In a recent development, a 21-year-old Indian national, who federal authorities confirmed was unlawfully present in the U.S., received a prison sentence of four years and eight months. This ruling comes after a catastrophic crash in Southern California last year that resulted in the loss of three lives.

Jashanpreet Singh accepted responsibility by pleading guilty to three felony charges of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence for an accident in October 2025, according to NBC Los Angeles.

Investigators reported that Singh was operating a semitruck when he collided with slow-moving traffic on Interstate 10 in San Bernardino County, an event that led to three fatalities and multiple injuries.

News Media previously reported that Singh is an illegal immigrant from India who crossed the southern border in 2022 and was released into the United States by the Biden administration.

According to federal sources, Singh was first encountered by Border Patrol agents in California’s El Centro Sector in March 2022 and released pending an immigration hearing.

The crash, which was captured on dashcam video, showed Singh never applying the brakes before slamming into traffic, according to investigators.

Singh obtained a California commercial driver’s license in June 2025, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation.

In September, federal officials warned California they had uncovered compliance issues involving commercial driver’s licenses and directed the state to make corrections, including pausing the issuance of new licenses to non-citizens and reviewing existing licenses to ensure they complied with federal requirements.

Anyone who did not meet the criteria was supposed to have their license revoked.

Federal officials said Singh should have been disqualified under an emergency Department of Transportation policy. California officials said Singh’s CDL eligibility was based on federally approved employment authorization documents, while federal transportation officials said he should have been disqualified under new emergency rules. However, on Oct. 15, after he turned 21, a restriction on his commercial driver’s license was removed.

Just six days later, authorities said Singh was driving the semitruck involved in the deadly crash.

Toxicology testing later confirmed Singh was not under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

DEAR ABBY: After 41 years of marriage, I find myself questioning whether my husband truly loves me. Although he is attentive to my needs and those of our family, a distressing truth overshadows our relationship—he’s been unfaithful throughout our marriage. Despite his care, our physical intimacy is lacking. My attempts at romantic gestures meet only with fleeting, impersonal responses.

In an effort to reignite our relationship, I’ve proposed regular date nights and suggested that we dine out together once or twice a month. Now that our children are grown and independent, I feel we should be embracing our freedom to focus on each other. Despite my efforts, my intuition tells me he continues his infidelities. How should I navigate this? — DISILLUSIONED IN ARIZONA

DEAR DISILLUSIONED: It’s possible your husband loves you, just not in the way you desire. It’s also conceivable that he’s maintaining the marriage to avoid the complexities and costs of divorce. Trust your instincts—if you suspect he’s still unfaithful, you may want to undergo STD testing as a precaution. To obtain concrete evidence of his fidelity, consider hiring a private investigator. Should your suspicions prove correct, you’ll face the difficult decision of whether to remain in the marriage.

DEAR ABBY: Having recently celebrated my 80th birthday, I’m grateful for my excellent health. Through diligent effort, I’ve achieved financial independence, secured long-term care insurance, installed an elevator for convenience in my home, and maintain an active lifestyle.

However, my friends have launched what I jokingly call the “Golden Girls Campaign Movement,” persistently suggesting that we cohabitate or jointly purchase a house. While I cherish their friendship, my autonomy is paramount. I’ve communicated my stance tactfully and, when necessary, with directness—emphasizing that cohabitation is not an option. Yet, my words seem to fall on deaf ears. I seek companionship, not roommates. How can I handle this situation? — ANNOYED IN CALIFORNIA

DEAR ANNOYED: From now on, when your friends raise the subject, smile and say, “I want friends, not roommates. I prefer to live independently.” Repeat it as often as necessary. It’s the truth.

DEAR ABBY: My brother-in-law was recently diagnosed with Alzheimer’s. He’s a retired doctor and knows what to expect in the coming years. We’re a close family and are always honest with each other. My wife and I do not know the best ways to support my sister. She is also a health professional who knows what is in store. Any help you may suggest will be shared among our family members, as we want to present a united approach. — FAMILY IN OREGON

DEAR FAMILY: I’m sorry for your brother-in-law’s diagnosis. Because he and his wife are well-equipped to tell you what they will need from you, ask them. Refrain from “going the extra mile” with assistance they have not requested. (You do not want to smother them.)

