Connect with us

Business

NYC Pays Settlement to Mom Separated from Newborn for Cannabis Use

Published

on

Cannabis legalization does not happen overnight, it happens in spurts and pieces as this story will show. Government agencies are oftentimes slow to adapt to the wide array of changes that must accompany legalization – which in this case amounted to the infliction of lifelong trauma on a mother and her newborn baby boy.

A settlement has been reached between the City of New York’s child welfare arm and a mother who had her baby taken from her just days after his birth.

According to an article in the New York Daily News, The New York Administration for Children’s Services will pay Chanetto Rivers, who says she was subjected to a drug test without her consent, a settlement of $75K plus attorney fees.

Rivers’ case first made headlines in May when the New York Times ran a story entitled “She Smoked Weed Legally, Then Gave Birth. New York Took Her Baby,” and that does indeed appear to be an apt description as Rivers gave birth to her baby boy in August of 2021, five months after New York legalized cannabis for recreational purposes.

The new laws did not stop ACS from taking custody of Rivers’ baby just two days after his birth. Rivers’ lawsuit against ACS argued that the organization’s own policy  published in 2019 even before legalization forbids separating a mother and child for cannabis use alone.

“Positive marijuana toxicology of an infant or the mother at the time of birth is not sufficient, in and of itself, to support a determination that the child is maltreated, nor is such evidence alone sufficient for ACS to take protective custody of (remove) a child or file a case in Family Court,” – Excerpt taken from “ACS Policy and Practice on Cases Involving Marijuana Use by Patients.”

The Daily News article said that the whole situation began when Rivers told her doctors and nurses she had consumed cannabis at a family gathering just hours before arriving at the hospital. A drug test was allegedly taken without Rivers’ consent, the results of which came back positive for cannabis both in Rivers and her baby. Two days later, an order was issued by ACS to the hospital to retain custody of the baby and not release him to Rivers.

“Just days postpartum, [Rivers] had to travel in physical pain every day, to go to the hospital to be able to visit with her baby, because they wouldn’t let them be together,” said Niji Jain to the Imprint. Jain was lead counsel in the case and is director of the Impact Litigation Practice at Bronx Defenders.

In total the baby was separated from Rivers for one week, during the course of which she had to travel to and from the hospital so she could see the child while she was simultaneously traveling to and from court in an attempt to get a judge to intervene, which is exactly what happened. A judge granted an emergency order and Rivers regained custody of her son, only to face several more months of inquiries, home visits, drug tests and state-mandated anger management and parenting courses. RIvers’ lawsuit alleged she was singled out and discriminated against due to her race. 

“I didn’t just bring this lawsuit for myself, but for every Black family that ACS has ripped apart. They know what they did was wrong and now they’re on notice,” Rivers said in a statement released through her lawyers.

A spokesperson for ACS gave a statement on the matter after the conclusion of the lawsuit, saying they evaluate each case individually but reiterating that cannabis use alone does not necessarily mean the child is being harmed.

“In all of our cases, including those with substance misuse allegations, we assess child safety on a case-by-case basis, looking at actual or potential harm to a child and the parent’s capacity to care for the child,” the spokesperson said in a statement. “State and city policy is that a parent’s use of marijuana is not in and of itself a basis for indicating a report or filing a neglect case. This means that a case should not be indicated solely because a parent is using marijuana, but instead a child protective specialist should assess the impact, if any, on the safety and well-being of the child.”

Outside of the settlement she received, Rivers’ case is not unique. Substance abuse and cannabis use are regularly used as justification to remove newborns from their mother’s custody, and a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in April of this year found that Black mothers were disproportionately more likely to receive drug testing at birth than white mothers, 2.2% more likely to be exact. 

Source: https://hightimes.com/news/nyc-pays-settlement-to-mom-separated-from-newborn-for-cannabis-use/

Business

Alleged Crores Pharma Scam Mastermind Arrested from Surat

Published

on

By

After evading law enforcement for nearly 13 years, an accused linked to a large-scale pharmaceutical fraud case has been arrested by Delhi Police from Surat, Gujarat. The suspect is alleged to have orchestrated a series of financial scams involving fake identities, forged documents, and dishonoured cheques used to procure high-value pharmaceutical raw materials.

