. Bonta said the outreach came after he already had turned over the letter he had received from Juarez to law enforcement.

Bonta said he hired lawyers to help him review information in his possession that could be helpful to federal investigators.

“I wanted to get them all the information that they wanted, that they needed, give it to him as fast as as I could, to assist, to help,” Bonta said. “Maybe I had a puzzle piece or two that could assist them in their investigation.”

He said he may have made “an audible gasp” when he saw the legal bill, but that it was necessary to quickly turn over all documents and communications that could be relevant to the federal investigation.

“The billing rate is high or not insignificant at private law firms,” Bonta said. “We were moving quickly to be as responsive as possible, to be as helpful as possible, to assist as as much as possible, and that meant multiple attorneys working a lot of hours.”

Bonta said the state’s Fair Political Practices Commission also has alerted him that it received a complaint against him. Bonta and his advisers believe is about the use of campaign funds to pay the legal expenses and suspect it was filed by the campaign of a current gubernatorial candidate.

“We’re not worried,” Bonta said. “That’s politics.”

Asked whether these news stories could create obstacles to a potential gubernatorial campaign, Bonta pushed back against any assertion that he may have “baggage.” He said he was assisting federal prosecutors with their investigation with the hopes of holding people accountable.

“That’s what I would expect anyone to do, certainly someone who is committed as I am to public safety.,” he said. “That’s my job, to assist, to support, to provide information, to help.”

A French court rejected all claims brought by UFC-Que Choisir against Perrier, after the consumer group claimed the firm’s natural mineral water was deceptively labelled.

In early June, UFC-Que Choisir filed an emergency motion with a court in Nanterre near Paris seeking a recall of all Perrier bottles in circulation, as well as a temporary ban on sales of the natural mineral water.

The case centred on a dispute over the use of a filtration treatment, which the group said was contrary to French and European law. UFC-Que Choisir also claimed that the water posed health risks.

UFC-Que Choisir insisted that its demands would not have caused Perrier’s Vergèze plant to close, but it hoped that the bottles produced there would be sold as drinking water and not natural mineral water.

The consumer group noted that natural mineral water typically sells for 100 to 300 times the price of tap water.

Nestlé says decision proves Perrier’s food safety is ‘guaranteed’

The court in Nanterre said a health risk to consumers was not proven to the level required for an emergency ruling, a ruling welcomed by Nestlé.

“Today’s decision confirms that the food safety of Perrier natural mineral waters has always been guaranteed”, it said.

The company said it operates under an integrated quality management system, shared with, and controlled by, the relevant authorities to ensure the food safety of all its products.

“The results of our analyses are constantly shared with the authorities who regularly test our mineral waters, both at source and the finished product, to confirm compliance with the applicable regulatory requirements, including food safety and quality standards.”

UFC-Que Choisir must pay €5,000 to Nestlé, according to a court statement.

The Nanterre ruling was the latest twist in a series of scandals hounding Nestlé in France.

In a 2024 report, the Occitanie Regional Health Agency (ARS) warned of the possibility of halting Perrier production because of persistent bacterial contaminationin water drawn from wells at the Vergèze plant.

An inquiry commissioned by France’s Senate then found that the French government had covered up the use of illegal water treatments for years, particularly with regard to Nestlé.

Nestlé said it has since stopped using these prohibited treatments, instead switching to its current filtration methods.

MARTIN Freeman has been branded “selfish” after he complained about the noise from nearby schools.

The Sherlock star recently won a year-long battle with planners to put in new windows at his £5 million mansion to block out the din, despite being in a protected area which has strict rules on building appearance.

The Hobbit star snapped up the luxury five-bed pad, in north London, following his split from actress wife Amanda Abbington in 2016.

The planning inspector gave the green light for the new double-glazed windows after visiting the star’s home last month, and there were no submitted objections from neighbours.

Aside from the playground noise, Freeman had also insisted that most of the existing single glazed windows were so wonky from building movement that he couldn’t even open and close them properly.

In a statement, his planning agent said: “The noise is a major problem particularly during term time on weekdays due to the school located directly opposite.

STAR’S PLEA

Kirsty Gallacher sobs & says ‘I’m broken’ as she’s banned from driving

POP BOOST

Huge sum Dua Lipa, Taylor Swift & Charli XCX helped to add to UK economy revealed

“The new units will reduce noise pollution from the street and school, improving the building’s internal environment.”

But some are unimpressed with the actor’s grievances about noise, with one dubbing him “selfish” and saying he was “overreacting”.

