Success isn't guaranteed. It's earned through unwavering commitment. The only ones who make it to the top are those willing to go the extra mile. Get ahead with WSJ Plus, offering insights from the Wall Street Journal, Barron's, MarketWatch, and Investors Business Daily. because fortune favors the ambitious.
It's 505 and welcome into a Tuesday edition of the Carolina Journal News Hour, News Talk 1110-993 WBT. I'm Nick Craig. Good morning to you. As we predicted yesterday, it was a busy day, a busy Monday in the North Carolina General Assembly, as lawmakers in both the House and the Senate return to Raleigh as they will do so a couple more times before the end of the year and wrapping up the long session at the end of 2025. Yesterday, September the 22nd, marking one month after the murder of Irina Zaruska, a 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee who was murdered on the Charlotte light rail one month ago yesterday.
And as we have been previewing over the last week and a half or so, lawmakers in Raleigh are moving forth with House Bill 307, also known as. Arena's law. This is set to address some of the issues that could have allowed Zaruska to still be alive today, including dealing with a variety of criminal justice issues that exist throughout the North Carolina judicial system, as well as things that are relevant in the wake of the murder of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. With those both making both state, national, and international headlines, several issues have arisen in state and local government, including tightening pretrial conditions for the release of violent offenders, eliminating cashless bail, addressing the mental health crisis in the criminal justice system, and removing roadblocks to the death penalty. That's a big portion of this in North Carolina.
The bill addresses most of those concerns. It creates a new category of violent offenses, requires GPS monitoring, house arrests, or secured bond for those accused, and adds as well as adding a capital of punishments or capital felonies on public transportation to the list of aggregating factors that make a defendant eligible for the death penalty. Republican leaders say these changes are designed to ensure that violent, repeat offenders remain off the streets, while holding magistrates and judges more accountable for release decisions that they might make. Senator Danny Britt, who is the Republican out of Hope County, introduced this legislation in the Senate Judiciary Committee where it was first introduced in Raleigh yesterday. This is how the senator from Hope County described the legislation.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members. This bill is largely in response to the incident that happened in Mecklenburg County on the Charlotte Mass transit system. And this is in House Bill 307, what has been called Irena's Law. What this deals with is pretrial release conditions under various certain circumstances.
This creates or basically does away with written promises to appear. It creates a new concept of what would be considered a violent offense. In circumstances where there is a violent offense, there would be a rebuttable presumption that no pretrial released would be granted based on a danger analysis. If the judicial official does determine pretrial release is appropriate. the following would apply.
The first arrest, the only option is either a secure bond or house arrest with monitoring. Second or subsequent only option is house arrest with monitoring. If a defendant has been convicted of three or more offenses, Class 1 misdemeanor or higher within the 10 years prior to, then the only option is secured bond along with house arrest. With monitoring. Many counties do not already have the GPS monitoring system within their pretrial release or their sheriff's department.
This would allow for individuals to. are counties who do not have those systems established. to contract with a private vendor by which the defender would for that. ankle monitoring device that they were placed out on. pre-trial release with a monitor.
Law is clarified to ensure that judicial official reviews and considers the defendant's criminal history before setting conditions of pretrial release. Law is modified so the judicial official must make written findings of fact explaining the reasons. Why the official determined the conditions of release in each case. If a judge or magistrate fails to make these written findings, it would be ground for suspension. It would allow the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or Chief District Court Judge to initiate suspension proceedings for magistrates.
Right now, only a Chief District Court judge could suspend. As for mental health evaluations, it creates a protocol under which judicial official will be required to order a mental health evaluation if the defendant is charged with a violent offense and has been involuntarily committed within the last three years. or the defendant is charged with any offense and judicial official has cause to believe the defendant is suffering from a mental health crisis. The collaboratory will study the intersection of mental health and the justice system in North Carolina. As we all realize that there is a connection, there's more to do on this topic.
We had a rather short window to do what we did in this bill here. We believe this does make North Carolina safer. And does help to promote law and order in the state of North Carolina, but we do have more work to do on involuntary commitments and mental health in the space of. the criminal justice system. This also would modify laws related to aggravating factors.
