UnitedHealthcare CEO shooting latest: Manhunt for killer enters 3rd day
NYPD
(NEW YORK) — The unidentified man suspected of gunning down UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson outside a Midtown Manhattan hotel remains at large after Wednesday’s attack, which was described by police as “brazen, targeted” and “premeditated.”
The killer entered New York City by bus on Nov. 24, when a surveillance camera at Port Authority Bus Terminal caught his arrival at 9 p.m., law enforcement sources told ABC News.
The inbound bus originated in Atlanta but it was not immediately clear where the suspected boarded.
Police are investigating whether the suspect left New York City by bus on Wednesday after the murder.
The 10-day period he was in New York City before the shooting is the focus of investigative efforts.
Police have collected video of the suspect all over the city, including in the subway, in cabs and in a McDonald’s, sources told ABC News. In each place, he paid with cash and he made sure to keep his mask on, which indicates to detectives he knew he was coming to New York City to commit the murder, sources said.
Police were able to find a surveillance image of the suspect without his face mask on because he was flirting with the woman who checked him into the hostel, police sources said.
As he stood at the check-in desk, the sources said the woman asked to see his smile. The shooter obliged, pulling down his mask long enough for the surveillance camera to capture his face.
Police have determined the suspect checked into the hostel using a New Jersey license that wasn’t his own, police sources told ABC News.
The masked gunman shot Thompson at point-blank range at 6:44 a.m. Wednesday outside the New York Hilton Midtown, where Thompson was heading for his company’s investors conference.
“The shooter then walks toward the victim and continues to shoot,” NYPD Chief of Detectives Joseph Kenny said. “It appears that the gun malfunctions, as he clears the jam and begins to fire again.”
Written on the shell casings were the words “deny,” “defend” and “depose,” according to police sources.
The words on the bullets echo the title of the 2010 book “Delay, Deny, Defend: Why Insurance Companies Don’t Pay Claims and What You Can Do About It.” Police are aware of the similarity, and are investigating whether one possible motive is anger at the insurance industry, sources said.
The suspect fled on foot into an alley, where a phone believed to be linked to the suspect was later recovered, police sources said.
He then fled north on a bike and rode into Central Park, police said.
A person appearing to be the suspect was seen just before 7 a.m. on the Upper West Side, riding a bicycle away from Central Park. He has not been spotted since.
UnitedHealth Group said in a statement that its “hearts are broken” and that they have been “touched by the huge outpouring of kindness and support.”
“So many patients, consumers, health care professionals, associations, government officials and other caring people have taken time out of their day to reach out. We are thankful, even as we grieve,” UnitedHealth Group, parent company of UnitedHealthcare, said. “Our priorities are, first and foremost, supporting Brian’s family; ensuring the safety of our employees; and working with law enforcement to bring the perpetrator to justice.”
“We, at UnitedHealth Group, will continue to be there for those who depend upon us for their health care,” the statement continued. “We ask that everyone respect the family’s privacy as they mourn the loss of their husband, father, brother and friend.”
John J. Kim/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The bipartisan House Ethics Committee on Monday released a scathing report concluding its yearslong investigation into former Rep. Matt Gaetz, finding “substantial evidence” that he had sex with a 17-year-old in 2017 in violation of Florida’s statutory rape law, and engaged in a broader pattern of paying women for sex.
The report also detailed evidence of illegal drug use, acceptance of improper gifts, granting special favors to personal associates, and obstruction, after Gaetz refused to comply with subpoenas and withheld evidence from the committee.
A woman testified to the committee that Gaetz had sex with her in 2017, when she was 17 and had just completed her junior year of high school, and Gaetz was in his first year in Congress. Identified only as “Victim A” in the report, the woman told investigators she received $400 in cash from the then-congressman that evening, “which she understood to be payment for sex,” according to the report.
“The Committee received credible testimony from Victim A herself, as well as multiple individuals corroborating the allegation,” the report says. “Victim A said that she did not inform Representative Gaetz that she was under 18 at the time, nor did he ask her age.”
While many of the allegations in the committee’s report have been previously reported, this is the first time the woman’s direct testimony about Gaetz having sex with her when she was a minor has been made public, along with corroborating testimony from others.
