Grand jury finds probable cause to charge sitting legislator with domestic violence
Sanford Republican Rep. Lucas Lanigan was indicted on Wednesday after a grand jury found probable cause to charge the sitting legislator on two counts for domestic violence offenses.
Lanigan, who was arraigned in York County Superior Court, pleaded not guilty to both charges, which include a Class B felony for aggravated domestic violence and a Class D misdemeanor for domestic violence charges. An indictment is not a guilty verdict or sentencing, rather it means the grand jury found probable cause to convict Lanigan on the charges the police recommended.
Lanigan was arrested one week before the November election for domestic violence aggravated assault. According to a police report, a Sanford police officer alleged that Lanigan strangled his wife after she confronted him and another woman his wife believed he was having an affair with. Lanigan then won reelection by one vote after a recount.
During Lanigan's first court appearance in October, his wife called the incident a 'misunderstanding' and said the case should be dropped. However, Assistant District Attorney Linda Holdsworth-Donovan said victims regularly recant or downplay their stories after the fact and that the state would still pursue charges.
Lanigan, who represents the towns of Newfield, Shapleigh, and parts of Sanford and Springvale, did not respond to a request for comment by the time of publication. He told the Portland Press Herald that he promised his caucus he would 'immediately resign and step down' if he is convicted, 'because someone that's convicted of that should not be serving in the House of Representatives.'
The Maine Democratic Party called for Lanigan's resignation following the indictment, reiterating earlier calls from the party and Democratic legislators.
'There is no place for domestic violence in our society,' Maine Democratic Party Vice Chair Imke Schessler-Jandreau said in a statement, 'and I call on Republican leaders to join the widespread calls for Mr. Lanigan's immediate resignation.'
Senate President Mattie Daughtry (D-Brunswick) and Speaker of the House Ryan Fecteau (D-Biddeford) did not respond to requests for comment on the sitting legislator's indictment by the time of publication. Fecteau stripped Lanigan of his assignment to the Labor Committee in December.
In January, Maine House members voted 74-69 to direct the House Ethics Committee to investigate the allegations against Lanigan to determine if he had violated the code of ethics. A report is due a month after the committee convenes.
One day after that vote, Finding Our Voices, a domestic violence survivor network, held a protest against Lanigan's reelection.
'Thank you to the York County DA for continuing to pursue criminal charges against Lucas Lanigan,' Patrisha McLean, CEO and founder of Finding Our Voices, wrote in a statement to Maine Morning Star following the indictment. 'And thank you to every individual working to end Lanigan's law making abilities: Maine needs stronger laws against domestic violence stranglers and not lawmakers who stand indicted for domestic violence strangling.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
24 minutes ago
- USA Today
Mike Johnson says Ghislaine Maxwell should serve 'life sentence,' opposes potential pardon
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana, said he believes Ghislaine Maxwell, a key associate of Jeffrey Epstein currently serving 20 years in prison for conspiring to sexually abuse minors, should face "a life sentence." "If you're asking my opinion, I think 20 years was a pittance," Johnson told NBC's Kristen Welker on "Meet the Press" July 27. "I think she should have a life sentence, at least." His remarks to NBC come as many, including supporters of President Donald Trump, clamor for testimony from Maxwell. Some followers of the case have proposed a pardon in exchange, but Trump told reporters on July 25 he hadn't considered the move. "I'm allowed to do it, but it's something I have not thought about," the president said. Epstein was charged with sexually trafficking minors and died by suicide while in detention in 2019. Maxwell, his longtime girlfriend, has been accused of recruiting minors for the disgraced financier's predation. Maxwell maintains her innocence and is appealing her 2021 sex-trafficking conviction. Johnson in his interview with NBC reiterated that pardons aren't up to him, telling the outlet, "obviously that's a decision of the president." "I won't get it in front of him," Johnson said. "That's not my lane." But, later in the interview he noted, "It's hard to put into words how evil this was, and that she orchestrated it and was a big part of it." "So, again, not my decision," he added, "but I have great pause about that, as any reasonable person would." The Trump administration for weeks has faced backlash over its handling of Epstein's case. Critics from Democratic lawmakers to prominent Republicans and slices of Trump's voter base accuse the president and other officials of not being transparent with the American people. The speaker has faced his own ongoing Epstein-related criticism, as some House Republicans have zeroed in on the Justice Department's recent review of Epstein's case and are calling for related documents to be released publicly. Democrats in Congress have piled on too. Reps. Ro Khanna, D-California, and Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, introduced a bipartisan measure to force the Trump administration's hand in releasing the federal government's files. Also on "Meet The Press," the pair split on pardoning Maxwell. "That would be up to the president," Massie said. "But if she has information that could help us, then I think she should testify. Let's get that out there. And whatever they need to do to compel that testimony, as long as it's truthful, I would be in favor of." Khanna disagreed, saying Maxwell shouldn't receive a pardon. "Look, I agree with Congressman Massie that she should testify," the California Democrat said. "But she's been indicted twice on perjury. This is why we need the files. This is why we need independent evidence." Contributing: Bart Jansen and Aysha Bagchi, USA TODAY
Los Angeles Times
24 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
