Man facing federal charges for allegedly setting massive fire that destroyed warehouse: DOJ
In this screen grab from a video, a Kimberly-Clark warehouse burns in Ontario, Calif., April 7, 2026. (KABC)
(ONTARIO, Calif.) — A man is facing federal charges for allegedly purposely setting the fire that destroyed a massive warehouse in Southern California, prosecutors said.
Chamel Abdulkarim, 29, is charged with arson of a building used in interstate and foreign commerce and used in activities affecting interstate and foreign commerce, the Department of Justice said on Friday.
On April 7, Abdulkarim allegedly took video of himself setting fire to paper goods in the Ontario, California, distribution center, prosecutors said.
Abdulkarim allegedly said in the video, “If you’re not going to pay us enough to [expletive] live or afford to live, at least pay us enough not to do this [expletive],” the DOJ said in a statement.
The massive blaze destroyed the 1.2 million-square-foot warehouse and caused about $500 million in damage, prosecutors said. No one was injured, the Ontario Fire Department said.
In texts and phone calls, Abdulkarim allegedly said, “I just cost these [expletive] billions,” and, “All you had to do was pay us enough to live. … Didn’t see the shareholders picking up a shift,” according to prosecutors.
The suspect also allegedly posted videos on social media of him starting the fire, prosecutors said.
Abdulkarim, of Highland, California, was arrested on Tuesday on state charges and is expected to be arraigned in state court on Friday, prosecutors said.
Attorney information for Abdulkarim was not immediately available.
(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge is allowing the release of deposition videos of two former DOGE staffers, ruling that the risk of “embarrassment and reputational harm” is not enough to overcome the public interest in the videos.
U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon on Monday lifted an earlier order requiring a group of nonprofits to remove the videos from the internet after lawyers with the Justice Department argued that the former Department of Government Efficiency staffers faced threats because of the depositions’ release.
While Judge McMahon acknowledged that the former staffers faced threats, she said the DOJ could not prove a “particularized harm” to the former staffers that would overcome the public interest in their official conduct as government employees.
“Here, the testimony in the videos concerns the conduct of public officials acting in their official capacities — a context in which the public interest in transparency and accountability is at its apex,” she wrote.
Judge McMahon concluded that ordering the videos removed would have little impact on the alleged threats because the videos had been already shared hundreds of thousands of times online.
The DOJ, she said, failed to prove that ordering the removal of the videos “would materially reduce the alleged risk of harm or embarrassment.”
“The videos have already been widely disseminated across multiple platforms, including YouTube, X, TikTok, Instagram, and Reddit, where they have been shared, reposted, and viewed by at least hundreds of thousands of users, resulting in near-instantaneous and effectively permanent global distribution,” she said.
“This is a predictable consequence of dissemination in the modern digital environment, where content can be copied, redistributed, and indefinitely preserved beyond the control of any single actor,” wrote the judge.
“This decision validates our position that the publication of the videos, which document a process to destroy knowledge and access to vital public programs, was indeed in the public’s interest,” said Joy Connolly, president of the American Council of Learned Societies, one of the nonprofits that released the videos. “We look forward to continuing the pursuit of justice in reclaiming government support for important humanities research, education, and sustainability initiatives.”
The videos were initially released as part of an ongoing civil lawsuit related to the funding cuts carried out by DOGE as part of President Donald Trump’s efforts to trim the size of the federal government. In the videos, two former DOGE staffer. — Justin Fox and Nate Cavanaugh — were questioned about their push to cut more than $100 million in humanities grants, and acknowledged they used DEI keywords and ChatGPT to identify grants to eliminate.
“You don’t regret that people might have lost important income … to support their lives?” an attorney asked one of the staffers about the grant cancellations.
“No. I think it was more important to reduce the federal deficit from $2 trillion to close to zero,” the staffer said.
“Did you reduce the federal deficit?” the attorney asked.
Printed documents available at Epstein Library on the U.S. Department of Justice website are seen in this illustration photo taken in Krakow, Poland on February 6, 2026. (Photo by Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
(NEW YORK) — The Department of Justice on Thursday released three previously withheld FBI interview reports from 2019 related to a woman who made uncorroborated allegations that she was abused by Donald Trump in the 1980s, when she was a minor.
In a statement on social media, the Department of Justice said the interview summaries — known as FBI 302 reports — were initially withheld from the January release of millions of pages of DOJ documents related to Jeffrey Epstein because they were believed to be duplicative of other documents.
“What we found through extensive review is that a published 302 — additionally disclosed in a published spreadsheet — had subsequent 302s that were coded as ‘duplicative.’ After this was brought to our attention, we reviewed the entire batch with the similar coding and discovered 15 documents were incorrectly coded as duplicative,” the DOJ account said.
The statement did not appear to explain why, beyond possible human error, the records were marked as duplicative. As of Thursday evening, the DOJ database still does not include the handwritten notes from the interviews themselves.
According to the reports, the FBI interviewed the woman four times between July and October 2019. During each of the interviews with the woman, whose identity is redacted, she made allegations of abuse against Epstein.
