Friday, March 27, 2026

In Live Nation Trial Defense Said 7 Day Case Now Lists 29 Live Witnesses so States Complain

SDNY COURTHOUSE, March 22 –  The United States versus Live Nation trial began on March 2 with jury selection, before U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Arun Subramanian.   Then after a week of testimony it went on pause, and the DOJ and now several states settlement with Live Nation.
 
   On March 16 the trial picked back up, with NYS' Hatch questioning AEG's Marciano followed by a grilling cross by Live Nations' Marriott, emphasizing the size and actions of AEG.  Then the states called Live Nations Bob Roux, who repeatedly said he didn't remember and couldn't confirm.

On March 17 the states put on Ben Baker, whose Slack messages about robbing customers blind were unsealed amid Press requests. Baker called his language immature; there was no cross. CEO Rapino is due on the stand on the morning of March 19...

On March 18, a former Ticketmaster technie, Edward Khoury now of Jump Platforms, on TM's ancient systems, and a defensive Mike Evans unaware of Rapino's threats to Abbamondi - expect more on that on March 19.

On March 19 Rapino was on the stand all day. Kessler landed some blows, about why lawn chairs were banned (so that Live Nation could charge for them); Rapino with his own lawyer painted a different picture. It's all in the thread. Kessler said the states will rest on Wednesday, March 25.

Late on March 19, Inner City Press publishes TicketMonster in Court, here

On March 20 there was only one witness, LN's Colin Lewis who promotes Shakira and Cardi B and Post Malone. He was about saying AEG would never be in the Hollywood Bowl. Then after the juror left, LN said its case will take seven trial days, with April 1 and 2 off for Passover.

On Sunday March 22 the States' lawyer wrote in that "Marriott, represented to the Court that Defendants’ “best estimate” was that they would put on a case for 7 trial days, Defendants disclosed a list of 29 live witnesses and 19 witnesses via designation. This is pure gamesmanship aimed at impeding Plaintiffs’ ability to prepare for trial" - full filing on Patreon here.

More on X for Subscribers here and Substack here.

March 19 more on that on X for Subscriber here and Substack here

March 18 extra on "war room(s)" on X for Subscribers here and Substack here

On March 5, Judge Subramanian granted Inner City Press first motion to unseal, here

On March 6, Inner City Press was in the courtroom at 8:30 am, and spoke to push for further unsealing, including of demonstratives. See new book, "TicketMonster: US v Live Nation 1," ebook, audiobook and paperback here.

On March 9, amid news of a US settlement, Inner City Press filed a second request to unseal, here. Then it ran in and live tweeted Judge Subramanian questioning the settlement, summoning Rapino in on March 10. At 4:20 pm the US - which says Live Nation is selling off things it is divesting - filed its term sheet, which we are putting on DocumentCloud here

At 11 pm on March 9, Live Nation opposed Inner City Press' motion to unseal, here. Before midnight, Inner City Press replied, here.
Near midnight on March 11, some documents were unsealed, and Inner City Press tweeted-out photos and links to CourtListener.

More from March 10 on X for Subscribers here and Substack here

Back on March 4 Inner City Press did a vlog, after filing to unseal, full letter on DocumentCloud here

On March 5, greanted. More March 2 details, and the names, on X for Subscribers here and Substack here

On March 3, three opening statements - David Dahlquist out of Chicago for the US, Jonathan Hatch for NY and the other states, and Latham's Marriott for Live Nation. The first witness was supposed to take the stand after that, but Judge Subramanian cited technical issues and sent the jurors home.

