sentencing

July 8 (UPI) — Britain has summoned Iran’s charge d’affairs after a judge last week sentenced two Romanian men to prison for stabbing an Iranian journalist in London in 2024, an attack the court found was carried out on behalf of the iranian state.

“We take threats posed by Iran and those who do its bidding extremely seriously,” a spokesperson for Britain’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office said in a statement.

“Iran’s actions attempt to undermine UK sovereignty and security, and are completely unacceptable — it must cease in these activities immediately.”

Ali Nasimfar, charge d’affairs of the Iranian Embassy in London, was summoned by Middle East Minister Hamish Falconer on Tuesday, after a British judge sentenced Nandito Badea, 21, and George Stana, 25, to prison over the March 29, 2024, attack.

According to prosecutors, the two men attacked Pouria Zeraati, a reporter with the Britain-based Persian-language broadcaster Iran International, as he was leaving his Wimbledon home.

One of the men asked Zeraati for money before the other grabbed him. Zeraati suffered multiple stab wounds to his leg before both men fled on foot and entered a blue Mazda car that was waiting nearby and driven by a third accomplice.

Prosecutors accused Badea of having been involved in the attack, while Stana drove the getaway car, which had been bought through Facebook. The third suspect has been identified as David Andrei.

The three suspects were arrested by Romanian police in December 2024. Badea and Stana were extradited to Britain that same month, while Andrei remains in Romania, where he is subject to domestic criminal proceedings.

During the trial, the judge agreed with the prosecution that the crime was a state-sponsored attack, as evidence “overwhelmingly” supported the finding that it was carried out on behalf of Iran.

Stana was sentenced to 12 years in prison, as the judge ruled that the Foreign Power Condition under the National Security Act was met in his case. The judge said the extensive planning and involvement in the plot indicated that he knew — or at the very least ought to have known — of the connection to Iran.

Badea was sentenced to eight years behind bars.

“Protecting national security, upholding media freedom and freedom of expression, remain our top priorities,” Britain’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office said.

“This government will take all measures necessary to protect the British people, and those living and working in the UK.”

British officials and allies have accused Iran of a longstanding pattern of targeting critics, journalists and dissidents abroad with assassination plots.

In the United States, authorities have several times thwarted Iran-backed attempts to assassinate and kidnap Masih Alinejad.

In 2024, the United States and Britain issued coordinated sanctions targeting those they accused of being behind threats to assassinate Iranian dissidents abroad.

Carl Erik Rinsch, the director of the 2013 Keanu Reeves action film “47 Ronin,” will serve more than two years in federal prison for defrauding Netflix of $11 million.

U.S. District Judge Jed S. Rakoff on Monday sentenced 48-year-old Rinsch to 30 months in prison, the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of New York, announced. Federal prosecutors convicted Rinsch in December of wire fraud, money laundering and other counts. A legal representative for Rinsch did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.

Federal prosecutors indicted Rinsch in March 2025, alleging the $11 million went into Rinsch’s personal accounts. The filmmaker “quickly transferred” the money from the Rinsch Co. account, where it had been deposited March 6, 2020, by Netflix, through additional accounts until about $10.5 million wound up weeks later in a personal brokerage account. He lost more than half of that money in less than two months via risky investments in the stock market, the indictment said.

Though Rinsch told the streamer that his sci-fi show “White Horse” was progressing nicely, the filmmaker allegedly moved the remaining money into cryptocurrency and profited from crypto speculation over the next couple of years. The streamer had invested around $44 million in the show. Rinsch was accused of spending around $10 million on five Rolls-Royces, a Ferrari, watches, clothing, luxury bedding and linens, credit card bills, attorneys to sue Netflix for more money, and lawyers to work on his divorce.

He was arrested in West Hollywood and released the same day after agreeing to post a $100,000 bond to guarantee his appearance in a New York federal court.

Rinsch never finished the Netflix show.

During his sentencing, Rinsch and his legal team told the court his behavior was a result of mental health struggles and medication problems and they are working to address those issues with a new care provider, the Associated Press reported.

“I failed to recognize the danger of the state I was in,” Rinsch said, though his mental issues were not described in court, and his attorneys declined to provide further detail.

Ahead of the sentencing, Reeves — the star of Rinsch’s most notable project to date — penned a letter in May requesting “leniency and mercy as well as justice” in the filmmaker’s sentencing.

