
A confrontation at pro-Israeli rally leads to gunfire after a man tackles one of the demonstrators
CNN
A suspected gunman and the man he allegedly shot both face charges of assault after a clash at a pro-Israeli demonstration in Newton, Massachusetts, authorities said.
A suspected gunman and the man he allegedly shot both face charges of assault after a clash at a pro-Israeli demonstration in Newton, Massachusetts, authorities said. The fracas began when a man with no connection to the rally “began shouting comments at the demonstrators” around 6:40 p.m. Thursday, Middlesex District Attorney Marian Ryan said. “Words were exchanged back and forth across the street,” the prosecutor said in a news conference Thursday. The man eventually crossed the street toward the rally “and jumped upon one of the demonstrators,” Ryan said. “A scuffle ensued. During that scuffle, the individual who had come across the street was shot by a member of the demonstrating group.” The 31-year-old man who was shot was hospitalized and is expected to survive his injuries, the district attorney’s office said Friday. Authorities have not identified the Newton resident, but police have applied for a criminal complaint against him for assault and battery, the prosecutor’s office said. “An assault and battery that does not occur in the presence of a police officer is not an arrestable offense,” Ryan’s office said in a written statement. “The person charged is then entitled to a hearing before the Clerk Magistrate to determine whether probable cause exists.”

Attorneys in the case of Bryan Kohberger are set to face off in a Boise, Idaho, courtroom Wednesday over the admissibility of key evidence – including the recording of an emotional 9-1-1 call and the defendant’s alibi – in his approaching death penalty trial for the killings of four University of Idaho students in 2022.

Attorney General Pam Bondi railed against a federal judge who partially blocked enforcement of President Donald Trump’s executive order targeting the Jenner & Block law firm, telling government agencies to stop enforcing the order despite the “blatant overstepping of the judicial power,” while suggesting that the agencies are still permitted “to decide with whom to work.”