Latest news with #Manhattan
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
90s actor who starred with Julia Roberts and Melanie Griffith is unrecognizable with shockingly thin frame
Fans of '80s and '90s movies were in for a treat when one of the most beloved scene-stealers from those decades made a rare appearance in Manhattan on Friday. The iconic actor, now 65, turned heads during a brisk walk through the West Village—looking shockingly thin and nearly unrecognizable. The slimmed-down look was a far cry from the full-figured stockbroker he played opposite Melanie Griffith in 1989's Working Girl. It also marked a major departure from his heftier appearance in 1990's Flatliners, where he starred alongside Julia Roberts, Kevin Bacon, and Kiefer Sutherland. Dressed in a gray polo and navy shorts, the Tony-nominated star—who also appeared in Indecent Proposal and Benny & Joon—seemed to be getting in a workout, breaking a sweat while carrying a water bottle. Can you guess the star? Fans of '80s and '90s movies were in for a treat when one of the most beloved scene-stealers from those decades made a rare appearance in Manhattan on Friday The iconic actor, now 65, turned heads during a brisk walk through the West Village—looking shockingly thin and nearly unrecognizable If you said Oliver Platt, you're right! Back in 1999, Platt reflected on his career during a particularly busy moment, with three major films hitting theaters: Three to Tango with Matthew Perry, Bicentennial Man alongside Robin Williams, and Lake Placid with Betty White. 'I look back at the movies I've made, and there's not a single one I regret,' he told Esquire. 'But I like them for different reasons—some were fun to do, and for others the result was satisfying.' Platt singled out a few personal favorites. 'Funny Bones is really dear to me, but such a tense experience. Then there's The Impostors, which was criminally fun to make,' he said, referencing the 1998 comedy in which he and Stanley Tucci played struggling New York actors posing as stewards aboard a luxury liner bound for France. 'We kept saying to each other, "I can't believe we're getting paid for this—oh, yeah, we aren't."' In addition to his film career, Platt has earned critical acclaim across both television and theater. He's received five Primetime Emmy nominations, a Golden Globe nod, and two Screen Actors Guild Award nominations, including recognition for his role as George Steinbrenner in ESPN's The Bronx Is Burning (2007). He was also Emmy-nominated for standout guest appearances in The West Wing (2001), Huff (2005–2006), and Nip/Tuck (2008). Platt is a familiar face on the small screen, known for major roles in The Big C, Fargo, and The Good Wife, as well as his ongoing performances as Uncle Jimmy on Hulu's The Bear. On Broadway, he made his debut in Conor McPherson's Shining City in 2006, earning a Tony Award nomination for Best Actor. He later returned to the stage as Nathan Detroit in the 2009 revival of Guys and Dolls.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Contributor: By wearing masks, immigration agents undermine authority and endanger us all
On Tuesday, New York City Comptroller Brad Lander was arrested by several masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents at a courthouse in Manhattan as he attempted to steer an individual past immigration authorities. That same day, masked agents outside a Walmart in Pico Rivera detained two individuals — one a target of immigration enforcement, the other a U.S. citizen who tried to intervene. These two scenes from opposite sides of the country illustrate what has become a more common problem: federal agents wearing masks to avoid recognition. On Thursday, masked individuals said to be affiliated with the Department of Homeland Security descended on a Home Depot in Hollywood and on Dodger Stadium. Masking is not good law enforcement practice. It may contradict Homeland Security regulations, while potentially providing cover for some officers to violate constitutional and civil rights. It undermines agents' authority and endangers public safety as well. The federal government has no specific policy banning immigration agents from wearing masks. But the fact that such practice is not illegal does not make it acceptable. Department of Homeland Security regulations require immigration officers to identify themselves during an arrest or, in cases of a warrantless arrest, provide a statement explaining how they identified themselves. The use of masks seems to violate the intent of these directives for identification. ICE agents in masks are becoming disturbingly routine. There were ICE agents in masks at the Los Angeles immigration protests recently, just as there have been at enforcement actions in Minneapolis, Boston, Phoenix and across the country. In March a video of Rumeysa Ozturk, a doctoral student at Tufts University, being detained by masked officers on the street went viral. There seems to be no uniformity in the face coverings immigration agents wear, which has included ski masks, surgical masks, balaclavas and sunglasses. Such inconsistency across a federal workforce flies in the face of sound policing. Masked agents can confuse both bystanders and ICE targets, which risks people interfering with enforcement actions that look more like kidnappings. The International Assn. of Chiefs of Police has warned that the public 'may be intimidated or fearful of officers wearing a face covering, which may heighten their defensive reactions.' Todd Lyons, acting director of ICE, said earlier this month that immigration agents wear masks to protect themselves. "I'm sorry if people are offended by them wearing