Argentina's Kirchner urges backers not to gather as police deploy

Argentine ex-president Cristina Kirchner urged supporters Friday not to gather outside her Buenos Aires apartment, where she is serving a six-year fraud sentence, saying she feared police violence.
Kirchner alleged on social media the government had "orchestrated a police operation at the door of my house with the sole purpose of provoking conflicts."
She called on her backers, who held a days-long vigil outside her flat, to exercise "wisdom and restraint" and to organize a demonstration planned for Friday elsewhere.
AFP witnessed police barriers around the building, with several police trucks stationed nearby.
The 72-year-old, convicted of "fraudulent administration" over public works contracts awarded during her 2007-2015 two-term presidency, had an appeal overturned by the Supreme Court last week.
The court upheld her sentence and a life ban on holding public office.
A different judge allowed Kirchner to serve her sentence at home, which quickly became the scene of solidarity demonstrations.
On Wednesday, tens of thousands of people marched on a central square under the banner "Argentina with Cristina."
The following day, a judge ruled Kirchner may use her second-floor balcony, under which supporters had been keeping vigil and where she made several brief appearances.
A ban on "any behavior that could disturb the peace of the neighborhood" had led to fears she could be confined indoors.
Kirchner has challenged limited visitation rights ordered by the court, restricted to family members, doctors and lawyers in what her team described as "a totally arbitrary exclusion regime."
There has been speculation Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva could try and visit her when he travels to Buenos Aires for a summit in July.
He would have to request a court's permission.
sa/dga/ial/lpt/mlr/sms

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

2 hours ago

• Yahoo

Woman prosecuted for riding e-scooter in public says 'store shouldn't sell them'

A WOMAN brought before a court for riding an e-scooter in public without a licence or insurance said the store she bought it from 'shouldn't be allowed to sell them'. Haley Bower, 37, was stopped by officers while riding the vehicle along the pavement on the A596 at Siddick at 10.30pm on March 7. Pamela Fee, prosecuting at Workington Magistrates' Court, said police spoke to the defendant and told her the e-scooter had to be road legal and licensed. Ms Fee said it then became clear that Bower only had a provisional licence and there was no insurance for the vehicle being used in a public place. Police could smell cannabis and a search was carried out under the Misuse of Drugs Act. A small wrap of cannabis, a joint and a grinder were found. The e-scooter was seized by police and Bower was reported for driving it without a licence and without insurance. Bower, who was not legally represented, said: 'I didn't know I wasn't allowed to use the thing. They shouldn't be allowed to sell them in Halfords. 'I was driving up and down the lane. I didn't know it wasn't allowed.' Bower, of Hillcrest, Northside. Workington, pleaded guilty to driving a motor vehicle otherwise than in accordance with a licence, using a motor vehicle in a public place without third party insurance and possessing a Class B drug. Passing sentence, presiding magistrate Mark Gear, said: 'There is a surge of people riding these e-scooters on pavements and things. There is some sympathy with you about how you got it from Halfords. 'We are here to protect other people. 'The reason for you having it is legitimate. In the wrong hands, people are being injured by them and the court has to take a view on that. 'You did take it outside the remit of your own land and we have to deal with that.' Bower was fined £80 and ordered to pay £85 costs and a £64 victim surcharge. Her driving licence was endorsed with six points. An order was made for the forfeiture and destruction of the cannabis.

Yahoo

4 hours ago

• Yahoo

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson blasts 'narrow-minded' judging on SCOTUS: ANALYSIS