Investigators noted that while the former Florida congressman has “suggested that the allegations against him have been manufactured” and had called into question Victim A’s credibility, “the Committee found no reason to doubt the credibility of Victim A.”
The report details that between 2017-2020, records obtained by the committee show Gaetz paid nearly $100,000 dollars to 12 different women and to Joel Greenberg, his one-time close friend who in 2021 pleaded guilty to numerous crimes, including sex trafficking Victim A.
While all the women who testified to the committee described their sexual encounters with Gaetz as consensual, according to the report, one woman raised concerns that drug use at the parties and events may have “impair[ed their] ability to really know what was going on or fully consent.” Another woman told the committee, “When I look back on certain moments, I feel violated.”
The report alleges that Gaetz “took advantage of the economic vulnerability of young women to lure them into sexual activity for which they received an average of a few hundred dollars after each encounter.”
“Such behavior is not ‘generosity to ex-girlfriends,’ and it does not reflect creditably upon the House,” the report reads, referencing the former congressman’s previous statement dismissing the allegations as someone “trying to recategorize my generosity to ex-girlfriends as something more untoward.”
“Based on the above, the Committee determined there is substantial evidence that Representative Gaetz violated House Rules and other standards of conduct prohibiting prostitution, statutory rape, illicit drug use, impermissible gifts, special favors or privileges, and obstruction of Congress,” the report says.
Gaetz has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing. The Justice Department declined to charge him last year after a yearslong investigation into similar allegations.
President-elect Donald Trump last month tapped Gaetz to serve as attorney general in the incoming administration, and Gaetz resigned his congressional seat shortly after. Gaetz subsequently withdrew his name from consideration for AG, saying his confirmation process was “unfairly becoming a distraction to the critical work of the Trump/Vance Transition.”
The Ethics Committee was in the final stages of its probe into Gaetz when Trump tapped him for attorney general. The committee generally drops investigations of members if they leave office, but Gaetz’s resignation prompted a fiery debate on Capitol Hill over whether the panel should release its report to allow the Senate to perform its role of vetting presidential nominations.
Following indications last week that the committee would release its report, Gaetz took to X in a lengthy post, writing in part that when he was single he “often sent funds to women” he dated and that he “never had sexual contact with someone under 18.”
“It’s embarrassing, though not criminal, that I probably partied, womanized, drank and smoked more than I should have earlier in life. I live a different life now,” he posted. “I’ve never been charged. I’ve never been sued. Instead, House Ethics will reportedly post a report online that I have no opportunity to debate or rebut as a former member of the body.”
In its report, the committee concluded that it did not find substantial evidence that Gaetz violated federal sex trafficking laws, finding that while Gaetz “did cause the transportation of women across state lines for purposes of commercial sex,” investigators did not find evidence “that any of those women were under 18 at the time of travel, nor did the Committee find sufficient evidence to conclude that the commercial sex acts were induced by force, fraud, or coercion.”
According to the report, the committee conducted over two dozen interviews, issued 29 subpoenas, reviewed nearly 14,000 documents, and requested information from multiple government agencies as part of its extensive investigation into the allegations.
The committee received written testimony from Greenberg but, due to credibility concerns, investigators said they would “not rely exclusively on information provided by Mr. Greenberg,” according to the report.
The committee also accused Gaetz of obstructing its investigation by ignoring subpoenas, withholding documents, and declining to answer questions about the allegations.
“Representative Gaetz continuously sought to deflect, deter, or mislead the Committee in order to prevent his actions from being exposed,” the report reads. “His actions undermine not only his claims that he had exculpatory information to provide, but also his claims that he intended to cooperate with the Committee in good faith. It is apparent that Representative Gaetz’s assertions were nothing more than attempts to delay the Committee’s investigation.”
The committee had been investigating allegations that Gaetz engaged in sexual misconduct and illicit drug use, shared inappropriate images or videos on the House floor, misused state identification records, converted campaign funds to personal use, and/or accepted a bribe, improper gratuity, or impermissible gift, according to sources.
Earlier this year, the committee released a statement that it would continue its probe but would no longer pursue allegations that Gaetz “may have shared inappropriate images or videos on the House floor, misused state identification records, converted campaign funds to personal use, and/or accepted a bribe or improper gratuity.”