When someone is on trial for first-degree murder prior to a decision that the state is going to proceed capital, one of the arguments they must make to the court are that certain aggravating factors exist to be able to have the case declared capital. This adds an aggravating factor that if the incident took place, On mass transit, that would be considered an aggravating factor by which Rule 24 could be granted. It also modifies death penalty proceedings that appeals and post-convictions, MARs, must be heard within 24 months of the date they have been filed. The oldest appeal currently is a 1985 murder case in the state of North Carolina. And uh these Murder appeals are simply going on too long without a family ever seeing justice for their loved one, and this is an effort to try to speed these up.
Any case that is already pending appeal, if appeal has already been filed, they'll have 24 months as well from passage of this law. There was a modification in what was in the original draft that we made. Current law requires defendants lack of capacity to proceed. The court dismiss charges. This occurs at any time a defendants will not regain capacity.
The defendant has been incarcerated beyond maximum sentence for the underlying sentence. 10 years for any felony. Essentially, if someone's declared incompetent, the longest we can hold them if they are violent is up to 10 years. This provides a process with after that 10-year period, the district attorney can have the individual viewed again to determine whether or not further involuntary commitment is necessary. That's Senator Danny Britt in Raleigh yesterday, more particularly the Senate Judiciary Committee, describing some of the details of House Bill 307.
Again, the short name on that arena's law. One of the big things that came up with throughout discussion yesterday in Raleigh was the death penalty.
Now, this should not be a surprise or secret to anybody. We heard back in a press conference a couple of weeks ago, which did include the leader of the North Carolina Senate in Phil Berger and the leader of the North Carolina House in Destin Hall that lawmakers would move forward to essentially reinstate the death penalty in North Carolina. And that is exactly one of the things added to House Bill 307. It removes roadblocks that have hindered the death penalty in North Carolina for close to 20 years. That's according to a press release from Speaker Destiny Destin Hall's office.
Currently, the death penalty appeal can sit indefinitely. Any appeal or motion filed more than 24 months ago now must be scaled. Scheduled for a hearing date no later than December of 2026, with the hearing taking place on or before December 2027, as required by this bill. For death penalty cases, hearings must be held in the county in which the offender was originally convicted. Previously, all of those hearings took place in Raleigh, our state capitol.
Lawmaker said, in an attempt to allow to streamline this process to some extent, that the official Whole group, including the individual in question, does not have to travel to the state capitol, which can be a major burden on local prosecutors, law enforcement, and jails, as the transferring of that individual is a pretty heavy lift. We've got some additional details from the Senate floor. It was a busy evening as lawmakers didn't wrap up until well after 7 p.m. last night debating this legislation. We'll continue the details coming up here in just a few minutes as we roll on with the Carolina Journal News Hour.
Trying to lose weight? It's time to try hers. At forhears.com/slash for you, you can access affordable doctor-trusted weight loss treatments tailored just for you. These include oral medication kits or compounded GLP-1 injections. Through HERS, pricing for oral medication kits started just $69 a month for a 10-month plan when paid in full upfront.
No hidden fees, no membership fees. You shouldn't have to go out of your way to feel like yourself. HERS brings expert care straight to you with 100% online access to personalized treatment plans that put your goals first. Reach your weight loss goals with help through HERS. Get started at forhers.com/slash for you to access affordable doctor-trusted weight loss plans.
That's forhears.com/slash for you. F-O-R-H-E-R-S.com/slash for you. Paid for by HIMS and HERS Health. Weight loss by HERS is not available everywhere. Compounded products are not FDA approved or verified for safety, effectiveness, or quality.
Prescription required. Restrictions at forhears.com. Apply. you Yeah. It's 21 minutes past the hour.
Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour. News Talk 1110-993WBT. We are continuing our coverage this morning of a busy day in Raleigh yesterday for the North Carolina General Assembly. As lawmakers, through the rest of the year, we'll be back for a couple of days at the end of each month, leading all the way up until the new year. House Bill 307 was the big topic of discussion yesterday, at least on the Senate side, where all of the activity happened.