In her second interview with federal investigators, she claimed that Epstein once took her to either New York or New Jersey where he introduced to Trump when she was between the ages of 13 and 15 years old. According to the report, she claimed Trump abused her during that trip.
In the fourth interview in October 2019, the woman declined to provide additional details about the alleged interaction with Trump when asked by agents, according to the summary of that interview.
Her statements to the federal agents allege that the incident with Trump took place in the early-to-mid 1980s — a period when Epstein and Trump did not appear to be in contact.
Trump has denied any wrongdoing related to his relationship with Epstein or any knowledge of Epstein’s criminal activity.
In her initial interview with the FBI, the woman claims she was sexually abused by Epstein after being hired for what she thought was a babysitting job, but she said there were no children present. Similar abuse occurred, she said, on several more occasions, according to the summary of the first report, which was released by the DOJ in January.
The witness said multiple alleged incidents with Epstein took place in South Carolina, a location not known to have been frequented by Epstein. The timing of the allegations would place them two decades before law enforcement in Florida began investigating Epstein for sexual exploitation of minors.
Before the additional records were released Thursday, Congressional Democrats had accused the Justice Department of illegally withholding the documents to protect the president.
“It is unconscionable, it is illegal, and [Attorney General] Pam Bondi and the president need to answer where those files are,” California Democrat Robert Garcia, D-Calif. said last week.
In a statement in January, the Department of Justice said that some investigative files in the massive tranche released would include unsubstantiated claims about Trump.
“Some of the documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 election. To be clear, the claims are unfounded and false, and if they have a shred of credibility, they certainly would have been weaponized against President Trump already,” the statement said.
Ali Staking talks about how she and her family reacted to Eric Richins’ sudden death and Kouri Richins’ subsequent murder trial. (ABC News)
(NEW YORK) — After Kouri Richins was charged with murder for fatally poisoning her husband with fentanyl, a friend of the Utah mother of three had a difficult time reconciling that.
In an exclusive interview with “20/20,” Ali Staking said she and her children were “devastated” about the sudden 2022 death of 39-year-old Eric Richins.
“I said, along the way, ‘Sometimes it looks like Kouri might have done it,'” Staking recalled saying to her children. “Then my kids would say, ‘Well, did she?’ And I’d say ‘I don’t think so. But, you know, it sometimes looks like it.'”
A Summit County jury ultimately found 35-year-old Kouri Richins guilty of aggravated murder on Monday, after prosecutors argued during the three-week trial that she killed her husband for financial gain by giving him a lethal dose of fentanyl in a cocktail.
Eric Richins was found dead in bed on March 4, 2022. An autopsy determined that he died from fentanyl intoxication, and the level of fentanyl in his blood was approximately five times the lethal dosage, according to the charging document. The medical examiner determined the fentanyl was “illicit fentanyl,” not medical grade, according to the charging document.
Kouri Richins, who self-published a children’s book on grief following her husband’s death, was arrested in May 2023 following a lengthy investigation.
The charges alleged that she spiked his drink with a lethal dose of fentanyl that she purchased illicitly, and that she also gave her husband a sandwich laced with fentanyl on Valentine’s Day two weeks before his death in an initial, failed attempt to kill him.
Prosecutors argued that Kouri Richins wanted a “fresh start” and to leave her husband, but didn’t want to leave his money. They said she was in “financial desperation” due to her house flipping business’ debts and needed a significant influx of cash immediately.
According to prosecutors, she believed she would have financially benefited from her husband’s death — without realizing that his assets were in a trust overseen by one of his sisters.
A jury found her guilty of all five counts, including aggravated murder and attempted aggravated murder, after about three hours of deliberations on Monday. She was also found guilty of insurance fraud for taking out a $100,000 insurance policy on her husband’s life with his forged signature and also for submitting a claim following his death.
Kouri Richins, who had pleaded not guilty and asserted her innocence from jail, did not testify during the trial and the defense called no witnesses. Her sentencing has been scheduled for May 13. She faces 25 years to life in prison.
Staking, who testified during the trial, said she was “very surprised that there was no defense.”
ABC News contributor Brian Buckmire suggested this was a reflection of the defense’s confidence.
“They may believe the prosecution didn’t make out their case, that having any witness on the stand wouldn’t make sense because they’ve already won their case,” he told “20/20.”
Staking said it was “surreal” learning that Eric Richins had died, describing him as a “dedicated dad” and a “goofy cowboy dude who loved to dance.”
“He had so much more life to live and he wanted so much for his boys,” she said. “I’m gonna remember just how much he loved them.”
Kouri Richins also faces more than two dozen charges in a separate case filed last year, including allegations that she committed mortgage fraud in 2021. The charging document alleges she submitted falsified bank statements in support of mortgage loan applications for her realty business, committed money laundering and issued bad checks.
The charges in the case also allege she murdered her husband for financial gain as she “stood on the precipice of total financial collapse.”
She has not yet entered a plea to those charges.
Staking said she wants Eric Richins to be remembered as a “loving dad.”
“I believe Eric is with his kids all the time every day,” she said. “I don’t think there’s anywhere else he’d wanna be.”
