Uncategorized
Defense rests in Pittsburgh synagogue shooting trial without calling witnesses or presenting evidence
PITTSBURGH (JTA) — Defense attorneys in the trial of the Pittsburgh synagogue shooter will not be calling witnesses or presenting evidence in court, following 11 days of harrowing testimony from witnesses called by the prosecution.
The defense attorneys’ choice underscores their acknowledgement that their client committed the attack. Since the beginning of the trial, lead defense attorney Judy Clarke has made clear that her goal is to prevent the shooter, Robert Bowers, from being sentenced to death.
Judge Robert Colville dismissed the jury on Wednesday and told jurors to return on Thursday to hear closing arguments, after which the jury will deliberate and deliver its verdict. The defendant is almost certain to be found guilty, and his sentence — which will be determined in the next phase of the trial — will depend on whether the jury finds him guilty on all 63 counts he faces or just some of them. Of those charges, 22 carry the death penalty — two for each of his 11 victims.
The anticlimactic conclusion of the proceedings on Wednesday followed 11 days of graphic testimony from congregants and emergency responders who were present when the gunman perpetrated the shooting in Pittsburgh’s Squirrel Hill neighborhood on Oct. 27, 2018. The synagogue he attacked housed three congregations: Tree of Life, New Light and Dor Hadash.
Witnesses have described how the shooting unfolded, detail by tragic detail — and have explained the Jewish rituals and practices interrupted and desecrated by the attack. Other witnesses, including 911 call center employees and law enforcement, have recounted how they responded to the shooting.
Clarke and her team have cross-examined witnesses but revealed on Thurday that they would not be calling any of their own.
“We have no evidence,” Clarke said after Colville turned to her following the prosecution’s last witness. In her opening remarks on May 30, Clark had said that the defense team would not contest that its client committed the shooting.
“There is no disagreement, there is no dispute and there will be no doubt as to who shot the 11 congregants,” she said then. “On Oct. 27, 2018, Robert Bowers, the man seated at that table, loaded with ammunition and firearms entered the synagogue.”
Clarke is famous for keeping her clients off of death row and hopes to achieve the same result here. Her argument to jurors is that her client targeted the congregants not because of their religion, but because of a delusion that they were facilitating an immigration invasion to replace white people.
“We can at least do our best to uphold the rule of law by figuring out, to the best of our ability, what were Mr. Bowers’ motives and intent,” Clarke said in her opening statement.
The prosecution wrapped up its case before lunch on Wednesday with testimony from Andrea Wedner, one of two worshippers who were injured by gunfire in the shooting and survived. Wedner was with her mother, Rose Mallinger, when the gunman entered the chapel. Mallinger, who was 97, was killed in the attack.
Acting U.S. Attorney Troy Rivetti asked Wedner if the gunman had kept her from worshipping — the same question the prosecution has posed to other survivors who took the stand.
That question is key to half of the 22 capital charges the gunman faces: Federal law allows the death penalty in cases “of obstruction in free exercise of religious belief resulting in death.” The other 11 capital charges are for hate crimes resulting in death.
“Did you go there to worship and pray?” Rivetti asked Wedner. “Did the defendant prevent you from praying? Did the defendant come into the chapel and shoot you? Your mother, Rose Mallinger, who prayed the prayer for peace each week, was shot right next to you?”
Wedner answered “Yes” each time, with increasing emotion.
The defense rarely objected during the trial, only doing so to argue that testimony was inappropriately veering into how American Jews worship, or into what animates Jewish practice. Nearly all of the defense’s objections during the trial were overruled.
After the jury exited the courtroom on Wednesday, the defense continued arguing that their client did not seek to kill Jews while they worshipped. Speaking before the judge, defense attorneys raised objections to the phrasing of some of the charges the jury would consider.
They tried, as they had previously, to have the words “willfully” and “because of actual or perceived religion” removed from the 11 capital charges that have to do with obstruction of worship resulting in death. Colville overruled the objections.
Wedner asked not to be on the stand when the prosecution played back her 911 call from the day of the shooting in court. Instead, Rivetti asked her a series of questions about the call before she left the chamber.
“Have you actually requested that we not play that 911 call while you’re on the stand?” Rivetti asked.
“Yes,” Wedner said.
“Is that because you can hear yourself being shot?”
“Yes.”
“Is it because you can hear your mother’s quiet voice as you try to comfort her?”
“Yes.”
“Is it because you can hear her being shot?”
“Yes.” Wedner’s voice cracked.
The recording of the call played out as Rivetti had described: Werner’s whispered pleadings to a 911 operator, silence, and then two gun blasts and screams. Rivetti stopped the replay about halfway through the 9-minute recording.
During her testimony, Wedner described sensing police were in the sanctuary, and moving her legs to signal she was alive. “They were in fatigues so I knew they were the good guys,” she said.