In addition to prison time, Rinsch must serve three years of supervised release, forfeit the $11 million and pay $700 in mandatory special assessments, according to Monday’s announcement. U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton said in the announcement: “Today’s sentence sends a deterrent message: fraud will not be tolerated.”

The Associated Press and former Times assistant editor Christie D’Zurilla contributed to this report.

MILWAUKEE — A federal judge on Wednesday considered whether to throw out a jury’s guilty verdict against former Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan, who was convicted of felony obstruction for helping an immigrant evade federal officers.

The case was an early test of how the courts would respond to President Trump’s sweeping immigration crackdown.

Dugan had been scheduled to be sentenced on Wednesday, but U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman postponed the proceedings indefinitely to instead hear arguments about whether to overturn her conviction.

Adelman did not rule from the bench and did not indicate when he might issue a decision. Dugan and attorneys for both sides left the courtroom without commenting to reporters.

Former judge’s attorney points to a Virginia case

Dugan’s attorney Steven Biskupic argued that her conviction was invalid and should be overturned. He said that was necessary because a federal appeals court in April overturned a key Virginia immigration case that the judge and prosecutors had cited in the Dugan case.

Biskupic argued that based on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturning that ruling, Dugan was improperly convicted, procedurally, under a certain federal law.

“Our primary argument is this was an invalid theory of conviction,” Biskupic said.

In the Virginia case, an immigrant who was in the country illegally was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and later escaped. He was recaptured and indicted on a charge of obstructing a pending immigration proceeding.

The federal appeals court found that the ICE action did not constitute a “pending proceeding,” as is required under the federal obstruction law.

Dugan’s attorneys argue that she should not have been charged because there was no “pending proceeding” against the immigrant in her courtroom being sought by ICE agents, only a warrant filed for his arrest. The filing of a warrant does not constitute a “proceeding” under the law, Biskupic argued.

Prosecutors countered that the facts in the Virginia case are different and don’t apply to Dugan’s. They also argued that other cases support Dugan’s conviction.

“The court should stick with its ruling,” said Richard Frohling, acting U.S. attorney for the eastern district of Wisconsin.

In response to a question from the judge, he contended that the appeals court was wrong to overturn the Virginia case. The judge also quizzed Frohling on what constitutes a proceeding under the law and how long it lasts.

“It could be a couple minutes, it could be a couple years,” Frohling said. “It all depends on the context.”

Dugan’s sentencing was postponed so the court can hear new arguments

Dugan, 67, faces up to five years in prison after a jury convicted her on Dec. 19. But it is unlikely that Dugan would be sentenced to prison. Federal sentencing guidelines generally call for probation for defendants like her who have no criminal history and are convicted of a nonviolent crime.

She resigned from her position as a Milwaukee County circuit judge two weeks after her conviction amid threats of impeachment from Republican state lawmakers. She had been a judge for nine years.

Dugan was present for Wednesday’s arguments but did not speak.

The Trump administration brought the case against Dugan as the president pressed ahead with his sweeping immigration crackdown. Trump’s administration and his allies branded Dugan as an activist judge, while Dugan’s attorneys said she was being unfairly targeted and argued, unsuccessfully, that she was immune from being charged because she was a judge.

Dugan’s case marked the first time that a state judge in Wisconsin went to trial on charges of obstructing immigration agents. She was acquitted of concealing an individual to prevent arrest, a misdemeanor.

Dugan helped an immigrant wanted by ICE agents

On April 18, 2025, immigration officers went to the Milwaukee County courthouse after learning Eduardo Flores-Ruiz had reentered the country illegally and was scheduled to appear before Dugan for a hearing in a state battery case.

Dugan confronted agents outside her courtroom and directed them to the chief judge’s office because she told them their administrative warrant wasn’t sufficient grounds to arrest Flores-Ruiz.

After the agents left, she led Flores-Ruiz and his attorney out a private jury door. Agents spotted Flores-Ruiz in the corridor, followed him outside and arrested him after a foot chase. A week later, FBI agents arrested Dugan in the courthouse, leading her outside in handcuffs.

Flores-Ruiz was deported in November.

Bauer writes for the Associated Press.

The sentencing of Aspiration co-founder Joseph Sanberg to 14 years in federal prison on Monday brings the NBA a step closer to concluding its nine-month investigation into the Clippers allegedly circumventing the salary cap.