According to the report, while several committee members did not support its release, a majority of its members voted in favor of its release on Dec. 10. In a statement at the conclusion of the report, House Ethics Chairman Michael Guest reiterated his stance against the release of the report on behalf of the dissenting members while acknowledging that he and other members do not dispute the report’s findings.
“We believe and remain steadfast in the position that the House Committee on Ethics lost jurisdiction to release to the public any substantive work product regarding Mr. Gaetz after his resignation from the House on November 14, 2024,” Guest wrote.
Earlier Monday Gaetz filed a lawsuit against the Ethics Committee in an effort to stop the committee from releasing its report.
“This action challenges the Committee’s unconstitutional and ultra vires attempt to exercise jurisdiction over a private citizen through the threatened release of an investigative report containing potentially defamatory allegations,” the filing from Gaetz said.
Gaetz in the filing asked the court to issue a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction to block the release of the report or any findings, which he says would cause “damage to his reputation and professional standing” that would be “immediate and severe.”
“The threatened release of information believed to be defamatory by a Congressional committee concerning matters of sexual propriety and other acts of alleged moral turpitude constitutes irreparable harm that cannot be adequately remedied through monetary damages,” the filing stated.
“After Plaintiff’s resignation from Congress, Defendants improperly continued to act on its investigation, and apparently voted to publicly release reports and/or investigative materials related to Plaintiff without proper notice or disclosure to Plaintiff,” the complaint said.
Following the report’s release Monday, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta gave Gaetz until 5 p.m. ET to show why the suit shouldn’t be dismissed with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction, given “this case appears to be moot in light of the House Ethics Committee’s public disclosure of the report.”
In a subsequent filing, attorneys for Gaetz acknowledged that their lawsuit is now “mooted” following the release of the report — a move they said has caused Gaetz “irreversible and irreparable harm.”
The filing said the committee’s decision to release the report was “unprecedented and procedurally defective,” and reiterated their claim that it was released without notifying him.
(NEW YORK) — Jussie Smollett’s attorney said the actor was “harmed substantially” after he was found guilty of lying about a 2019 hate crime in an interview with “GMA3” following the overturning of his conviction.
The Illinois Supreme Court threw out the former “Empire” actor’s conviction in a decision on Thursday after concluding that the state’s prosecution was unfair due to an agreement that initially dropped the charges.
Smollett was first indicted on 16 felony counts of disorderly conduct for filing a false police report, though Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx agreed to drop the charges if he paid $10,000 and did community service. A special prosecutor later charged him again, leading to his trial and conviction.
In its decision on Thursday, the court found that the state could not bring a second prosecution against Smollett after the initial charges were dismissed, and that reneging on the agreement “would be arbitrary, unreasonable, fundamentally unfair, and a violation of the defendant’s due process rights.”
Tina Glandian, Smollett’s attorney, told “GMA3” on Friday that they have been fighting the second prosecution from the start as “completely illegal.”
“It violates numerous constitutional provisions,” she said. “We’ve raised this numerous, numerous times before, various courts. And finally yesterday, the Supreme Court of Illinois agreed with us and said the second prosecution was barred because there was an agreement in place and the state is bound to honor its word.”
The case began after the openly gay actor told police he was attacked by two men while walking on a street near his Chicago apartment early on Jan. 29, 2019. The attackers allegedly shouted racist and homophobic slurs before hitting him, pouring “an unknown chemical substance” on him and wrapping a rope around his neck.
Chicago police said Smollett’s story of being the victim of an attack began to unravel when investigators tracked down two men, brothers Abimbola and Olabinjo Osundairo, who they said were seen in a security video near where Smollett claimed he was assaulted and around the same time it supposedly occurred. The Osundairo brothers told police the actor paid them $3,500 to help him orchestrate and stage the crime.
A jury convicted Smollett in December 2021 on five of six felony counts of disorderly conduct stemming from filing a false police report and lying to police, who spent more than $130,000 investigating his allegations.
Dan Webb, who was appointed by a Cook County judge to continue looking into the case after the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office initially dropped all charges against the actor, said he was “disappointed” in the court’s decision and noted that the ruling “has nothing to do with Mr. Smollett’s innocence.”