The House did gavel in at noon in a skeleton session. Just a couple of individuals, including Representative Jared Lowry, presiding over the House, talked about him yesterday as he announced that he would be leaving the General Assembly at the end of October to take a job in Washington, D.C. with the Trump administration. It's not immediately clear, but rumor has it that the full House will be back in some form or fashion today.
So as we look at House Bill. 307. This is IRENA's law. It went through all of the process in the Senate yesterday, and this is a widesweeping bill, more than 17 pages dealing with a variety of issues, including pre-trial release and documents that need to be filed by magistrates or judges when they allow violent or repeat offenders a pre-trial release, GPS monitoring, house arrests, or secured bond for those accused of violent offenses, which there's been some new additions to that.
Some other things, including committing a capital felony on public transit, that has been added to the list of aggravated factors that can make a defendant eligible for the death penalty and a variety of other issues. One of the big topics of debate and what really slowed down the North Carolina Senate last night was discussions on reinstituting or essentially allowing the death penalty to continue in North Carolina. It has been on the The books, and it is illegal in the state as a form of punishment.
However, that process has essentially been blocked for the last 20 years due to an appeal process in which the appeal can sit indefinitely. And that has been blocking and essentially a major roadblock in place for the death penalty. The Senate did adopt several amendments introduced, including an amendment introduced by Senate Leader Phil Berger that would establish lethal injection as the primary default method of execution in the state of North Carolina. This was not without controversy from Democrats. Senator Greg Meyer, the Democrat out of Coswell County, raised several concerns about alternative methods of execution with the death penalty or capital punishment, including the electric chair and firing squad, neither of which were introduced as amendments.
To avoid additional delays, Berger's amendment directs the Department of Adult Corrections to implement alternative execution methods if a court order or other administrative barrier prevents lethal injection. It also imposes deadlines for adopting new methods to ensure that the Stein administration is held accountable. And finally, the amendment stipulates that any case in which a trial court rules a method of execution unconstitutional, it may be appealed directly to the North Carolina Supreme Court for some expedition to take place there. Senate Leader Phil Berger said in a press release following the vote quote, For nearly two decades, judicial and administrative roadblocks have stopped true justice for victims, and it's time for that to end. During my time in the Senate, I've worked to find ways to restart the death penalty, but judges, activist doctors and weak on crime politicians have placed hurdle after hurdle in the way.
I hope we can finally get justice for victims' families and for the people of North Carolina. House Bill 307, also known as Irena's Law, would also classify committing a capital felony against a victim using public transportation as an aggravating factor in death penalty cases. This provision ensures that prosecutors can seek and courts can impose the death penalty without hesitation in cases similar to the one that happened just over one month ago that claimed the life of 23-year-old Irina Zaruska. Additionally, the bill would clarify that judicial officials must review and consider a defendant's criminal history before setting pretrial release conditions. It would also require the judicial official to make written findings of fact explaining the reason for determining that that pretrial release condition was justified in each and every case.
Failure by a judge or magistrate to make these required findings would, in fact, be grounds for removal. The bill for Further allows the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or the Chief District Court Judge to initiate suspension proceedings for magistrates that do not follow the process laid out in House Bill 307. And finally, it directs the North Carolina Collaboratory to study the intersection of mental health and the justice system in North Carolina for both adults and juveniles, examine the availability of house arrests as a condition of pretrial release, and evaluate alternative methods of execution beyond those currently authorized in North Carolina. The collaboratory would be required to have a preliminary draft to the General Assembly by next year and a final study sometime in 2027. With all of that said, and as I noted, this went long into the night, well past 7 p.m.
as lawmakers gaveled in around noon yesterday. The final passage of Irena's Law, House Bill 307, was 28 to 8. This is after the vast majority of Democrat lawmakers in the Senate, because they were incapable of getting their way on any of their amendments, decided to just walk out of the chamber and not vote either way on the legislation.
So it did pass 28 to 8, and now it moves over to the North Carolina House, where it has officially been calendar for this morning, September the 23rd. Again, not immediately clear how quickly that legislation will be taken up by the North Carolina House.
However, it is something that lawmakers promised, including House Speaker Destin Hall in that press conference with Phil Berger back a few weeks ago, that they would be taking up in Raleigh.
