In New Orleans I could not sleep. The city was still awake at two in the morning. I refused to be the first to quit.
I found a place called Cafe du Monde.
Three items on the menu. Beignets. Cafe au lait. Orange juice. Three items since 1862.
I bowed to the menu.
Jerome brought three beignets without asking. Golden squares buried under a mountain of powdered sugar. The dough underneath was a rumor.
I picked one up like a civilized man.
The sugar detonated.
My shirt. My hands. The table. A woman to my left minding her own business at two in the morning. She did not flinch. She was already white.
The man next to her was white. The chair behind her was white. The whole cafe was a joyful crime scene and nobody was investigating.
I tried to brush the sugar off my shirt. It got worse. I tried harder. Worse still. Jerome watched me the way a zookeeper watches a new animal figure out the enclosure.
"Does the sugar always do this."
"Every time."
"Has no one in a hundred and sixty years considered reducing—"
"That IS the amount."
I gave up. I ate the second beignet with no precautions. Sugar went into my hair. A man across the room raised his coffee cup at me. I had joined something.
The cafe au lait was bitter with chicory and rude about it. Jazz from somewhere I could not see. An old couple sharing one plate, both white as ghosts, laughing.
In my country, beauty is controlled. A garden trimmed. A tea poured without a drop.
In New Orleans, beauty lands on your suit and does not apologize.
I sat in the sugar until sunrise. I did not brush off a single grain.
Just an update on the Tyler Robinson preliminary hearing for the assassination of Charlie Kirk…
The compilation of UVU surveillance videos was rightly prohibited from being introduced, not because it wasn’t relevant or even accurate, but because the unedited videos should have been admitted first and the compilation of annotated videos should have been admitted second as a demonstrative. The defense, as expected, objected to only the demonstrative being admitted. The judge here is trying to keep the record clean for any future appellate reviews.
The defense’s characterization of the demonstrative videos as being “altered” is a calculated word choice that occurs in most criminal trials where the prosecution works with the investigator of the case to present evidence in a form that is easy for a layperson to understand. If there exists unedited “raw” footage, this isn’t “altered” evidence, but just a demonstrative of the relevant portions of that footage.
An example of this would be an extraction of a cell phone seized from a defendant. There is a whole lot of non-relevant data in that cell phone and a digital forensics expert will work with the prosecution team to identify the relevant images/messages/calls and compile a presentation of just those artifacts. They prosecution will admit the full extraction into evidence, but may only show the court (in a preliminary hearing or bench trial) or the jury (in a jury trial) those relevant artifacts from the extraction. The key is that the full extraction and the demonstrative presentation is admitted into evidence.
Expect social and traditional media to make a big deal out of nothing. I fully expect that the prosecutors will introduce and admit the “raw” surveillance videos into evidence today. I also expect that the judge will allow for the demonstrative to be used once the “raw” surveillance videos have been authenticated and admitted into evidence.
Just an update on the Charlie Kirk case relative to the Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing: continuing objections to hearsay by the defense have no teeth. The Utah Rules of Criminal Procedure relative to Preliminary Examinations under Rule 7B(b) state in part “The findings of probable cause may be based, in whole or in part, on reliable hearsay.”
Just to give clarity for the preliminary hearing beginning this week in the Charlie Kirk assassination trial, the State of Utah will succeed in showing that there is probable cause for charging Tyler Robinson with the murder of Charlie Kirk.
A preliminary hearing is just that. It is a hearing where the State puts forth enough evidence to establish probable cause, that’s it. I wouldn’t expect any fireworks. Don’t fall for sensationalist media headlines. The State will only put on enough witnesses to establish the low burden of proof that the evidence supports that Tyler Robinson killed Charlie Kirk, so don’t be surprised if you don’t hear from experts during the preliminary hearing. I would be surprised if ballistics experts, geolocation experts, or DNA analysts are called as State’s witnesses. Maybe the defense calls their own, but this would be a gift to the State as the prosecutors can lock those experts into their testimony and then have time to prepare to systematically dismantle that testimony at trial.
It is important to remember that hearsay is allowed in a preliminary hearing, so there is no need for the State to put on all of their witnesses. If you are saying to yourself after this hearing, “that’s all they have?”, remember that the burden in this hearing is very low for the State and they won’t be putting all of their evidence into the record, just enough to establish probable cause.
Probable cause exists between reasonable suspicion and beyond a reasonable doubt, so for you civil lawyers out there, it’s close to a preponderance of the evidence (50% plus a little more).
In Louisiana, a preliminary hearing would last for a few hours and may only include the lead detective who would testify about their investigation and the only evidence that would be submitted would be the search warrants and the arrest warrant. That is typically enough to prove probable cause. For an arrest warrant to be authorized, some magistrate or judge established that probable cause existed to make the arrest. If the State ended up charging the defendant with the same charges contained in the arrest warrant, something would have to have gone seriously wrong for another judge to now say that there isn’t enough evidence.
So this leads to the question of “why does this hearing take a week to conduct?”. There could be a few reasons. First, while the prosecution doesn’t need to introduce all of their evidence, they may introduce more than normal and have witnesses called that otherwise wouldn’t because so many eyes are on this trial, so it’s better to be overly thorough rather than having the trial tainted by unnecessary media scrutiny. Second, the defense is trying this case through traditional and social media and are hoping that when a jury is ultimately selected that the jury will be more sympathetic to the defendant based on what is said outside of the courtroom and witness stand. Third, the presentation of evidence could only take a couple of days, but the judge l, not wanting to get anything wrong, may take a day or two to make his ruling.
I’ll post updates as needed.
The Artemis II crew named a lunar crater after Commander Reid Wiseman's late wife, Carroll. What a beautiful and touching moment.
I'm not crying, you're crying 🤧
The launch team at @NASAKennedy are GO to begin filling the Artemis II rocket with fuel.
The official launch broadcast begins at 12:50pm ET (1650 UTC). Liftoff is scheduled for no earlier than 6:24 pm ET (2224 UTC). Tanking coverage can be found here: https://t.co/VVJqQrRz4a
Amazing footage.
Listen to how residents of Tehran are cheering and celebrating as American and Israeli bombs fall around them.
Iranians have prayed for this for so long.
Yesterday I rented a boat and took the leader of one of Flexport's partners in Long Beach on a 3 hour of the port complex. Here's a thread about what I learned.