masks,' he said, 'but I'm not going to let my officers and agents go out there and put their lives on the line, their family on the line, because people don't like what immigration enforcement is.' Yet law enforcement jobs come with an assumption of exactly that risk. Consider that the overwhelming majority of police officers, sheriffs and FBI agents fulfill their duties without concealing their faces. Correction officers who deal with prisoners do not wear masks, nor do judges who administer our laws. Because these public employees have such tremendous power, their roles require full transparency. Besides, ICE agents are increasingly targeting noncriminals, which mitigates the argument that agents require masks for safety. According to the research site Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, about 44% of people in ICE detention as of June 1 have no criminal record. When ICE agents wear masks, there can be unintended consequences. Lately, there has been a spike in people impersonating agents and engaging in harassment, assault and violence. In April, a Florida woman wore a mask as she posed as an ICE agent and attempted to kidnap her ex-boyfriend's wife. Ironically, the Trump administration has a double standard around the idea of people wearing masks. It has demanded that universities bar students from wearing masks during protests. In the aftermath of the Los Angeles immigration protests, the president posted on social media, 'From now on, MASKS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED to be worn at protests.' Shouldn't that principle be applied to both sides? True, it makes sense for immigration agents to use face coverings when they are making arrests of a high-profile target or conducting an undercover operation. However, masking should be the exception, not the norm. If ICE agents are conducting their duties anonymously, they open the door to potential civil rights and due process violations. The practice gives impunity to agents to make unlawful arrests, without the possibility of public accountability. Masking can also be seen as a show of intimidation by immigration agents — whether their target is an undocumented migrant or an American citizen, like Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, who was arrested outside a New Jersey detention facility in May. Masked ICE agents give the impression of being a secret police force, which is not good for our democracy. Last week, two Democratic lawmakers in California introduced a bill that would bar local, state and federal law enforcement officers in California from wearing masks on duty (with certain exceptions). Although this is a step in the right direction, it remains unclear whether such a state measure could be applied to federal agents. Congress should ban the use of masks by immigration agents. ICE officers should not be allowed to conceal their faces. The public's need for accountability strongly outweighs any rationale for agents' anonymity. Raul A. Reyes is an immigration attorney and contributor to NBC Latino and CNN Opinion. X: @RaulAReyes; Instagram: @raulareyes1 If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Globe and Mail
4 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Manhattan Child Custody Lawyer Richard Roman Shum Explains What Can Be Used Against a Parent in a Custody Battle
Navigating a custody dispute requires clarity, preparation, and an understanding of what courts consider when determining the best arrangement for a child. Manhattan child custody lawyer Richard Roman Shum ( sheds light on these legal challenges in his recent article, 'What Can Be Used Against You in a Custody Battle?' This insightful breakdown helps parents understand what factors may negatively influence a judge's custody decision in New York. Richard Roman Shum, a Manhattan child custody lawyer at the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq., explains that New York courts assess custody based on the child's best interests. No preference is given to either parent based on gender. Every decision made by the court reflects a comprehensive evaluation of the parent's ability to provide a safe, stable, and nurturing environment. As Shum outlines, actions and behaviors that may seem minor in daily life—like missing visits, sending inappropriate messages, or failing to comply with court orders—can become pivotal in custody proceedings. One of the key areas that courts examine, as noted by Manhattan child custody lawyer Richard Roman Shum, is any history of abuse. This includes physical, emotional, or psychological harm. 'A consistent pattern of physical aggression, such as hitting, choking, or inflicting bodily harm, indicates a potentially dangerous environment, and courts will act to protect the child from future risk,' he states. Even if the abuse does not happen in the child's presence, it can still impact custody decisions. Harassment, intimidation, or controlling behaviors are also taken seriously, especially when they create an unstable home. Substance abuse is another significant factor in custody cases. Shum explains that courts consider not only whether a parent has a history of drug or alcohol misuse, but also the steps taken to address the issue. Voluntarily participating in treatment programs, maintaining long-term sobriety, and agreeing to supervised visitation or drug testing are all positive indicators of parental responsibility. On the other hand, denial, concealment of substance use, or refusal to comply with monitoring measures can undermine a parent's position. Mental and emotional health plays a similarly critical role in the court's analysis. According to Richard Roman Shum, courts do not