It's a year of rapid change, except when it comes to Trump's approval numbers, poll finds
WASHINGTON — Eric Hildenbrand has noticed prices continue to rise this year with President Trump in the White House. The San Diego resident doesn't blame Trump, however, his choice for president in 2024, but says Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democrats who control the state are at fault. 'You can't compare California with the rest of the country,' said Hildenbrand, 76. 'I don't know what's going on in the rest of the country. It seems like prices are dropping. Things are getting better, but I don't necessarily see it here.' Voters like Hildenbrand, whose support of the Republican president is unwavering, help explain Trump's polling numbers and how they have differed from other presidents' polling trajectory in significant ways. An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll conducted in March found that 42% of U.S. adults approved of Trump's job performance. That is a lower rating than those of other recent presidents at the beginning of their second terms, including Democrat Barack Obama and Republican George W. Bush. The most recent AP-NORC poll, from July, puts Trump at 40% approval. While that is not a meaningful change from March, there is some evidence that Trump's support may be softening, at least on the margins. The July poll showed a slight decrease in approval of his handling of immigration since earlier in the year. Some other pollsters, such as Gallup, show a downward slide in overall approval since slightly earlier in his term, in January. But even those shifts are within a relatively narrow range, which is typical for Trump. The new AP-NORC polling tracker shows that Trump's favorability rating has remained largely steady since the end of his first term, with between 33% and 43% of U.S. adults saying they viewed him favorably across more than five years. Those long-term trends underscore that Trump has many steadfast opponents. But loyal supporters also help explain why views of the president are hard to change even as he pursues policies that most Americans do not support, using an approach that many find abrasive. Trump has not had a traditional honeymoon period in his second term. He did not in his first, either. An AP-NORC poll conducted in March 2017, two months into his first term, showed that 42% of Americans 'somewhat' or 'strongly' approved of his performance. That is largely where his approval rating stayed over the course of the next four years. The recent slippage on immigration is particularly significant because that issue was a major strength for Trump in the 2024 election. Earlier in his second term, it was also one of the few areas where he was outperforming his overall approval. In March, about half of U.S. adults approved of his handling of immigration. But the July AP-NORC poll found his approval on immigration at 43%, in line with his overall approval rating. Other recent polls show growing discontent with Trump's approach on immigration. A CNN/SSRS poll found that 55% of U.S. adults say the president has gone too far when it comes to deporting immigrants who are living in the United States illegally, an increase of 10 percentage points since February. 'I understand wanting to get rid of illegal immigrants, but the way that's being done is very aggressive,' said Donovan Baldwin, 18, of Asheboro, N.C., who did not vote in the 2024 election. 'And that's why people are protesting, because it comes off as aggression. It's not right.' Ratings of Trump's handling of the economy, which were more positive during his first term, have been persistently negative in his second term. The July poll found that few Americans think Trump's policies have benefited them so far. Even if he is not a fan of everything Trump has done so far, Brian Nichols, 58, of Albuquerque is giving him the benefit of the doubt. Nichols, who voted for Trump in 2024, likes what he is seeing from the president overall, though he has his concerns both on style and substance, particularly Trump's social media presence and his on-again, off-again tariffs. Nichols also does not like the push to eliminate federal agencies such as the Education Department. Despite his occasional disagreements with Trump, though, Nichols said he wants to give the president space to do his job, and he trusts the House and Senate, now run by Republicans, to act as a safeguard. 'We put him into office for a reason, and we should be trusting that he's doing the job for the best of America,' Nichols said. Trump has spent the last six months pushing far-reaching and often unpopular policies. Earlier this year, Americans were bracing themselves for higher prices as a result of his approach to tariffs. The July poll found that most people think Trump's tax and spending bill will benefit the wealthy, while few think it will pay dividends for the middle class or people like them. Discomfort with individual policies may not translate into wholesale changes in views of Trump, though. Those have largely been constant through years of turmoil, with his favorability rating staying within a 10-percentage point range through his widely panned handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, a felony conviction and an attempted assassination. To some of his supporters, the benefits of his presidency far outweigh the costs. Kim Schultz, 62, of Springhill, Fla., said she is thrilled with just about everything Trump is doing as president, particularly his aggressive moves to deport anyone living in the country illegally. Even if Trump's tariffs eventually take effect and push prices up, she said she will not be alarmed. 'I've always had the opinion that if the tariffs are going to cost me a little bit more here and there, I don't have a problem with that,' she said. Across the country, Hildenbrand dislikes Trump's personality and his penchant for insults, including those directed at foreign leaders. But he thinks Trump is making things happen. 'More or less, to me, he's showing that he's on the right track,' he said. 'I'm not in favor of Trump's personality, but I am in favor of what he's getting done.' Thomson-Deveaux and Cooper write for the Associated Press and reported from Washington and Phoenix, respectively.