“The Illinois Supreme Court did not find any error with the overwhelming evidence presented at trial that Mr. Smollett orchestrated a fake hate crime and reported it to the Chicago Police Department as a real hate crime, or the jury’s unanimous verdict that Mr. Smollett was guilty of five counts of felony disorderly conduct,” he said in a statement.
Glandian said Smollett continues to maintain his innocence and has “vehemently denied” any participation in a hoax.
“We do believe he didn’t get a fair trial, that the jury didn’t hear all the evidence that should have [been] heard, that things were improperly excluded, that the jury panel was not properly put together,” she said. “The Supreme Court yesterday didn’t get to that issue. They said legally this was invalid. It violated his due process and they, based on that, threw out the conviction. But we still maintain that he didn’t receive a fair trial.”
In the wake of the case, she said Smollett has been releasing music and “continued to do what he does best.”
“I think hopefully, obviously this can only help matters because he was harmed substantially after everything that happened, and of course, the convictions and the sentence that was imposed,” she said.
Webb said that despite the Illinois Supreme Court’s decision, the city of Chicago is still able to pursue its pending civil lawsuit against Smollett in order to recoup the investigation costs.
Glandian said she hopes the city “does the right thing” and dismisses that case.
“He’s incurred substantial legal fees. He spent six days in jail, all of which now has been said by the highest court in Illinois was completely unconstitutional,” Glandian said. “So for the city now to further proceed, we’ll see what they do. But hopefully they dismiss that case immediately.”
(SANTA CRUZ, Calif.) — A powerful storm pummeling the West Coast churned up waves as high as 60 feet, killing one man, sweeping another out to sea and prompting multiple rescues when a pier collapsed in Santa Cruz, California, authorities said.
A series of storms leading into Christmas are expected to continue to pound the West Coast on Tuesday with heavy rain, gusty winds and giant ocean waves.
On Monday, the wild weather turned deadly in Santa Cruz when a large wave hit a man, trapping him beneath debris at a beach, according to the Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Office.
The death unfolded around 11:30 a.m. local time at Sunset State Beach in Santa Cruz, about 75 miles south of San Francisco. First responders managed to pull the man from the water, but he was later pronounced dead at a hospital, the sheriff’s office said. The man’s name was not immediately released.
The storm also caused the Santa Cruz Municipal Wharf pier to partially collapse, according to the sheriff’s office. Three men, all members of a city crew working on the pier at the time, were thrown into the ocean, according to the sheriff’s office.
Lifeguards sprang into action and rescued two of the men, while the third worker swam to shore on his own. None of the men were seriously injured, according to Santa Cruz Mayor Fred Keeley.
The incident lopped off a 150-foot section at the end of the pier, which was undergoing a $4 million restoration. Large chunks of the pier were left floating in the water.
Video showed one worker stranded on a piece of the pier floating in the water being rescued by a first responder on a jet ski.
The sheriff’s office also issued an evacuation order Monday afternoon for oceanfront residents along an approximately 3-mile stretch of shoreline just south of Santa Cruz, citing large swells and high tides.
The National Weather Service in the Bay Area warned that “dangerous and life-threatening beach conditions” are forecast for along the Pacific Coast through Tuesday, including rough seas and breaking waves up to 60 feet.
A separate rescue attempt occurred Monday near Monterey, where authorities believe high surf likely pulled a man into the ocean. The incident happened at Marina State Beach along the Monterey Bay around noon, according to the Marina Police Department.
“Bystanders attempted to assist the individual; however, due to extremely large waves and strong currents, their rescue efforts were unsuccessful,” police said in a statement.
Marina police officers, firefighters, U.S. Coast Guard and the California Highway Patrol launched an extensive search for the man using boats and aircraft, but were forced to suspend the rescue operation when weather conditions became too dangerous, police said. The man, who was not immediately identified, remained missing Tuesday morning.
At the time of the search, the National Weather Service estimated waves in the Santa Cruz area to be 25 to 50 feet, according to police.
High surf warnings were issued up and down the West Coast from Washington to Southern California.
The Santa Cruz Sheriff’s office said first responders also made water rescues in a harbor near Capitola, about 4 miles south of Santa Cruz.
ABC News’ Meredith Deliso and Julia Jacobo contributed to this report.