automatically penalize parents for having a mental health diagnosis. What matters is whether the condition affects their ability to parent. For instance, untreated symptoms that result in unpredictable or disruptive behavior may be viewed as compromising to a child's welfare. However, consistent treatment and medical compliance can demonstrate stability and reliability in caregiving. Criminal history is also scrutinized, with a focus on the nature, timing, and frequency of offenses. Violent crimes, domestic violence, and serious drug offenses carry the greatest risk to a parent's custody claim. Even non-violent offenses can raise questions about judgment and reliability, particularly if the criminal behavior is recent or recurrent. Courts also consider whether a parent has made genuine efforts toward rehabilitation. Neglect and lack of involvement are additional red flags in custody proceedings. Failing to meet a child's physical, educational, or emotional needs is often interpreted as a lack of parental commitment. Richard Roman Shum outlines examples such as returning children without proper care, missing school events, or ignoring court-mandated visitations. Such behaviors can paint a picture of disengagement, which judges take seriously when considering custody arrangements. Financial stability is another core component. While income alone doesn't determine custody, the ability to consistently provide housing, food, clothing, and medical care reflects on a parent's suitability. Irresponsible financial behavior, such as unpaid child support, heavy debt, or unstable housing, can weaken a parent's case, especially when the other parent demonstrates greater consistency and responsibility. The article also discusses how non-compliance with legal orders, including court-mandated visitations, support payments, or protective directives, can significantly damage a custody claim. Failing to honor these obligations shows a disregard for legal structure and may lead to reduced parenting time or even supervised visitation. To improve custody outcomes, Richard Roman Shum emphasizes the importance of proactive steps. These include following all court orders, being actively involved in the child's life, addressing personal issues like substance abuse or mental health conditions voluntarily, maintaining a stable home, and communicating respectfully with the other parent. Courts in New York place a premium on action and consistency. Demonstrating reliable parenting through day-to-day involvement, adherence to legal requirements, and a focus on the child's well-being is key. As Shum explains, 'New York courts value action over intention, and tangible proof of good parenting will always carry more weight than verbal promises alone.' Parents facing custody disputes in Manhattan can look to the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. for guidance through every stage of the process. With legal support tailored to each family's circumstances, the firm helps clients avoid missteps and present the strongest possible case for custody. Building a strong foundation of stability, responsibility, and legal compliance is essential for securing favorable outcomes in court. Parents seeking direction and legal support in a custody matter can begin by consulting with the Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. A clear legal strategy and documented record of responsible parenting provide the best path to a custody arrangement that supports the child's best interests. About Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. The Law Office of Richard Roman Shum, Esq. serves families in Manhattan with legal representation focused on family law. The firm is committed to helping parents navigate custody disputes by providing guidance rooted in New York family law and the best interests of the child. Embeds: Youtube Video: GMB: Email and website Email: richard@ Website:
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Sean 'Diddy' Combs trial recap: Ex-assistant Brendan Paul testifies he bought drugs for Combs — but he was no 'drug mule'
The trial of Sean 'Diddy' Combs resumed Friday in Manhattan federal court, with Brendan Paul, a former assistant described in multiple civil lawsuits as Combs's 'drug mule,' testifying against him in the high-profile sex trafficking case. Federal prosecutors say that for decades, Combs abused, threatened and coerced women to participate in drug-fueled marathon sexual encounters called "freak offs" and used his business empire, along with guns, kidnapping and arson, to conceal his crimes. The defense has argued that the encounters were consensual, and Combs has denied any wrongdoing. The 55-year-old hip-hop mogul is facing five criminal counts: one count of racketeering conspiracy, two counts of sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion, and two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution. If convicted, he could face life in prison. Here are some key takeaways from Friday's testimony culled from various reporters and news organizations in the courtroom, including CNN, NBC News, and the Washington Post. Paul testified after invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Judge Arun Subramanian signed an immunity order compelling Paul's testimony. He told the court that he worked for Combs from 2022 until 2024, describing the grueling 80-to-100-hour weeks he spent helping coordinate the mogul's travel, fitness workouts, meal plans and assorted other needs, including setting up hotel rooms for "freak offs" — or what he knew as "wild king nights" — ahead of Combs's arrival. Like other former assistants, Paul said he would stock the rooms with supplies, including