So we will watch what happens in. the House and then of course following any other law passed in North Carolina or any other legislation I should say it will make its way to the governor's desk if successful in the House where he will likely veto it and it will have to come back to the General Assembly for a series of veto overrides. We will continue to track its progress throughout the day today over on our website CarolinaJournal.com and of course we'll have the latest details coming up for you tomorrow morning right here on the Carolina Journal News Hour. It's 5:35. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, News Talk 1110-993 WBT.
A search warrant gone wrong back in 2019 has been in the news over the last couple of years on a variety of legal challenges. We do have an update this morning to walk us through some of those details. Mitch Kokai of the John Locke Foundation joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour 2019. Mitch, six years or so ago, a story out of Mecklenburg County, including a search warrant. Law enforcement officers being shot.
A lot of information going on here. What's the latest that you're tracking out of the courts? Yes, this was an incident that really arose out of a law operation that certainly went sideways. A task force involving multiple law enforcement officers from multiple departments was trying to serve the search warrant on a suspect who was accused of trafficking methamphetamine. But what happened was when the law officers arrived, there was some case.
Chaos that ensued, some shooting that took place, and one of the officers, a fellow named Clarence Belton, who was a Gastonia police officer, got shot as he was trying to get away. He got shot some more. And though he survived, he suffered some very long-lasting serious injuries that prevented him from continuing his work in law enforcement. And so he sued one of the fellow officers, a woman named Heather Loveridge from the Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department, along with the city of Charlotte, saying that there was a legal liability for his injuries.
So This case has been moving through federal courts now for several years, and there was a ruling back in February. From the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, that said that the trial judge was going to have to take another look at whether Heather Loveridge would get immunity in the case. The judge had said no immunity, that the case could go forward, but the Fourth Circuit, in a unanimous ruling earlier this year, said the judge didn't go through the specific analysis that's required to ensure whether immunity is or is not possible in this case.
So the judge in the case, Max Cogburn, has to go back. And do the analysis to decide whether there's going to be immunity.
So that's one piece of this case. But the most recent development. Which should be very interesting to people who are fans of the First Amendment and to media access to public records and documents, is that the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals came out with a ringing endorsement. Of the media's access to records because WBTV wanted to get access to the video from law enforcement footage of this incident.
And not only would the law enforcement agencies not turn it over, but the same judge in this case, Judge Cogburn, ruled A, that WBTV couldn't intervene in the case, and also B, that the law enforcement footage would not be turned over, even if they could intervene, because it could threaten the right to the fair trial that Heather Loveridge said that she would have threatened if this video were released. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed. It actually agreed with Cogburn that WBTV could not intervene in the case. It had no right to. But the Fourth Circuit also said this video should be put forward, that this is part of the media and the public's right to, under the First Amendment, to have access to public documents.
And public footage of this sort. The Fourth Circuit also said that Loveridge put forward no evidence at all that this would jeopardize her right to a fair trial. And if she was going to prevail on that, she would have to show somehow that this video footage would somehow threaten her right to a fair trial, which is also a constitutional right. And she had put forward no evidence. All she had said was.
This is going to jeopardize my right to a free trial. And the judge had gone along with it.
So, a very interesting development. The decision that came out from Judge Nicole Berner talked quite a bit about. The public role of the media and why it's important for accountability and transparency, and basically saying that even if This was something that could have some sort of impact on the trial, that the interests of the public in having access to this were more than the interests of having a fair trial, unless there would be some sort of convincing evidence that the video could taint the trial. Another sort of sideline was so much of the information about the shooting is already in the public documents that it's hard to imagine that anything in the video would would change what people already know about this case. And Mitch, this is not even the first time that we've had discussions about WBTV and their attempts, in this case, going to court to try and get various pieces of video surveillance or information about some law enforcement matters in the Charlotte Metro audience.
Mitch, you've been in the media business for quite some time. Would you opine a little bit more on the importance for folks, as you noted, who are supporters of the First Amendment, folks that want to hold and make sure that their local governments, which law enforcement is an extension of that, at least in some regards, hold them accountable and make sure that this information is available to the public when situations like this unfold? Certainly, much of what government does is available to the public, and that is important because we have to be able to hold them accountable. And if we don't know what they're doing, then that makes it harder. And so there has been debate over the years about this law enforcement video footage and whether it is public, whether it isn't, and who should have access to it.