More March 3 detailing including on upcoming witnesses on X for Subscribers here and Substack here

The case is United States of America et al v. Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. et al., 24-cv-3973 (Subramanian) 


Amid UN80 Murky UN Dispute Tribunal Alleged by Staff to Inner City Press



Amid UN80 Murky UN Dispute Tribunal Alleged by Staff to Inner City Press

by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack

UN GATE, March 22– How corrupt is today's UN under Antonio Guterres? Now with Guterres bloviating without live stream in Japan after a long vacation, his staff tell Inner City Press things have hit a new low about which his spokespeople Stephane Dujarric and Melissa Fleming refuse all Press questions. Inner City Press has asked them, and others, about the newest sex abuse case against the UN. This, from a UN whistleblower sent to Inner City Press:

Dear Matthew Russell Lee, 

Within the United Nations internal justice system, each tier operates under its own procedural framework. In 2026, the United Nations Dispute Tribunal (UNDT) has issued and published 23 judgments. In contrast, the United Nations Appeals Tribunal (UNAT) has published none.

As reflected on its official webpage, no decisions have been posted to date.  This lack of publication raises serious concerns regarding transparency and accountability. At a minimum, judgments should be publicly available in a timely manner.

Where delays occur, the Tribunal must clearly explain the reasons. The absence of any published judgments is not acceptable in a system that is expected to uphold the rule of law and institutional credibility.

   Martha Helena Lopez, the Secretary-General’s senior advisor on human resources, has become emblematic of this “don’t care” policy. Observers note she looks fatigued, more focused on retirement than on strengthening governance. Rather than engaging with tribunal rulings, she and her team have defaulted to what staff now mockingly call “phone-call directives,” issuing guidance over the phone without regard to established precedent or proper review.  In New York, staff have started referring to her and her legal colleagues as “phone-call officers and advisors” because of their casual approach to matters of grave consequence.

In response it is said, "the first UNAT appeals for 2026 from the March session will be published in the coming weeks"- but see, for example, SDNY Judge Rakoff on March 23 asking USCIS why it can't, like US courts, publish decisions within minutes. He's given them a week. And the UN?

 Guterres, they say, should end censorship. Application was made on June 19, 2025 and denied without explanation on January 12, 2026. Watch this site.

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

sdny

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

Mail: Box 130222, Chinatown Station, NY NY 10013

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540



Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2026 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

As UNSG Candidates Dodge on Who Funds Their Campaign PGA Baerbock Year of Censorship

SDNY COURTHOUSE, March 23 –  To candidates nominated and running for Secretary General of the United Nations, a detailed questionnaire has been sent by Inner City Press and the Free UN Coalition for Access, on issues of transparency, independent, accountability, press freedom and freedom of information.

   The questionnaire has been sent, including via the UN Mission of the countries nominating them, to candidates Michelle Bachelet, Rafael Grossi, Rebeca Grynspan, Macky Sall and Virginia Gamba. We will continue reporting the responses, or lack thereof, including for the candidates expected before April 1, and after.

  But as some make excuses, or even praise, the abysmal level of campaign finance disclosure to date - phrases like "private resources" with no further detail - it's time to again look at who funds the ringmaster of this UNGA circus, Germany's Annalena Baerbock. For her entire terms, she has refused daily press questions and has colluded in censorship. Here is what she, in the tradition of the indicted PGA John Ashe (RIP) has disclosed (while not answering who seconds her staff):

Government of People’s Republic of China    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $500,000
July 2025    Government of the State of Qatar    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $250,000

July 2025    Government of Germany    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $1,159,200 July 2025   

Government of Australia    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $250,000 August 2025   

Government of Turkiye    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $60,000 August 2024   

Government of Morocco    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $50,000 August 2025   

Government of Ireland    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $116,230 September 2025   

Government of State of Kuwait    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $150,000 September 2025   

Government of India    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $100,000 September 2025   

December 2025    Government of Japan    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $31,635 December 2025   

Government of the Republic of Cyprus    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $20,000 January 2025   

Government of New Zealand    The implementation of the UN80 Initiative    $20,000

Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $80,000 October 2025   

Government of Estonia    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $11,737 October 2025   

Government of Italy    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $16,464.50 November 2025   

Government of Zimbabwe    General Administrative, logistical & management support    $5,000 December 2025   

From China to Zimbabwe, with fig leaf pittances from Estonia and New Zealand. And of course, her own country Germany, which wrote:

