3 police officers shot ‘without warning’ while responding to domestic call in Rochester
mphotoi/Getty Images
(ROCHESTER, N.Y.) — Three police officers in Rochester, New York, were shot Friday night “without warning at close range” while responding to a domestic call at a home, police said.
Emergency services received a call from a man who said his girlfriend’s ex-boyfriend was attempting to break into her home and possibly had a gun, according to the Rochester Police Department. The caller also told dispatchers he had a legal permit for a firearm and was carrying a pistol.
Officers arrived a short time later and located the suspect, identified by the caller as the ex-boyfriend, along the side of the house, authorities said.
“He immediately pulled out a handgun and fired multiple shots from close range toward the officers and the victim, striking two officers,” Rochester Police Chief David Smith said during a Saturday morning news conference.
Additional shots were fired, including an exchange of gunfire between the suspect and the man who called police, which resulted in the caller being shot multiple times, Smith said.
The suspect fled the scene but was located within minutes by another officer, who was also shot after being fired upon by the suspect.
That officer and others on scene returned fire, striking the suspect multiple times and killing him, police said.
One officer was shot multiple times in the upper body and is listed in stable condition. Another officer was shot in the upper body, rushed to surgery and is listed in critical but stable condition.
A third officer suffered serious injuries but is in stable condition, authorities said. The man who initially called police was shot multiple times and remains in serious but non-life-threatening condition.
Police have not released the identities of those involved and the investigation is currently ongoing.
Brian Walshe during the murder trial of Ana Walshe on December 9, 2025. (Photo by Suzanne Kreiter/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)
(DEDHAM, Mass.) — The jury began deliberations on Friday in the murder trial of Brian Walshe, a father of three accused of killing and dismembering his wife.
The Massachusetts man is accused of killing his wife, 39-year-old Ana Walshe, around New Year’s Day in 2023. He pleaded guilty last month, ahead of the trial, to lying to police following her disappearance and improperly disposing of her body, though he denies he killed his wife and has pleaded not guilty to murder.
Ana Walshe’s body has not been found.
After deliberating for nearly four hours on Friday following closing arguments, the jurors were dismissed for the day without a verdict. They are set to resume their deliberations Monday morning.
Prior to the closing arguments, Judge Diane Freniere told the jury during instructions that they will be able to choose to convict on second-degree murder, not just the first-degree murder charge the prosecution has argued for and includes the element of premeditation.
During the trial’s opening statements last week, defense attorneys said Brian Walshe found his wife dead in bed on New Year’s Day in 2023 and then panicked and lied to police as they investigated her disappearance — but maintained he did not kill her.
Brian Walshe allegedly killed and dismembered his wife, then disposed of her remains in dumpsters, according to prosecutors. The internet history on his devices on Jan. 1, 2023, included searches such as “best way to dispose of a body,” “how long for someone to be missing to inherit,” and “best way to dispose of body parts after a murder,” prosecutors said.
Defense attorney Larry Tipton argued the Commonwealth hadn’t proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Brian Walshe — whom he described as a “loving father and loving husband” — killed his wife or there was any motive to do so.
Positing what might account for the “unspeakable” internet searches and how someone could “dispose of the body of the woman that he adored,” Tipton said, “Could it be something that was sudden, something that was unexpected, something which was unbelievable, something that only a medical examiner would understand, have knowledge of, but not a man like Brian Walshe?”
Tipton conceded there’s evidence Brian Walshe lied and disposed of a body, but argued there was nothing proving that he planned to harm his wife. He claimed the internet search on murder came six hours after his wife died and “upsetting” searches about dismemberment and “cleaning up” do not point to a plan but rather his “disbelief.”
“Why is a man searching now if he had intended to kill his wife?” Tipton asked the jurors. “Where is the evidence of premeditation in thousands of pages of records?”
At the start of the Commonwealth’s closing argument, prosecutor Anne Yas told jurors, “Ana Walshe is dead because he murdered her,” while pointing toward Brian Walshe in the courtroom.
She argued Ana Walshe didn’t die of natural causes — but Brian Walshe killed her and then disposed of her body to hide the evidence.
“The defendant did not want anyone to find Ana’s body and to know how she died, so the defendant bought cutting tools at Lowe’s and Home Depot and he cut up Ana’s body — the woman that he claimed to love — and he threw her into dumpsters,” she said.
Yas argued the evidence shows Brian Walshe intended to kill his wife and was “methodical” — that his claims he misplaced his phone for two days around New Year’s Eve “allowed him to carry out his plan” and have an explanation for police as to why he hadn’t been in contact with her. She said he had a list when he was shopping at Lowe’s.
Yas said their marriage was in “crisis,” and they had been having arguments about Ana Walshe being away from the family due to her job in Washington, D.C. She also claimed Brian Walshe knew his wife was having an affair, which the defense has denied.
“Please do not allow the defendant’s self-serving act of dismembering and disposing of Ana’s body let him get away with this murder,” Yas said.
She urged jurors to use their “common sense” while they deliberate, and that they will “see that the evidence shows there is only one verdict” — guilty of the premeditated first-degree murder of Ana Walshe.
The defense rested on Thursday without calling any witnesses. Freniere noted in court on Thursday that it appeared that Brian Walshe would testify in his defense, based on the defense’s opening statement. Though he ultimately waived his right.
Evidence presented during the two-week trial in Dedham included surveillance footage of a man believed to be Brian Walshe buying tools and other supplies at a Lowe’s on Jan. 1, 2023. A receipt showed that items, including a hacksaw, utility knife, hammer, snips, Tyvek suit, shoeguards, rags and cleaning supplies totaling $462 were purchased with cash.