Ex-schoolteacher, Simon Bridge, 70, whose property backs onto one of the schools, fumed: “If neighbours are complaining about schools, I think it’s outrageous.

“The children make a noise, of course, the whistle blows, but come on.

“Go and live somewhere else, that’s my feeling. You’ve got money, go away.

“I’m a great lover of theatre, music and everything and I have nothing against actors whatsoever. But I don’t like people complaining about children, hearing noise, that’s all.”

When asked if he had any problems with the noise himself, he replied: “Not at all. I love it. Because I’m an ex-schoolteacher, I’m used to school.

“To hear children playing and laughing, that’s wonderful.”

Freeman’s mansion is in close proximity to several schools.

Retiree Sam De Silva has lived in a block of flats opposite the junior school for 12 years and has no complaints.

He said: “Well, as far as I’m concerned, the only issue with me is finding a place to park my car. I haven’t come across any noise issues, you know.”

When asked about his thoughts on grumblings about noise, he said: “I think it’s a bit selfish , I guess.

“There’s not a lot you can do, you know. I think he’s overreacting.

“I’ve been here for 12 years, my dad lived here prior to me. He’s never complained.

“Honestly, it’s a bit silly. These schools didn’t crop up, you know?

“My daughter goes to school down the road and I heard Taylor Swift bought a house down that lane.

“So if she can buy a house adjacent to a primary school, why the hell should we be complaining?”

Planning battle

Officials at his local council failed to make a decision on time so the Sherlock star appealed to a Government planning inspector who gave the go-ahead.

The council later said they would have refused to grant planning permission as the new windows would harm the designated conservation area.

Freeman’s planning agent said: “To all practical intents and purposes, the replacement windows would retain the appearance of the original single glazed windows and the appearance of the appeal property would be preserved.”

They said in a statement that planning officers wanted to negotiate on the application to a point where it could be approved but Freeman did not want to make changes.

A local caretaker, who didn’t want to be named, has worked in the area for nearly 30 years and said: “It’s only noisy when the kids are going in in the morning and coming out at night. But that’s where the house is isn’t it?

“What are you going to do? There’s a school there, a school there, a school there.

“The thing is, right opposite his house is the playground. So when I go past sometimes, the kids are in the playground running.

“But what’s that? Ten minutes – then it’s done.

“I don’t see him about much, he’s always away working. If he was here every day, I’d understand it.”

Other residents said the sound of children was a “joyful noise” and that they “wouldn’t have any complaints”.

The Office star’s Arts and Crafts-style pad boasts a basement gym, wine cellar and summerhouse and dates back to 1883 but is not listed.

He bought the massive mansion after cashing with with Hollywood movies Love Actually, Black Panther, Captain America: Civil War.

PEATY FEUD TWIST

Adam Peaty’s brother arrested over stag do threats sent to Olympian

CHOC HORROR

‘Disgusting’ price of 750g Quality Street tins are slammed by Tesco shoppers

He’s currently appearing onstage in The Fifth Step in London’s West End.

The Sun has reached out to Freeman’s reps for comment.

Australia’s High Court says government acted within its rights when it passed a law revoking 99-year lease for planned Russian embassy site.

Russia has lost a legal fight to build a new embassy near Australia’s Parliament, with the nation’s top court ruling that Canberra acted within its rights when it cancelled the lease for the site.

Australia passed legislation in 2023 to mothball the planned embassy building after officials deemed it to pose a security threat.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said at the time that his government decided to revoke the lease over the “specific risk” posed by the site, located about 300 metres (328 yards) from Parliament House.

Russia, which blasted the move as “Russophobic hysteria”, challenged the legislation in court, arguing that it was not valid under the Australian Constitution.

In a unanimous ruling on Wednesday, the High Court found that the cancellation of the lease had been a “valid exercise of the legislative power” to enact laws related to the acquisition of property.

The court, however, ruled that Russia was entitled to compensation after paying about $2m for the 99-year lease in 2008.

The court previously rejected a bid by Moscow to stop its officials from being evicted from the site.

The government introduced new legislation on June 15 to end the Russian lease on the land after intelligence agencies warned the location was a risk to national security.

In a statement following the ruling, Attorney General Michelle Rowland said, “Australia will always stand up for our values and we will stand up for our national security.”

“The government welcomes the High Court’s decision that found the government acted lawfully in terminating the Russian Embassy’s lease,” Rowland said in a statement.

“The government will closely consider the next steps in light of the court’s decision,” Rowland added.

The Russian embassy said it was studying the judgement, according to Australian broadcaster ABC News.

“The Russian side will carefully study the text of the court ruling, which sets a precedent,” an embassy official said in a statement.