Authorities say the accused, identified as Himmat Singh Lodha, is believed to have defrauded multiple pharmaceutical companies in Delhi of goods worth approximately ₹98 lakh before disappearing and remaining underground for years.

Fake Business Deals and Dishonoured Cheques Used in Fraud

Investigators claim the accused posed as a legitimate pharmaceutical trader and placed bulk orders for expensive drug ingredients, offering post-dated cheques as payment security.

In one documented case from 2013, he allegedly obtained around 550 kilograms of Gliclazide, a diabetes-related pharmaceutical ingredient, valued at over ₹26 lakh. When suppliers attempted to encash the cheques, they were reportedly returned with the remark “account closed.”

Following the transaction, the accused allegedly vacated his office and rented residence and disappeared without settling payments. He was later declared a proclaimed offender in 2016 after repeatedly failing to appear before court proceedings. Authorities had also issued a reward for information leading to his arrest.

Multiple Identities and Repeated Fraud Pattern

Police investigations further link the accused to another cheating case dating back to 2012, where he allegedly used a fake identity, “Kailash Jain,” to obtain a large consignment of Ambroxol HCL, a pharmaceutical compound used in cough medications. The value of that consignment was estimated at around ₹72 lakh.

Officials believe the accused followed a consistent modus operandi—posing as a credible businessman, securing high-value goods on deferred payment terms, and then disappearing after delivery while shutting down business operations.

Investigators suspect that forged business records, fake company credentials, and fabricated financial histories were used to build trust with suppliers and gain access to expensive raw materials.

Multi-State Surveillance Leads to Arrest in Surat

A special Crime Branch team tracked the accused through coordinated surveillance efforts across multiple cities, including Mumbai, Ahmedabad, and Surat. After nearly a month of technical monitoring and intelligence gathering, officials located and arrested him from a residential area in Surat.

Authorities also revealed that the accused had been involved in property-related activities while staying under the radar to avoid detection.

Growing Threat of Corporate Identity Fraud

The case highlights a rising trend of organised financial fraud targeting industries that rely heavily on trust-based transactions and deferred payments. Experts note that criminals increasingly exploit gaps in corporate verification systems by using fake GST registrations, temporary offices, and forged documentation to appear legitimate.

Cybercrime and financial fraud specialists warn that such schemes are becoming more complex with the widespread availability of digital business tools, making it easier to create convincing but fraudulent corporate identities.

Experts Urge Stronger Due Diligence in High-Value Transactions

Experts, including former IPS officer and cybercrime specialist Prof. Triveni Singh, emphasize the need for stricter verification procedures in commercial dealings. He noted that relying solely on paperwork or digital business profiles can expose companies to significant financial risk.

Authorities and industry experts recommend physical verification of business operations, bank account validation, and detailed background checks before engaging in high-value or deferred-payment transactions—particularly in sectors like pharmaceuticals, where single consignments can involve transactions worth crores.

Continue Reading

Business

EU Pressure Builds on Google as Regulators Face Calls for Massive Fine Over Search Practices

Published

on

By

A growing coalition of European industry groups is intensifying pressure on regulators to take decisive action against Google over allegations of unfair search practices that could reshape competition rules across the region’s digital economy.

Investigation Under Digital Markets Act Gains Momentum

The case is being examined by the European Commission under the European Union’s landmark Digital Markets Act (DMA), introduced to curb the dominance of major technology platforms and ensure fair competition.

Launched in March 2024, the investigation focuses on whether Google has been prioritising its own services in search results, potentially disadvantaging rival businesses that rely on online visibility to reach customers.

Industry Groups Demand Swift Action

Several prominent European organizations have jointly urged regulators to conclude the probe without further delay. They argue that prolonged investigations allow alleged anti-competitive practices to continue, putting European companies—especially startups—at a disadvantage.

Signatories include the European Publishers Council, the European Magazine Media Association, the European Tech Alliance, and EU Travel Tech.

In a joint statement, these groups warned that delays in enforcement are affecting innovation, profitability, and growth prospects for regional businesses competing in digital markets.