"Dear Mr Lee,     thank you for reaching out to us and for your detailed inquiry regarding press access to the United Nations General Assembly High-Level Week. We value the role of journalism, acknowledge the importance of press freedom and appreciate your dedication to this important work.      However, we must kindly inform you that the accreditation and access of journalists to the United Nations premises fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United Nations itself, specifically the Media Accreditation and Liaison Unit (MALU).  The German Mission to the United Nations does not have the authority to intervene in or influence these accreditation processes.      Please note that our Mission can only provide support to German journalists accompanying official delegations. For further assistance, we encourage you to continue to address your concerns directly to MALU or the relevant UN officials.     Best regards,     Pia Naendorf                Pia Naendorf     Permanent Mission  of Germany to the United Nations  871 UN Plaza, NY 10017."  Today's UN is a buck-passing joke, with the bucks murky and the watchdogs defanged (or never fanged). We'll have more on this.

Here are some of the questions sent to the UNSG candidates:

A. CAMPAIGN FINANCE & TRANSPARENCY

1. Beyond the minimum required disclosures, will you commit to publishing on the Internet the full names, nationalities, and amounts contributed by every donor to your campaign, on a rolling basis, within 48 hours of the contribution, for the duration of the selection process? If not, why not?

2. Have any member state governments, state-owned enterprises, or entities with business before the UN made financial contributions — direct or in-kind — to your campaign? If so, which ones, and in what amounts?

3. Some candidates' disclosed campaign financing documents are available only in one language or contain limited detail. Will you commit to publishing English as well as French versions of complete, itemized financial disclosures?

4. Do you believe the current campaign finance disclosure framework for SG candidates is sufficient? What reforms, if any, would you propose to strengthen it? Please be specific.

5. If elected, will you apply equivalent or stricter financial transparency standards to the Secretariat's own contracting, procurement, and partnerships with member states and private entities? If not, why not?

B. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION / PUBLIC ACCESS

6. The United Nations has no Freedom of Information Act or equivalent framework governing public access to Secretariat documents. See, e.g., https://www.freedominfo.org/2014/09/un-lacks-freedom-information/ As Secretary-General, would you support and propose the adoption of a formal UN Freedom of Information policy? What would it cover? What if anything would it not cover?

7. Which categories of UN Secretariat documents do you believe should be presumptively public? Which, if any, do you believe should be exempt from disclosure, and on what grounds?

8. How would you handle requests from journalists and civil society organizations for access to UN internal communications, reports, and meeting records that are currently withheld? How would you ensure that transparency-focused press does not continue to be excluded from the UN and its (possibly your) briefings?

9. The UN's current information-withholding practices have been criticized as inconsistent and opaque — some documents are routinely shared with select delegations while withheld from press and public. How would you address this asymmetry?

10. Would you support an independent appeals mechanism for journalists or researchers whose requests for UN documents are denied? Penalties for those who willfully withhold public information, particularly regarding the spending of the public's money?

C. PRESS FREEDOM & MEDIA ACCREDITATION

Questions from the Free UN Coalition for Access (FUNCA)

11. The current UN press accreditation system has been used to exclude or ban individual journalists, including some who have covered the UN for years. What criteria do you believe should govern the granting, denial, renewal, and revocation of UN press credentials?

12. Do you believe accreditation decisions should be content-neutral — meaning a journalist cannot be denied or stripped of credentials based on the substance of their reporting about the UN or member states?

13. Under the current system, the Department of Global Communications has broad discretion over credentialing with no independent review. Would you support establishing an independent body, including judges from member states with freedom of the press traditions, to adjudicate press accreditation disputes?

14. The Press has been banned from UN premises for years without a formal hearing, written charges, or appeal process. How and on what timeline would you address this case?

15. What due process protections, if any, do you believe journalists are entitled to before their UN access is revoked or denied?

16. The UN has been criticized for applying different standards to state media outlets versus independent journalists, freelancers, and watchdog journalists. How would you ensure equitable and content-neutral accreditation?

17. Would you commit to a full review of all currently banned or suspended press credential holders within your first 10 days?