I think there are some lines that you have to put out there about what should be available, what shouldn't be. And if there is a threat to someone's constitutional right to a fair trial, that would be a key argument that could be made about why you wouldn't release the footage. In this case, though, there wasn't any evidence put forward about why this particular footage would jeopardize the right to a free trial. And I think that's one of the reasons the Fourth Circuit said, no, this is just a case of one party in a lawsuit not wanting this information to be released. That in and of itself, Is not enough of a justification.
We want to make sure that police. Elected officials, city and county and state bureaucrats are doing the jobs that they're supposed to be doing. And if there is a way for them to be hiding, Things from us by not making public documents and other types of recordings and that sort of thing available, that there need to be strict limits on when that is acceptable, because almost everything that government does ought to be available to the public so that the public can look at it and decide whether the government is doing the right job or not. I'm sure some folks are probably looking at another situation that, of course, has garnered an incredible amount of national attention over the last month or so, Mitch. The murder of Irina Zaruska on the Charlotte Light Rail.
Surveillance footage of that with the accused killer now in custody has been plastered over international television. No claims, at least to this point, being made that there could be no fair trial there.
So I'm sure some folks might call this argument being made in this case from 2019 bogus if some of this other stuff you're seeing with the Charlotte Light Rail situation is unfolding in the public the way that it is.
Well, and remember that one of the reasons this case has attracted so much attention, speaking of the Charlotte Light Rail case, is the release of the video. I mean, the video didn't come out until well after a week of the events. I kind of feel good for the family of Irina Zarutska that they had the funeral and took care of the very private stuff before this really hit the news wheel because had this... Had the funeral taken place while all of the media frenzy was going on, you know, they would not have had any sort of peace. But because of the availability of the video, this escalated from what was at first seen as kind of a minor local crime incident into being a major issue that's attracted certainly attention from our General Assembly and from people all the way up to President Donald Trump.
And so that's another reason why you would want to make sure that something that happens. On public transportation or involving a government agency or government agents gets the scrutiny that it deserves. And this Fourth Circuit opinion, though it is not in the Arena Zarutska case and probably was not even inspired at all by the Arena Zarutska case, does sort of fit in with this idea of making this information available.
Now, I don't know all the details, but I think in the Arena Zarutska case, there was some talk at the beginning about whether this would be released or not. And had it never been released, I'm certain this case would not have attracted the attention that it did. And so that's a sign for all of us about how. Public access to this type of information can make a major difference. Yes.
There was some initial pushback from Katz and the Charlotte City Council on releasing some of the surveillance video from that Charlotte light rail. Great points and some great information. We appreciate the update this morning. Mitch Kokai from the John Locke Foundation joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour. You're listening to Leaf Filter Radio, and the guru of gutter protection himself, Chris Kunahan, is here to take your most pressing leaf-related questions.
Hey everybody, Chris here. Understand we have Ron on the line. Ron, where are you calling from? Ron, are you calling from a ladder?
Well, I was. Uh, I wanted to ask Chris what I need to do to get my gutters ready to have Leaf Filter installed. Oh, Ron, you don't have to do anything. A Leaf Filter Trusted Pro will come out and clean out your gutters, realign and seal your gutters, and install Leaf Filter, America's number one gutter protection system.
So, I didn't need to get on this ladder? Ron, Leaf Filter Trusted Pros are in your neighborhood and ready to help. Just visit leaffilter.com/slash day to schedule your free gutter inspection and get up to 30% off. Thank goodness. What was that site?
That's leaffilter.com/slash day for your free gutter inspection today. See Representative for warranty details. Promotion is 20% off plus a 10% senior or military discount. One discount per household. Good morning again.
It's 5:52. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, News Talk 1110-993 WBT. We continue our coverage this morning of what was a busy day and what will likely be a busy day today in Raleigh. As lawmakers are back, as they will do so for the rest of the year, a couple of days towards the end of each month to deal with a variety of leftover issues. Of course, the budget debate still stalled.