Additional surveillance footage presented in court showed someone throwing out trash bags at dumpsters on multiple days in early January 2023.
Several blood-stained items recovered from dumpsters by investigators — including a hacksaw, a piece of rug, a towel and hairs — and an unknown tissue were linked to Ana Walshe through DNA testing, a forensic scientist from the Massachusetts State Police Crime Laboratory testified during the trial.
Blood was also found in the basement of the family’s rental home in Cohasset, another forensic scientist with the crime lab testified.
Ana Walshe was reported missing by her employer on Jan. 4, 2023. Brian Walshe told police at the time that she had a “work emergency” at her job in D.C. and left their Cohasset home on New Year’s Day, according to video of his interview shown in court.
At the time, Brian Walshe and their three children were living in Massachusetts while he was awaiting sentencing in a federal fraud case after pleading guilty to a scheme to sell counterfeit Andy Warhol paintings.
Ahead of the murder trial, Brian Walshe admitted to lying to police amid her disappearance and improperly disposing of her body. His defense said during opening statements that he panicked after finding her dead in bed, calling her death sudden and unexplained.
Jurors heard testimony, including from a D.C. man with whom Ana Walshe was having an affair, that the mother of three was upset about being away from her young children so much — who were 2, 4 and 6 at the time — and that there was stress in the marriage. The defense maintained that the couple were happy.
People walk along snow covered streets as snow falls during a blizzard on February 23, 2026 in the Flatbush neighborhood of the Brooklyn borough in New York City. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — A quick-moving storm is making its way into northern Minnesota and Wisconsin from Canada on Tuesday and is expected to hit the Great Lakes dumping between 3 to 6 inches in the region.
The brief storm is expected to move into the Northeast around midnight on Wednesday and reach Pittsburgh around 1 a.m. followed by Philadelphia and New York City by around 5 a.m.
Snow will end for Philadelphia and New York City a few hours later at approximately 11 a.m. on Wednesday, while snow should end around 1 p.m. in Boston with a few lingering snow showers will last through the night over interior New England.
All three cities should expect no more than an inch of snow to accumulate, including Rhode Island as they continue to dig out of their 2.5 feet of snow from Monday.
Further inland, however, 1 to 3 inches of snow could be possible with higher elevations in the Northeast seeing up to 3 to 6 inches of snow.
Elsewhere, a storm currently in the Pacific Northwest will move across the country in the coming days and is expected to be shoved south by high pressure over the northern U.S. as it moves east.
This will lead to rain over the upper South on Thursday morning, with heavy rain possible for Kentucky and Tennessee and east through North Carolina.
On Thursday evening, that rain could be heavy over Tennessee as the storm moves north along the mid-Atlantic into Virginia, Delaware and Maryland.
By about 9 p.m. on Thursday, there is a chance this moisture is in line somewhere between Washington, D.C. and New York City with the potential of a wintry mix that could make roads slick.
If temperatures drop low enough, snow is also possible Thursday night for the region between Washington, D.C. to New York City. This could lead to a few inches of wet snow for the New York area, northern New Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania by Friday morning.
The system is expected to move out of the area by midday on Friday and, by the afternoon, the weather could warm up a bit, with highs in the upper 30s.
Temperatures will reach the upper 30s and lower 40s this week in New York City and Boston as well, meaning some of the snow that has blanketed the region could begin to melt with some refreezing possible overnight.
(NEW YORK) — A top ICE official struggled to answer questions about Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s potential deportation during an evidentiary hearing on Thursday, and admitted that someone else helped draft his sworn declaration submitted in the case.
John Cantu was called to testify about why the government is not planning to deport Abrego Garcia to Costa Rica and is instead preparing to remove him to the West African nation of Liberia.
When pressed by Abrego Garcia’s attorneys about the contents of the sealed declaration regarding the government’s communication with Costa Rica, their client’s preferred country of removal, Cantu said he did not understand parts of his declaration.
Abrego Garcia’s lawyers accuse the government of having “cycled through” four third-country destinations — Uganda, Eswatini, Ghana, and now Liberia — without providing “the notice, opportunity to be heard and individualized assessment that due process requires.”
After not being able to answer several questions from Abrego Garcia’s attorneys, Cantu said he received “verbiage” for his declaration from a State Department attorney.
“Sitting here today, you could not tell me whether anyone from the State Department has been in touch with Costa Rica since August 21, to determine whether communications have changed?” asked Sascha Rand, an attorney for Abrego Garcia.
“That’s right,” Cantu replied.
“Mr. Cantu, when you say Costa Rica is not an option for removal … where does that come from?” U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis interjected.
“Counsel,” Cantu said referring to the State Department attorney.
“The point has been made that this witness knows zero information about the content of the declaration,” Xinis said.
Cantu later admitted he had no involvement in Abrego Garcia’s case prior to November and said his only involvement was a “five minute Teams call” with the Department of State attorney.
Abrego Garcia, who had been living in Maryland with his wife and children, was deported in March to El Salvador’s CECOT mega-prison — despite a 2019 court order barring his deportation to that country due to fear of persecution — after the Trump administration claimed he was a member of the criminal gang MS-13, which he denies.
He was brought back to the U.S. in June to face human smuggling charges in Tennessee, to which he has pleaded not guilty. His criminal trial is scheduled to begin in January.
Abrego Garcia’s deportation is currently blocked by U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis pending the resolution of the habeas case challenging his removal. He is currently in a detention center in Pennsylvania.
His attorneys say the U.S. government has disregarded Abrego Garcia’s “statutory designation” of Costa Rica, despite the country’s previous assurances that it would accept him and give him refugee or resident status.