CBS News
an hour ago
- CBS News
Senate Democrats urge U.S. to stop funding GHF, resume support for U.N. food distribution in Gaza as more starve
A group of Democratic senators led by Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland is urging the Trump administration to suspend American financial support for the Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a private food distribution organization that has been heavily criticized for the way it delivers food aid to Gazans and because so many have been killed trying to reach its distribution sites. The U.S. and Israel have advocated for the recently established GHF to replace the United Nations, which has built an extensive network of humanitarian workers inside Gaza over decades. Israel accuses the U.N. of bias and collusion with Hamas. In a letter sent to Secretary of State Marco Rubio Sunday, the 21 senators expressed "grave" concerns about "the U.S. role in and financial support for the troubled GHF." "We urge you to immediately cease all U.S. funding for GHF and resume support for the existing UN-led aid coordination mechanisms with enhanced oversight to ensure that humanitarian aid reaches civilians in need," the letter reads. The U.N. warns that the humanitarian crisis in Gaza is growing increasingly dire as more Palestinians are in danger of starvation after a months-long Israeli blockade, and recent military operations complicated humanitarian efforts to help. The IDF claims there is no starvation. Van Hollen, who serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as well as the powerful Appropriations Committee, told CBS News "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" Sunday, "American taxpayers should not be spending one penny to fund this private organization backed by mercenaries and by the IDF that has become a death trap," noting that scores of Gazans were shot and killed as starving people crowded the GHF sites to obtain food. The letter focuses on a $30 million pledge from the State Department, announced last month, and on GHF's operations, particularly its use of armed contractors who stand behind IDF soldiers at food distribution sites in four designated military zones. Starving Gazans must travel to those areas, which is difficult for those too weak to move. "Blurring the lines between delivery of aid and security operations shatters well-established norms that have governed distribution of humanitarian aid since the ratification of the Geneva Conventions in 1949," the letter says. U.S. allies have also been critical of the tactics used by the U.S. and Israeli-backed GHF. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot told Margaret Brennan Sunday on "Face the Nation" that Gaza is on the "brink of food catastrophe" and that France expects "the Israeli government to stop the operations of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation that has caused [a] bloodbath in humanitarian health distribution lines in Gaza." U.N. Secretary General António Guterres said Friday that a thousand Palestinians have been killed trying to access food since May 27. "We hold video calls with our own humanitarians who are starving before our eyes," Guterres said. "We will continue to speak out at every opportunity. But words don't feed hungry children." The U.N. human rights office said 1,054 people were killed while trying to obtain food since late May, and of those, 766 were killed while trying to reach sites run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. The others were killed when gunfire erupted around U.N. convoys or aid sites. The group of senators led by Van Hollen are seeking answers about whether necessary oversight is being bypassed to benefit the GHF. Their letter cites public reports that the Trump administration authorized the funds under a "priority directive," which meant it could avoid "a comprehensive audit that is usually required for groups receiving USAID grants for the first time." The senators want to see the GHF's "complete funding application and all supporting documentation" and demand to know whether any statutory and regulatory requirements were waived. They also asked Rubio about the procurement mechanism that resulted in the $30 million in funding, and they want to know who signed the agreement, who might be liable for compliance violations and whether officials were aware of potential concerns raised by USAID about "GHF's ability to protect Palestinians while delivering food aid." The State Department has not responded to a CBS News request for comment about the senators' letter. A department spokesperson said Friday that the funding has been allocated, but it has not yet been disbursed to GHF. On Saturday, amid international outcry, the Israel Defense Force began airdrops of humanitarian aid into Gaza and said it would establish humanitarian corridors to "enable the safe movement of UN convoys delivering food and medicine to the population." The U.N. has said the airdrops are insufficient. Past airdrops have fallen on Gazans and killed them. Now the approximately 2 million people live in Gaza and have been herded into an even more limited zone that lacks extensive open space where air-dropped pallets can