Enter the a team. Private eyes. There had been a brief encounter with a mysterious stranger. On the train coming home. She met this woman. Did that hold the answer . She is talking about how someone has tried to assume her identity. A chilling case of a daughter in danger. Strangers on a train. Hello and welcome to date line extra. She was beautiful. Talented and trusting and sometimes troubled. A young woman from a prem innoce prominent family. When the police were unable to find her. Her family hatched a plan. To solve the mystery. Heres keith morris son. It began in the great morning
A young woman disappears, and a chance encounter with a stranger on a train may hold some answers. Visa. A Paperwork Mixup sort of thing that would have sent her into a tailspin once, but now, the new kate vowed to try again later. Boarded the palmetto for charleston and once home threw herself into College Classes and a Childrens Book shed been writing. Big brother joe was, to say the least, encouraged
challenging the to remove him from the primary pal lot in maine based on the 14th amendment s insurrectionist ban. we ll speak live with maine s secretary of state, shen that bellows, in just a few moments. first are cnn s chief legal affairs correspondent, paula reid. what is trump s team arguing, and what happens next? reporter: now it s up to the main maine courts. the trump team is asking the court to overturn the decision by maine s secretary of state of c maine, shenthat bellows. she opted to remove trump from the ballot. if you don t like what the secretary of state says about your ballot eligibility, you can appeal that to the court system, which is what they ve done here, asking them to overturn her decision. trump s team arguing, the secretary was a biased decisionmaker who should have recused herself and had no local
subpoena, but, of course, that will be a question for a different day, for a different court. but certainly the judge in this case found that the two cases combined in her opinion showed a propensity for mr. harrison to commit crimes. so she was able to deny bond based on criteria here in georgia. when you think about that, she seemed referencing another judge. she didn t want to be the decisionmaker on this case. tell me why. right. well, in here in the fulton county judicial circuit there are, as in most judicial circuits, there is court rules that kind of govern what judges are able to do and not do. in this case, mr. harrison, because he was already indicted by a fulton county jury, lawyer, as you know, he was not entitled to what is commonly referred to as a first appearance hearing or a commitment hearing wherein a magistrate will look at his
weiss comes in and says, look, i am not the decisionmaker here. it doesn t support that at all. it supports this one fairly narrow aspect of the story. look, the main thing with shappley, what we are seeing, and, obviously, there is new information presented in this testimony that has changed narrative of the story, right. we are now talking about the d.c. and california charging decisions. we hadn t been talking about that before. let s just affirm that he has placed that into the record. but a lot of these other characterizations have not been challenged. we are not seeing him cross-examined by minority counsel on his testimony and he has yet to say that he will appear under oath before the committee as merrick garland has. so the suggestions, the question here is, there are two sets of questions here, right. what s the fact set which is what we are attempting to determine and what are the suggestions that shappley is making and what s the gaps
going to go much beyond what we wrote. but i will tell you that the general sense that we have is that he approached the prosecutor in southern california with a request to partner and was denied. that is the alpha to omega of what we know and what we have reported thus far. we are continuing to okay. that seems to support what it seems to support what shapley has said, which is that at this meeting on october 7, 2022, weiss comes in and says, look, i am not the decisionmaker here. it doesn t support that at all. it supports this one fairly narrow aspect of the story. look, the main thing with shapley, what we are seeing, and, obviously, there is new information that s been presented in this testimony that has changed the narrative of the story, right? we are now talking about the d.c. and california charging decisions.