candles, condoms, Astroglide and a Gucci pouch that contained drugs. He also sometimes cleaned the rooms after the sex parties, he said. Paul testified that he would sometimes go days without sleep working for Combs, taking prescription Adderall and occasionally cocaine to stay awake. According to Paul, Combs likened his staff of assistants to SEAL Team 6, demanding they operate with no failures. Paul said that Combs 'fired' him numerous times, including once for forgetting to bring his boss's Lululemon fanny pack. The firings would always blow over within a day or two and he would continue working, he said. Paul testified that he was also tasked with buying drugs — including marijuana, cocaine, ketamine and ecstasy — for Combs. Combs or one of his other assistants would instruct him to obtain the drugs, which involved meeting with drug dealers with such nicknames as Guido, Baby Girl and One Stop, Paul said. Paul told the court that he would also pick up prescription drugs for Combs at pharmacies under Combs's real name or the alias "Frank Black." Once he procured the drugs, Paul said he would give them directly to Combs or put them in Combs's Gucci bag, where they were often stored. But under cross-examination by the defense, Paul testified that handling drugs was only a minor part of his work for Combs, and that it was his understanding that the drugs were for the mogul's personal use. 'You were not some drug mule, right?' defense attorney Brian Steel asked. 'Absolutely not,' Paul replied. Paul was arrested for possession of cocaine at Miami-Opa Locka Executive Airport in March 2024, around the same time federal agents raided Combs's homes. The charges were later dropped. He told the court that he got the cocaine while he was "sweeping" Combs's room and put it in his own bag, but then forgot to remove it before leaving for a family trip. 'I was sweeping his room and put it in my bag and forgot it while I was packing,' he explained. Paul said he told law enforcement that everything in the bag, including the cocaine, was his, and did not say where he got it out of "loyalty" to Combs. Big picture: Prosecutors hope to convince jurors that Combs used his business empire, including assistants like Paul, to procure drugs and help him set up "freak offs" as part of their racketeering conspiracy charge. But under cross-examination, Paul acknowledged that Combs did not ask him to travel with the cocaine, and that he had left it in his bag by mistake. While Joseph Cerciello, a special agent with Homeland Security Investigations, was on the stand, prosecutors entered into evidence text messages between Combs and Cassie Ventura, his former girlfriend and a star witness for the government's case. The messages were from March 2017, a year after Combs was captured on surveillance video assaulting Ventura in a Los Angeles hotel. "That's not love, that's possession," Ventura wrote to Combs in one of the messages, which was shown in court. At one point, Combs asked Ventura if she was "flipping" on him. She said she 'aint flipping' but that she also did not want to subject herself to another 'beat down.' Later in the exchange, Ventura told Combs, 'You treat me like a hooker to be honest. You always want to call one and you have one. This hooker has been here for 10 years.' Prosecutors had hoped to rest their case this week, but the court was adjourned without testimony Wednesday because a juror was sick with vertigo, delaying the proceedings. Court was not in session Thursday for the Juneteenth holiday. The government said it now expects to wrap up its case Monday. Combs's lead attorney, Marc Agnifilo, estimated it would take less than two days to present his defense, and likely rest on Tuesday or Wednesday. (The defense had already hinted that Combs probably won't testify.) Under that timeline, Subramanian said jury deliberations could begin Thursday after closing arguments, and asked both sides to prepare modifications to the proposed instructions that will be given to the jury when it gets the case.
CTV News
7 hours ago
- Climate
- CTV News
Boy struck by lightning in New York City's Central Park says he feels lucky
Central Park and buildings in midtown Manhattan are seen from the Rainbow Room, New York City's landmark restaurant atop 30 Rockefeller Plaza, Sunday, Oct. 5, 2014. (AP Photo/Mark Lennihan) NEW YORK — A 15-year-old boy says he feels 'pretty lucky' after being struck by lightning in Central Park on Thursday when a round of thunderstorms swept through New York City. Yassin Khalifa, a high school sophomore, told WABC-TV he was in the park with friends enjoying a picnic when the storm suddenly rolled in. 'I leaned up against a tree, and I told them, 'Oh, guys, let's ride out the storm,' which in hindsight might not have been the best idea,' Khalifa said. Khalifa said said he was knocked unconscious for several minutes. Crystal Mateo, 17, told the New York Times she witnessed the scene and saw Khalifa's friends frantically calling for help and trying to revive him. 'It was scary,' she said. 'I was crying.' Khalifa told WABC he was conscious when he was taken by ambulance to a hospital, where he was treated for burns on his neck and leg. Khalifa said he's expected to make a full recovery. 'Apparently, I'm pretty lucky, because my spine was directly against the tree and no nerve damage happened. So I'm like, not losing any sort of motor function,' Khalifa said. 'So I'm pretty happy about that.' Lightning kills around 30 people a year in the United States, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. Strikes, though, are usually not fatal. About 90 percent of people injured by a lightning bolt survive. The Associated Press
