Loading dispatches...
← Return to NewsroomWorld
Brazilian court convicts Eduardo Bolsonaro of courting US interference
Breaking
Cornell president says university 'must do better' after frat house rape allegations
The US had placed tariffs on Brazilian goods and sanctioned judicial officials involved in the trial of Eduardo’s father, Jair Bolsonaro.A panel on the Brazilian Supreme Court has voted to convict Eduardo Bolsonaro of lobbying the United States to interfere in the trial of his father, former right-wing President Jair Bolsonaro.On Tuesday, three of the four justices on the panel voted in favour of conviction, with one remaining justice yet to vote.Recommended Stories list of 3 itemslist 1 of 3Brazil’s Flavio Bolsonaro meets with Trump amid troubled presidential bidlist 2 of 3‘Arbitrary measures’: Lula slams US ‘terror’ designation for Brazil gangslist 3 of 3Lula says Brazil cannot ‘accept treatment’ after new US tariffs proposedend of listThey determined that Eduardo Bolsonaro’s actions amounted to coercion against Brazil’s justice system and sentenced him to four years and two months in prison.“It wasn’t merely an expression of opinion or a political stance, but rather conduct that clearly threatened Brazilian authorities and Brazilian citizens themselves,” Justice Cristiano Zanin said, calling Eduardo Bolsonaro’s actions “illegitimate and criminal”.The conviction is the latest legal setback for the Bolsonaro family, which remains a dominant force on Brazil’s political right.Jair Bolsonaro is serving a 27-year prison sentence for his efforts to remain in power after losing the country’s 2022 election.Prosecutors described his actions as an attempted coup. Bolsonaro and his family have portrayed the trial as a political witch-hunt.The ex-president’s third son and a member of Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies, Eduardo Bolsonaro has been active in his father’s defence.In March 2025, he pledged that he would move to the US full time to “focus 100 percent” of his energy on “a single cause”: freeing his father.Prosecutors accused him of mounting an illegal campaign to court US President Donald Trump and use foreign influence to pressure Brazilian officials to drop the case against Jair Bolsonaro.Trump, an ally of Bolsonaro, had likewise tried to remain in office despite his loss in the 2020 election and has accused Brazilian officials of persecuting right-wing voices like Bolsonaro.In July 2025, Trump issued a letter announcing 50 percent tariffs on certain Brazilian products, citing Jair Bolsonaro’s trial, specifically, as a reason.“This Trial should not be taking place,” Trump wrote at the time. “It is a Witch Hunt that should end IMMEDIATELY.”Trump also issued an executive order sanctioning one of the Brazilian Supreme Court justices involved in the Bolsonaro case, Alexandre de Moraes, on the basis that he worked to “target political opponents” and “suppress dissent”.He called de Moraes a “threat” to the US, and his administration later expanded the sanctions to include the justice’s family members, as well as other Brazilian judicial officials.Brazil’s current president, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, has denounced those actions as an attempt to interfere in Brazil’s domestic affairs.As relations with Lula grew more cordial, the Trump administration relaxed its tariffs against Brazil. In December, it also repealed the sanctions against de Moraes and his family.Lula, meanwhile, visited the White House in May and praised what he described as a productive meeting with his US counterpart.But it remains unclear what role Trump may seek to play in Brazil’s upcoming presidential elections.The left-wing Lula is campaigning for a fourth term, and he is likely to face his stiffest competition from Jair Bolsonaro’s eldest son, Senator Flavio Bolsonaro.A CNT/MDA poll released on Tuesday projected that Lula would receive 49.3 percent of the vote in a run-off election against the senator’s 40.2 percent.Flavio Bolsonaro has faced his own legal trouble in recent months, with police opening a probe in April into whether he defamed Lula. His connections to a disgraced banker have also raised media scrutiny.Jair Bolsonaro, meanwhile, faced questions this w
Prosecutors say man deliberately started blaze that became one of the most destructive wildfires in Los Angeles history.Federal prosecutors in the United States have accused 29-year-old Jonathan Rinderknecht of deliberately starting the Palisades Fire, which grew into one of the most destructive in the history of Los Angeles, California.Opening statements were presented on Wednesday in Rinderknecht’s federal trial, where he stands accused of destroying property by means of fire, committing arson affecting interstate commerce, and lighting timber aflame.Recommended Stories list of 3 itemslist 1 of 3Suspect charged with starting deadly Los Angeles Palisades firelist 2 of 3Trump yanks permitting process from Democrats after California fireslist 3 of 3What can we expect as fire season ramps up in California?end of listRinderknecht has pleaded not guilty to starting the fire in January 2025.While prosecutors portrayed him as an arsonist who premeditated his crime, defence lawyers argued there was no proof that he had ignited the blazes. If anything, they said, Rinderknecht had tried to stop them.“When all the evidence is in, there will be one thing missing: proof that Jonathan Rinderknecht started that fire on January 1,” lawyer Steve Haney told jurors.The Palisades Fire ultimately killed 12 people and left swaths of the coastline north of Los Angeles unrecognisable after sweeping through communities such as the Pacific Palisades.Jonathan Rinderknecht has denied responsibility for the 2025 Palisades Fire in California [File: US Attorney’s Office via AP]If convicted, Rinderknecht would face at least five years in prison, with a maximum sentence of 45 years.Prosecutors say that the Palisades Fire began on January 1, 2025, smouldering in root systems before flaring into a significant conflagration on January 7.They argue that evidence places Rinderknecht on the hilltop where the fire allegedly started.“The evidence will show that the defendant lit this fire on January 1 and that he did so on purpose,” Assistant US Attorney Mark Williams told jurors in a court in downtown Los Angeles.“And the evidence will show that the fire that the defendant started on January 1 was the same fire that caused all of that destruction on January 7.”Rinderknecht allegedly called emergency services 16 times on January 1, and his cellular data places him near the hilltop where the fire occurred, according to prosecutors.They also point to a prompt Rinderknecht entered into ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence model, in the months leading up to the fire. It described a “burning forest” and “people running away”.“He wanted revenge – revenge against society, because he blamed society for all his troubles,” said prosecutor Matt O’Brien.But Rinderknecht’s defence team argued that the 29-year-old was trying to help extinguish the fire, calling firefighters and guiding them to the site of the initial blaze.Haney played segments of Rinderknecht’s 911 calls as evidence. “It’s the voice and actions of a man who was trying to stop the fire,” Haney said.He also advised jurors not to read into how Rinderknecht “uses his computer” for ChatGPT searches.Firefighters initially responded to the reports of a fire on January 1, but the blaze subsequently reignited, prompting evacuations and widespread destruction of property.Factors such as extreme drought, worsened by climate change, and an increase in residential developments in wild-land areas have exacerbated the lethality of wildfires in California in recent years.The flames of the Palisades Fire were driven by strong Santa Ana winds and dry conditions, which helped fuel the conflagration.According to the state firefighting agency Cal Fire, the blaze reached a peak of more than 23,000 acres (9,300 hectares).The Palisades Fire became the ninth deadliest in the state’s history and the third most destructive in terms of the number of structures destroyed. Of the 10 largest wildfires in California history, all but one have oc
Discussion (0)