Relations between Australia and Russia have been strained for years.

Ties deteriorated sharply after the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, which multiple investigations blamed on pro-Russian separatists, and then plunged further after Moscow launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

#BREAKING: The lease was granted to Russia in 2008, but was withdrawn when parliament passed a new law citing ASIO advice that the planned embassy could pose a threat to national security. https://t.co/6S6bf37h7m

— ABC News (@abcnews) November 11, 2025

PORTLAND, Ore. — A federal judge in Oregon ruled Friday that President Trump’s administration failed to meet the legal requirements for deploying the National Guard to Portland after the city and state sued in September to block the deployment.

The ruling from U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, a Trump appointee, followed a three-day trial last week in which both sides argued over whether protests at the city’s U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement building met the conditions for using the military domestically under federal law.

The administration said the troops were needed to protect federal personnel and property in a city that Trump described as “war ravaged” with “fires all over the place.”

In a 106-page opinion, Immergut found that even though the president is entitled to “great deference” in his decision on whether to call up the Guard, he did not have a legal basis for doing so because he did not establish that there was a rebellion or danger of rebellion, or that he was unable to enforce the law with regular forces.

“The trial record showed that although protests outside the Portland ICE building occurred nightly between June and October 2025, ever since a few particularly disruptive days in mid-June, protests have remained peaceful with only isolated and sporadic instances of violence,” Immergut wrote. “The occasional interference to federal officers has been minimal, and there is no evidence that these small-scale protests have significantly impeded the execution of any immigration laws.”

The Trump administration criticized the judge’s ruling.

“The facts haven’t changed. Amidst ongoing violent riots and lawlessness, that local leaders have refused to step in to quell, President Trump has exercised his lawful authority to protect federal officers and assets. President Trump will not turn a blind eye to the lawlessness plaguing American cities and we expect to be vindicated by a higher court,” said Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman.

“The courts are holding this administration accountable to the truth and the rule of law,” Oregon Atty. Gen. Dan Rayfield said in an e-mailed statement. “From the beginning, this case has been about making sure that facts, not political whims, guide how the law is applied. Today’s decision protects that principle.”

Democratic cities targeted by Trump for military involvement — including Chicago, which has filed a separate lawsuit on the issue — have been pushing back. They argue the president has not satisfied the legal threshold for deploying troops and that doing so would violate states’ sovereignty.

Immergut issued two orders in early October that had blocked the deployment of the troops leading up to the trial. The first order blocked Trump from deploying 200 members of the Oregon National Guard; the second, issued a day later, blocked him from deploying members of any state’s National Guard to Oregon, after he tried to evade the first order by sending California troops instead.

Immergut has called Trump’s apocalyptic descriptions of Portland “simply untethered to the facts.”

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has already ordered that the troops not be deployed pending further action by the appeals court. The trial Immergut held further developed the factual record in the case, which could serve as the basis for further appellate rulings.

Witnesses including local police and federal officials were questioned about the law enforcement response to the nightly protests at the city’s ICE building. The demonstrations peaked in June, when Portland police declared one a riot. The demonstrations typically drew a couple dozen people in the weeks leading up to the president’s National Guard announcement.

The Trump administration said it has had to shuffle federal agents around the country to respond to the Portland protests, which it has characterized as a “rebellion” or “danger of rebellion.”

Federal officials working in the region testified about staffing shortages and requests for more personnel that have yet to be fulfilled. Among them was an official with the Federal Protective Service, the agency within the Department of Homeland Security that provides security at federal buildings, whom the judge allowed to be sworn in as a witness under his initials, R.C., because of safety concerns.

R.C., who said he would be one of the most knowledgeable people in Homeland Security about security at Portland’s ICE building, testified that a troop deployment would alleviate the strain on staff. When cross-examined, however, he said he did not request troops and that he was not consulted on the matter by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem or Trump. He also said he was “surprised” to learn about the deployment and that he did not agree with statements about Portland burning down.

Attorneys for Portland and Oregon said city police have been able to respond to the protests. After the Police Department declared a riot on June 14, it changed its strategy to direct officers to intervene when person and property crime occurs, and crowd numbers have largely diminished since the end of that month, police officials testified.

The ICE building closed for three weeks over the summer because of property damage, according to court documents and testimony. The regional field office director for ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations, Cammilla Wamsley, said her employees worked from another building during that period. The plaintiffs argued that was evidence that they were able to continue their work functions.

Rush and Johnson write for the Associated Press. Johnson reported from Seattle. AP staff writer Michelle L. Price contributed to this report from Palm Beach, Fla.