Sanberg pleaded guilty in October to federal charges of conspiring to bilk investors out of $248 million for portraying the now-defunct Aspiration as a “socially-conscious and sustainable banking services and investment products” firm.

The NBA has declined to comment on the status of the probe centered on $60 million invested in Aspiration by Clippers owner Steve Ballmer and the $28-million contract Clippers star Kawhi Leonard signed with Aspiration for endorsement and marketing work that he never delivered.

Players are allowed to have separate endorsement and other business deals, but at issue is whether the Clippers participated in arranging the side deal beyond simply introducing Aspiration executives to Leonard. Doing so would be a violation of Article 13 of the NBA collective bargaining agreement, punishable by a $4.5-million fine, the loss of a first-round draft pick and the voiding of Leonard’s contract.

The NBA draft takes place June 23-24 and the Clippers have three picks, including the fifth overall selection. The league is not expected to release its findings until after the NBA Finals, which begin Wednesday between the New York Knicks and San Antonio Spurs.

Clippers officials haven’t commented on the investigation. But Leonard, who has one year left on a three-year, $149.5-million contract that will pay him $50.3 million next season, told The Athletic after the Clippers’ season-ending game April 15 that “I think we’re going to be in the clear. I’m not stressing.”

Otherwise, among the few public comments about the investigation were letters submitted to federal court judge Stephen V. Wilson ahead of Sanberg’s sentencing by Ballmer and the law firm conducting the probe on behalf of the NBA.

The letter from Dave Anders of Wachtell Lipton stated that Sanberg provided documentation and information helpful to the NBA investigation during two in-person interviews.

“In all our dealings with Mr. Sanberg, both directly and through his counsel, he provided information that was consistent with our review of contemporaneous documents and other evidence,” Anders wrote. “Mr. Sanberg’s cooperation substantially assisted our investigation, including our ability to develop a more complete understanding of key events.”

Ballmer countered by asking Wilson for a stiff sentence in a five-page Victim Impact Statement posted on social media by his lawyer, David N. Kelley.

“Sanberg continues to exploit his fraud of Mr. Ballmer for his benefit, providing information to the NBA in return for a sentencing letter that the league submitted on his behalf,” Kelley wrote. “The reliability of Sanberg’s information is suspect given that he has pleaded guilty to federal fraud charges, and the government has made its own determination that he is not credible.”

Before handing down the sentence, Wilson made it clear that Sanberg’s credibility was questionable.

“He portrays himself as a do-gooder who was in business to help the world, but he did personally gain from his fraud,” Wilson said, later adding, “I would put the grade of his fraud at the zenith.”

Ballmer, a former longtime CEO of Microsoft who has owned the Clippers since 2014, accused Sanberg of targeting him for his well-known interest in environmental sustainability and exaggerating their relationship to convince others to invest in the fraudulent company. He said he met Sanberg only once.

Ballmer invested $50 million in Aspiration in September 2021. A month later, the Clippers announced a $300-million sponsorship deal with the company. Ballmer nearly granted Aspiration naming rights to the team’s new $2-billion venue as well, but instead chose financial services firm Intuit. Ballmer made an additional $10-million investment in Aspiration on March 9, 2023.

Ballmer was added in November as a defendant in a civil lawsuit against Sanberg and several others associated with Aspiration. Ballmer and the other defendants are accused by 11 investors in Aspiration of fraud and aiding and abetting fraud, with the plaintiffs seeking at least $50 million in damages.

Kelley contended that Ballmer was added as a defendant because of his “visibility and resources,” and portrayed the Clippers owner as a victim, saying “Mr. Ballmer’s losses are not measured solely, or even primarily, on a balance sheet. They are measured in the reputational damage that will take years to remediate, and in the chilling effect on future endeavors intended to do good.”

The lone public comment about the investigation from NBA Commissioner Adam Silver came during All-Star Weekend in February at the Intuit Dome when he described the issue as “enormously complex.”

“You have a company in bankruptcy, you have thousands of documents, multiple witnesses that needed to be interviewed,” Silver said.

The investigation was triggered by reports from podcaster Pablo Torre that Leonard’s sponsorship deal with Aspiration was to circumvent the salary cap. Torre and the staff of “Pablo Torre Finds Out” won a Pulitzer Prize for Audio Reporting for their efforts.