land. Israel's announcement came after extensive international outcry at images of starving children, and reports of death. Leaders in Europe, including French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and German Chancellor Fredreich Merz, coordinated Saturday by phone. A readout of the call released by the UK said the three leaders said the situation in Gaza is "appalling" and "emphasized the urgent need for an immediate ceasefire, for Israel to lift all restrictions on aid and urgently provide those suffering in Gaza with the food they so desperately need." On Friday, two Jordanian officials said they were considering airdrops and the United Arab Emirates sent a 7,000-ton aid ship to Gaza's shores. But it has not been determined who will distribute the food once it arrives. The GHF says it has distributed more than 91 million meals to Gazans, but there have been almost daily reports of civilians being injured or killed as they try to reach one of the group's four distribution hubs, all located in southern Gaza. In an interview with BBC News this week, Anthony Aguliar, a U.S. Army veteran and former contractor for GHF, detailed what he says he saw on the ground behind IDF lines during humanitarian aid distribution, calling the operation "amateur." "I witnessed the Israeli Defense Forces shooting at the crowds of Palestinians. I witnessed the Israeli Defense Forces firing a main gun tank round from the Merkava tank into a crowd of people," Aguilar said. "In my most frank assessment, I would say that they're criminal. In my entire career, I have never witnessed the level of brutality and use of indiscriminate and unnecessary force against a civilian population, an unarmed, starving population." In a statement to CBS News, the GHF called Aguilar's claims "materially false" and said he had been terminated from his position for "misconduct." The group has also been criticized by the U.N., which said GHF's tactics are neither adequate nor safe and make it more difficult for Gazans too weak to travel to military zones to secure food. Philippe Lazzarini, the commissioner general for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, or UNRWA, which provides support for Palestinian refugees, condemned the GHF in June, calling it "an abomination" and "a death trap costing more lives than it saves." As the catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza deteriorated further this week, the GHF and U.N. groups continued to blame each other. In several public statements and social media posts last week, GHF said the responsibility for the mass starvation lies with the U.N. for allowing their full aid trucks inside Gaza to sit untouched and undistributed. "The U.N. cannot deliver this humanitarian aid to the people who need it most, and I'm not sure what the reason is," said GHF spokesperson Chapin Fay in a video posted to X, which showed him standing in front of U.N. aid trucks. "Whether it's looters, safety or whether they're playing politics, it just doesn't matter. The people of Gaza deserve better." The executive chairman of GHF, Reverend Johnnie Moore, in an interview with conservative commentator Ben Shapiro this week accused the U.N. of "playing politics with people's lives." "They're actually basically a willful participant on the Hamas side of the negotiating table in the ceasefire negotiations, by refusing to distribute aid and spreading this narrative around the world that the people of Gaza are going to starve if Hamas doesn't, in effect, get its demands at the negotiating table," Moore said. The U.N. World Food Programme says hundreds of aid trucks are ready to move, but the approval needed from the Israeli military to transport and distribute that aid is not coming quickly enough. In a statement Friday, they said just over half of their requests to collect cargo were approved and convoys were typically delayed, sometimes up to nearly two days, awaiting permission to travel within Gaza. Meanwhile, a UNICEF spokesperson confirmed to CBS News that their supplies of Ready-to-Use Therapeutic Food or RUTF — used for treating severely acutely malnourished children — is expected to run out in mid-August if more is not allowed into Gaza. "We are now facing a dire situation that we are running out of therapeutic supplies," said Salim Oweis, a spokesperson for UNICEF in Amman, Jordan. "That's really dangerous for children as they face hunger and malnutrition at the moment," he added. Oweis said UNICEF had only enough RUTF left to treat 3,000 children. In the first two weeks of July alone, UNICEF treated 5,000 children facing acute malnutrition in Gaza. The UNICEF spokesperson said the agency is unaware of whether GHF is distributing this type of specialized food and emphasized that it must be given to children after they are assessed by professional health workers to be suffering from acute malnutrition. GHF did not respond to CBS News when asked if the foundation also distributes specialized high-nutrient food for acutely malnourished children. UNICEF is the main procurer of RUTF in the world. Read the full letter sent by Senate Democrats to Secretary of State Marco Rubio here:Camilla Schick and Margaret Brennan contributed to this report.