D. INSTITUTIONAL REFORM & ACCOUNTABILITY

18. The UN Secretariat has faced repeated findings of mismanagement, fraud, and abuse. What structural changes would you make to ensure genuine accountability?

19. The Secretary-General's office currently operates with limited external oversight. Would you support an independent Inspector General mechanism with the authority to investigate the Office of the Secretary-General itself? Should the SG — a position you seek — be covered by the same restrictions as other UN staff members?

20. How would you respond if a member state, P5 or otherwise powerful, including one of your campaign donors or supporters, pressured you to suppress a report, deny press access, or take other actions adverse to transparency or press freedom? Please be specific.

21. The UN's relationship with civil society has become more closed in recent years, with accreditation of NGOs and independent observers becoming more politicized. What would you do to reverse this trend, including in the relevant Committee(s)?

22. How do you view the relationship between the Secretary-General's function as a "chief administrative officer" and the obligation to speak publicly about human rights violations, press freedom abuses, and institutional failures within the UN system itself?

E. ACCOUNTABILITY FOR UN-CAUSED HARM

23. For years, UN peacekeepers accused of sexual exploitation and abuse have simply been flown home to their troop-contributing countries, with no justice in the communities where the alleged abuse took place. Will you commit to waiving UN immunity in such cases, so that host-country justice systems can prosecute? Will you support mandatory reporting of all sexual exploitation and abuse allegations to host-country prosecutors, regardless of the nationality of the accused?

24. The United Nations introduced cholera to Haiti through its peacekeeping mission, causing an epidemic that killed thousands. The UN acknowledged "moral responsibility" in 2016 but never paid a penny in compensation to victims or their families, and the trust fund established for that purpose raised essentially nothing. Would you reverse that position and commit to compensating the victims and families? What specific steps would you take to avoid a repetition of this impunity — including supporting binding arbitration for communities harmed by UN operations, as an alternative to the current system under which the UN claims absolute immunity?

PART II: YES OR NO QUESTIONS

by the Free UN Coalition for Access (FUNCA)

1. Will you, within your first 30 days as Secretary-General, propose a formal UN Freedom of Information framework to the General Assembly?

2. Will you establish a publicly accessible register of all meetings between the Secretary-General's office and member state delegations?

3. Will you immediately restore Inner City Press to resident correspondent status at UN Headquarters?

4. Will you commit to content-neutral press accreditation — meaning no journalist will be denied or stripped of credentials solely because of the substance of their reporting?

5. Will you establish an independent press accreditation review board, including judges from member states with press freedom traditions, to hear appeals of denied or revoked credentials?

6. Will you conduct and publish a full review of media currently banned or suspended from UN press access within your first 10 days?

7. Will you make all UN Secretariat procurement contracts above $100,000 publicly available online, in easily searchable format, API-accessible?

8. Will you publish a full, itemized accounting of the Secretary-General's discretionary funds and travel budget on a weekly or monthly basis?

9. Will you commit to holding regular, unscripted press conferences open to all journalists, including independent and freelance reporters?

10. Will you support a formal whistleblower protection framework for UN staff who report misconduct?

11. Will you commit to not accepting any post-SG employment, advisory role, or paid engagement with any entity that had a financial relationship with your campaign within five years of leaving office?

12. Will you make your personal financial disclosures — including with specificity assets, investments, and any ongoing income streams — publicly available for the duration of your term?

13. Will you publish the full text of all communications between your office and member state governments regarding press access or accreditation decisions?

14. Will you commit to responding to this questionnaire within 10 days of receipt?

15. Will you make this questionnaire and your response publicly available on your campaign website? (Rest assured, Inner City Press will be publishing it, and your response or non-response.)

16. Will you commit to waiving UN immunity for peacekeepers credibly accused of sexual exploitation and abuse, so that host-country justice systems can prosecute?

17. Will you commit to compensating the victims and families of the UN-introduced cholera epidemic in Haiti?

  All candidates and/or their nominators have received the above - watch this site.


More on X for Subscribers here and Substack here