Google Denies Allegations

Google has rejected claims of bias, stating that its search algorithms are designed to deliver the most relevant and useful results to users. The company has also proposed adjustments to address regulatory concerns.

However, critics argue that these changes are insufficient and fail to address the core issue of market dominance.

Potential Billion-Euro Penalties

If found in violation of the DMA, Google could face significant financial penalties. Under EU rules, fines can reach a substantial percentage of a company’s global turnover, potentially amounting to billions of euros.

Regulators may also impose corrective measures requiring changes to business practices, which could have long-term implications for how digital platforms operate in Europe.

Wider Implications for Big Tech

The case highlights ongoing tensions between European regulators and major U.S. technology firms. In recent years, the EU has taken a more aggressive stance in enforcing competition laws, aiming to create a level playing field for local businesses.

A final ruling against Google could set a major precedent, influencing future enforcement actions and shaping the regulatory landscape for global tech companies operating within Europe.

As scrutiny intensifies, the outcome of the investigation is expected to play a critical role in defining the future of digital competition across the European Union.

Continue Reading

AI & Technology

Amazon Faces Potential Criminal Trial in Italy Over €1.2 Billion Tax Evasion Allegations

Published

on

By

Milan: U.S. tech giant Amazon is facing the prospect of a major legal showdown in Italy, after prosecutors in Milan formally requested a court to move forward with criminal proceedings over alleged tax evasion totaling approximately ₹12,500 crore (€1.2 billion).

The case targets Amazon’s European division along with four senior executives, marking one of the most significant tax-related investigations involving a global e-commerce platform in Europe.

Trial Push Despite Multi-Million Euro Settlement

The move comes even after Amazon reached a financial settlement with Italian tax authorities in December, agreeing to pay around ₹5,500 crore (€527 million), including interest, to resolve part of the dispute.

Typically, such settlements lead to the closure of criminal investigations. However, Milan prosecutors have opted to proceed, signaling a tougher stance on alleged corporate tax violations.

A preliminary hearing is expected in the coming months, where a judge will decide whether to formally indict the company and its executives or dismiss the case.

Allegations of VAT Evasion Through Marketplace Sellers

At the center of the investigation are claims that Amazon’s platform enabled non-European Union sellers to avoid paying value-added tax (VAT) on goods sold to Italian consumers between 2019 and 2021.

Prosecutors allege that the company’s marketplace structure allowed thousands of foreign vendors—many reportedly based in China—to operate without fully disclosing their identities or tax obligations. This, authorities argue, led to substantial VAT losses for the Italian government.

Under Italian law, online platforms facilitating sales can be held partially liable if third-party sellers fail to comply with tax requirements, a key point in the prosecution’s case.

Italian Government Named as Affected Party

In their filing, prosecutors identified Italy’s Economy Ministry as the injured party, citing significant financial damage resulting from the alleged tax evasion.

Legal experts say the outcome of the case could have wide-ranging implications across the European Union, where VAT systems are harmonized and similar compliance rules apply to digital marketplaces.

Multiple Investigations Add to Pressure

The VAT probe is just one of several legal challenges facing Amazon in Italy. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office is reportedly examining additional tax-related issues covering more recent years.

Meanwhile, Milan authorities are pursuing separate investigations into alleged customs fraud linked to imports from China and whether Amazon maintained an undeclared “permanent establishment” in Italy—potentially exposing it to higher tax liabilities.

In a separate regulatory action, Italy’s data protection authority recently ordered an Amazon unit to stop using personal data from over 1,800 employees at a warehouse near Rome.

Amazon Denies Allegations

Amazon has consistently denied wrongdoing and indicated it will strongly contest the allegations in court if the case proceeds. The company has also warned that prolonged legal uncertainty could impact investor confidence and Italy’s appeal as a destination for international business.

Broader Impact on Europe’s Digital Economy

If the case moves to trial, it could become a landmark moment for the regulation of global e-commerce platforms in Europe. Governments across the region are increasingly scrutinizing how digital marketplaces handle tax compliance, especially in cross-border transactions.

With online retail continuing to expand, regulators are under mounting pressure to ensure that multinational platforms and third-party sellers adhere to the same tax rules as traditional businesses.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 420 Reports Marijuana News & Information Website | Reefer News | Cannabis News