We continue to track that coverage as well.
However, the priority this morning and the priority of lawmakers is dealing with a variety of judicial issues that exist this coming in, just one month after the murder of Irina Zaruska, a 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee who was murdered on the Charlotte light rail back on August the 22nd. This has prompted outrage not only from lawmakers in North Carolina, but even comments from prominent national figures, including. The President of the United States in Donald Trump. This has prompted lawmakers in North Carolina to introduce House Bill 307, also known as Irena's Law. This is a criminal justice reform bill that addresses a variety of issues, including several.
Discussions about tightening pretrial conditions for the release of violent offenders, eliminating cashless bail, addressing the mental health crisis in the criminal justice system, and removing continued roadblocks to the death penalty in the state of North Carolina. This went through the Senate Judiciary Appropriations and Rules Committee yesterday in Raleigh. It then made its way to the full North Carolina Senate floor for a vote where the final tally was 28 to 8. After most of the Democrat caucus in the North Carolina Senate determined since they were not going to be successful in voting down this legislation, they were just going to leave, which is exactly what they did, prompting that 28 to 8 vote. This piece of legislation addresses a lot of concerns that you've heard about over the last month or so.
It creates a new category of violent offenses that require GPS monitoring, House organizations. Arrest or secured bond for those that are accused of those. It also adds committing a capital felony on public transportation to the list of aggregating factors that can make a defendant eligible for the death penalty in North Carolina. Republican leaders say that the changes are designed to ensure that violent and repeat offenders remain off the streets while holding magistrates more accountable for their release decisions and turning our attention. To those magistrates and judges, this legislation would require any judicial official allowing somebody pre-trial release to make written findings of fact explaining the reason for determining the condition of release in each and every case.
Now, there are some consequences for legal officials that refuse to do that. Failure by a judge or magistrate to make those required findings would be grounds for removal. The bill allows either the Chief Justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court or the Chief District Court judge, gives them the ability to initiate suspension proceedings and removal proceedings for those magistrates if they choose not to follow this legislation. That, of course, presuming it goes into law.
So, here's how things are going to shake out over the next couple of days. It is now officially passed the House, House Bill, or Senate rather, House Bill 307 in a 28 to 8 vote. Lawmakers. In the North Carolina House are expected back this morning. It was a skeleton session yesterday in Raleigh with lawmakers quickly gaveling in and then gaveling out, indicating that there would be some votes today in the House.
The calendar remains incredibly busy with still a litany of veto overrides from earlier this year.
Now, House Bill 307, that is ARENA's law. If it is successful and if the House does have the votes to take it up, it will follow the process of every other piece of legislation that we track here on the Carolina Journal News Hour passing both chambers of the General Assembly, then making its way to the governor's desk for a signature. As this has become a highly partisan issue, it would seem very unlikely that current Democrat Governor Josh Stein would sign this legislation, at least as it is written right now. That will likely set up the possibility of yet another set of veto overrides for both chambers to deal with. Remember the math on that.
The North Carolina Senate Republicans hold that veto-proof supermajority. In the North Carolina House, Republicans are just one vote short, meaning that they do need at least one Democrat to cross the aisle to override any vetoes by the governor. We've seen multiple examples of that earlier this year.
So it is set to be a busy couple of days in Raleigh. We will have a continued coverage over on our website throughout the day, CarolinaJournal.com and the latest coming up for you tomorrow morning right here on the Carolina Journal News Hour. That's going to do it for a Tuesday edition. WBT News is next, followed by Good Morning BT. We're back with you tomorrow morning, 5 to 6, right here on News Talk 1110 and 99.3, WBT.
If you love to travel, Capital One has a rewards credit card that's perfect for you. With a Capital One Venture X card, you earn unlimited double miles on everything you buy. Plus, you get premium benefits at a collection of luxury hotels when you book on Capital One Travel. And with Venture X, you get access to over 1,000 airport lounges worldwide. Open up a world of travel possibilities with the Capital One Venture X card.
What's in your wallet? Terms apply. Lounge access is subject to change. See CapitalOne.com for details.