She rose and realized she was the lone survivor in the sanctuary where the Tree of Life congregation regularly convened.
Before she left, she bid her mother goodbye.
“I kissed my fingers and I touched my fingers to her skin,” she said. “I cried out, ‘Mommy.’”
—
The post Defense rests in Pittsburgh synagogue shooting trial without calling witnesses or presenting evidence appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Lebanon Plans UN Complaint Against Israel Over Border Wall
A UN vehicle drives near a concrete wall along Lebanon’s southern border which, according to the Lebanese presidency, extends beyond the “Blue Line”, a U.N.-mapped line separating Lebanon from Israel and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, as seen from northern Israel, November 16, 2025. REUTERS/Shir Torem
Lebanon will file a complaint to the U.N. Security Council against Israel for constructing a concrete wall along Lebanon’s southern border that extends beyond the “Blue Line,” the Lebanese presidency said on Saturday.
The Blue Line is a U.N.-mapped line separating Lebanon from Israel and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. Israeli forces withdrew to the Blue Line when they left south Lebanon in 2000.
A spokesperson for the U.N. secretary-general, Stephane Dujarric, said on Friday the wall has made more than 4,000 square meters (nearly an acre) of Lebanese territory inaccessible to the local population.
The Lebanese presidency echoed his remarks, saying in a statement that Israel’s ongoing construction constituted “a violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701 and an infringement on Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.”
Dujarric said the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) had requested that the wall be removed.
An Israeli military spokesperson denied on Friday that the wall crossed the Blue Line.
“The wall is part of a broader IDF plan whose construction began in 2022,” the spokesperson said, referring to the Israel Defense Forces.
“Since the start of the war, and as part of lessons learned from it, the IDF has been advancing a series of measures, including reinforcing the physical barrier along the northern border.”
UNIFIL, established in 1978, operates between the Litani River in the north and the Blue Line in the south. The mission has more than 10,000 troops from 50 countries and about 800 civilian staff, according to its website.
Uncategorized
Iran Says US Is Not Ready for ‘Equal and Fair’ Nuclear Talks
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi speaks during a meeting with foreign ambassadors in Tehran, Iran, July 12, 2025. Photo: Hamid Forootan/Iranian Foreign Ministry/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via REUTERS
Washington’s current approach toward Tehran does not indicate any readiness for “equal and fair negotiations,” Iran’s foreign minister said on Sunday, after US President Donald Trump hinted last week at potential discussions.
Following Israel’s attack on Iran in June, which was joined by U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, attempts at renewing dialogue on Tehran’s nuclear program have failed.
The United States, its European allies and Israel accuse Tehran of using its nuclear program as a veil for efforts to develop the capability to produce weapons. Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only.
Tehran and Washington underwent five rounds of indirect nuclear talks prior to the 12-days-war, but faced obstacles such as the issue of domestic uranium enrichment, which the U.S. wants Iran to forego.
“The U.S. cannot expect to gain what it couldn’t in war through negotiations,” Abbas Araqchi said during a Tehran conference named “international law under assault.”
“Iran will always be prepared to engage in diplomacy, but not negotiations meant for dictation,” he added.
During the same conference, deputy foreign minister Saeed Khatibzadeh accused Washington of pursuing its wartime goals with “negotiations as a show.”
Uncategorized
Israeli Government Decides ‘Independent’ Commission to Investigate Oct. 7 Failures
The Israeli Supreme Court in Jerusalem. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.
i24 News – The Israeli government has approved the creation of an “independent” commission of inquiry to examine the failures that enabled the Hamas assault of October 7, 2023.
However, in a move sharply criticized by the opposition and contrary to the recommendation of the Supreme Court, the panel will not be a formal state commission of inquiry. Instead, its mandate, authorities, and scope will be determined directly by government ministers.
According to the decision, the commission will receive full investigative powers and must be composed in a way that ensures “the broadest possible public trust.”
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will form a special ministerial committee tasked with defining what the inquiry may investigate, the time periods to be reviewed, and the authority it will receive. The committee has 45 days to deliver its recommendations.
For the past year, the government has repeatedly resisted calls to establish a state commission, arguing at first that such a body could not operate during wartime. Later, some ministers accused Supreme Court President Isaac Amit of being incapable of appointing an impartial chairperson.
But on October 15, the High Court of Justice ruled that there was “no substantive argument” against forming a state commission, giving the government 30 days to respond.
Netanyahu maintains that responsibility for the October 7 failures lies primarily with Israel’s security agencies rather than with political leaders.
His critics accuse him of creating a weaker, government-controlled inquiry designed to limit scrutiny of his decisions, undermining the prospect of full accountability for the deadliest attack in Israel’s history.