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson unloaded on her Supreme Court colleagues Friday in a series of sharp dissents, castigating what she called a "pure textualism" approach to interpreting laws, which she said had become a pretext for securing their desired outcomes, and implying the conservative justices have strayed from their oath by showing favoritism to "moneyed interests." The attack on the court's conservative majority by the junior justice and member of the liberal wing is notably pointed and aggressive but stopped short of getting personal. It laid bare the stark divisions on the court and pent-up frustration in the minority over what Jackson described as inconsistent and unfair application of precedent by those in power. Jackson took particular aim at Justice Neil Gorsuch's majority opinion in a case brought by a retired Florida firefighter with Parkinson's disease who had tried to sue under the Americans with Disabilities Act after her former employer, the City of Sanford, canceled extended health insurance coverage for retirees who left the force before serving 25 years because of a disability. MORE: Supreme Court upholds a state law banning some gender-affirming care for transgenders kids Gorsuch wrote that the landmark law only protects "qualified individuals" and that retirees don't count. The ADA defines the qualified class as those who "can perform the essential functions of the employment position that such individual holds or desires." "This court has long recognized that the textual limitations upon a law's scope must be understood as no less a part of its purpose than its substantive authorizations," Gorsuch concluded in his opinion in Stanley v. City of Sanford. It was joined by all the court's conservatives and liberal Justice Elena Kagan. Jackson fired back, accusing her colleagues of reaching a "stingy outcome" and willfully ignoring the "clear design of the ADA to render a ruling that plainly counteracts what Congress meant to -- and did -- accomplish" with the law. She said they had "run in a series of textualist circles" and that the majority "closes its eyes to context, enactment history and the legislature's goals." "I cannot abide that narrow-minded approach," she wrote. MORE: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson says 'whole truth' about Black history must be taught Gorsuch retorted that Jackson was simply complaining textualism didn't get her the outcome she wanted, prompting Jackson to take the rare step of using a lengthy footnote to accuse her colleague of the same. Saying the majority has a "unfortunate misunderstanding of the judicial role," Jackson said her colleagues' "refusal" to consider Congress' intent behind the ADA "turns the interpretative task into a potent weapon for advancing judicial policy preferences." "By 'finding' answers in ambiguous text," she wrote, "and not bothering to consider whether those answers align with other sources of statutory meaning, pure textualists can easily disguise their own preferences." Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who joined parts of Jackson's dissent, explicitly did not sign-on to the footnote. Justice Elena Kagan, a member of the liberal wing, joined the conservative majority in all three cases in which Jackson dissented, but she did not explain her views. In 2015, Kagan famously said, "we're all textualists now" of the court, but years later disavowed that approach over alleged abuse by conservative jurists. MORE: Supreme Court allows Trump to begin removing 500,000 immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela In two other cases decided Friday, Jackson accused her colleagues of distorting the law to benefit major American businesses and in so doing "erode the public trust." She dissented from Justice Amy Coney Barrett's majority opinion siding with major tobacco manufacturer, R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co., that gives retailers the ability to sue the Food and Drug Administration over the denial of new product applications for e-cigarettes. Barrett concluded that a federal law meant to regulate the manufacture and distribution of new tobacco products also allows retailers who would sell the products to seek judicial review of an adverse FDA decision. Jackson blasted the conclusion as "illogical" again taking her colleagues to task for not sufficiently considering Congress' intent or longstanding precedent. "Every available indictor reveals that Congress intended to permit manufacturers -- not retailers -- to challenge the denial," she wrote. MORE: Justice Stephen Breyer's blunt message to Supreme Court conservatives: 'Slow down' Of the court's 7-2 decision by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, giving gasoline producers the right to sue California over limits on emission-producing cars, Jackson said her colleagues were favoring the fuel industry over "less powerful plaintiffs." "This case gives fodder to the unfortunate perception that moneyed interests enjoy an easier road to relief in this Court than ordinary citizens," she wrote. Jackson argued that the case should have been mooted, since the Trump administration withdrew EPA approval for California's emissions standards thereby eliminating any alleged harm to the auto and fuel industry. MORE: Supreme Court limits environmental impact studies, expediting infrastructure projects "Those of us who are privileged to work inside the Court must not lose sight of this institution's unique mission and responsibility: to rule without fear or favor," she wrote, admonishing her colleagues. The court is next scheduled to convene Thursday, June 26, to release another round of opinions in cases argued this term. Decisions are expected in a dispute over online age verification for adult websites, parental opt-out rights for kids in public schools exposed to LGBTQ themes, and, the scope of nationwide injunctions against President Donald Trump's second-term policies.

Yahoo

4 hours ago

• Yahoo

Three men guilty of repeatedly raping 12-year-old girl over three days

Three men are facing jail after being found guilty of rape after drugging a young girl and 'using her for their own horrendous gratification' over multiple days. Kevin Horvath, 26, and Ivan Turtak, 38, saw the 12-year-old victim in a supermarket car park in Dover and encouraged her to get in their car on August 11 2024, a Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) spokesperson said. She was then plied with drugs including crystal meth and amphetamine before she was raped and subjected to sexual acts by them and a third man, Ernest Gunar, 27, over a three-day period. The girl managed to escape from her captors after waking up before them on August 13. On Thursday, jurors at Canterbury Crown Court found the three men guilty of a series of sexual offences including rape of a 12-year-old girl after over 14 hours of deliberation. After trial, Gunar was convicted of two counts of rape against a child under 13; Turtak was convicted of one count; and Horvath was convicted of sexual assault. Horvath had already admitted three counts of rape against a child under 13, and one charge of assault by penetration of a child under 13, and Gunar, who is thought to be his cousin, had also admitted one charge of rape. Turtak initially denied rape but did admit taking indecent photos of a child. During the three-day period, whenever they went out in public, the girl was told that she would be killed if she tried to talk to anyone or tried to run away, a CPS spokesperson said. She was found by police on August 13 after escaping from the three men. Her phone had been taken from her and was later found in Horvath's car. Senior Crown Prosecutor Catherine Wear said: 'The three defendants took a 12-year-old from the street, took full advantage of her, plying her with drugs and using her for their own horrendous gratification. 'None of us can underestimate the impact this has had on her. When she was first found by police, she was unable to tell them what she had been put through, as she was so scared, and the details only came out gradually after that. 'Thanks to her courage in detailing what happened to her, despite the obvious distress that caused her, these three dangerous men have now been brought to justice for the appalling and callous crimes they committed against her. 'We hope these verdicts bring some small comfort to her as she starts to rebuild her life.' Horvath and Turtak, of Dover, along with Gunar, of Folkestone, will be sentenced on September 12.