Closeness and honesty will be your greatest assets as you navigate this chapter of your BIL’s life. For additional support, the Alzheimer’s Association (alz.org) has resources, both for the affected person and for caregivers.

Dear Abby is written by Abigail Van Buren, also known as Jeanne Phillips, and was founded by her mother, Pauline Phillips. Contact Dear Abby at DearAbby.com or P.O. Box 69440, Los Angeles, CA 90069.

Donald Trump has teased that he will reveal ‘really big news’ during his Thursday night address, which is anticipated to showcase explosive evidence of voter fraud.

According to a White House official speaking to Reuters, the speech is slated to disclose declassified information from probes into U.S. elections, including alleged vulnerabilities found within voting machines.

On the other side, left-wing Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has expressed that networks have a ‘responsibility’ not to broadcast the speech if it is intended to mislead the American public.

While Trump kept specifics under wraps when questioned on Tuesday about the forthcoming address, he did hint at its potential to be quite a dramatic event.

“I’d rather save it; it will concern [election machines]. It’s really big news. It’s really, really big news,” he stated confidently from the Oval Office.

‘Our country has to shape up. What we’re going to be talking about Thursday, it doesn’t get bigger.’ 

The president could ‌also use his televised speech at 9pm ET to press his debunked claim that he lost his 2020 reelection to Joe Biden due to massive fraud.

Numerous courts, ballot audits and his first-term Justice Department found no evidence of such fraud, including vote-machine rigging. 

The federal cybersecurity watchdog joined other federal, state and local officials in declaring the vote ‘the most secure in American history.’

Asked ​if his speech would address election machine integrity, Trump told reporters on Tuesday, ‘It will concern that subject’ among others, but gave no details.

Propelled by Trump’s ​repeated claims that U.S. elections are ‘rigged,’ the administration has for over a year sought to increase federal oversight of election administration and ⁠reshape the way Americans vote — an effort that legal experts say would take power away from states in violation of the US Constitution.

With Republican control of Congress at ​stake in the November midterm elections, Democrats and some election security experts have expressed concerns that the Trump administration plans to interfere in those contests.

Ocasio-Cortez suggested the networks shouldn’t even bother to air it.  

‘He’s basically doing a made-for-TV broadcast about election fraud and conspiracy theories,’ she told MeidasTouch.

‘I don’t think we should be contributing to the platforming of lies about our elections. Many news outlets oftentimes may receive transcripts [in advance], and I think we have an ethical obligation not to air things that undermine our elections that are not rooted in evidence and in fact.’

Meanwhile, Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff spoke to MS NOW, suggesting he’d heard rumors that Trump might try and declare his and fellow Georgia Democrat Raphael Warnock’s victories ‘illegitimate.’

‘I expect him to use whatever he puts out there on Thursday as a pretext, either for some attempted unconstitutional use of federal power to interfere in the election, or to give his proxies and loyalists in state and local jurisdictions some cover for whatever they might attempt or to lay the groundwork for challenging the result.’

Ossoff slammed the President for focusing on this when he had so many other key issues to deal with. 

‘You’ve got the American public broadly furious with the president for war and tariffs and health care cuts that are making everything more expensive,’ Ossoff said. 

‘So now he’s pivoting from ballroom obsession to election conspiracy theory obsession, this is politically disastrous for Republicans in Georgia.’ 

By casting the 2020 election ​as illegitimate, Trump is laying the groundwork to challenge Republican losses and undermine Democrats if they win back power in Congress in November, multiple election experts have said.

An administration official, who discussed the plans on condition of anonymity, said on Monday that Trump will discuss in his speech national elections and what White House officials view as voting machine flaws that could permit foreign cyber intrusion.

The administration official said Trump ​would discuss newly declassified intelligence related to 2020.

Election officials say they are confident that machines are adequately secure and ​no evidence has been found of foreign intrusions that changed results of past elections.

A forensic analysis submitted last year by Mojave Research, a contractor hired by former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, ‌found flaws ⁠in voting machines seized in Puerto Rico but no evidence of hacking.

Gabbard, whose resignation was effective last month, also produced her own report that outlined significant vulnerabilities in voting machines and further safeguards, such as updating their software, that could be implemented, three sources familiar with the matter said.

The White House, however, has delayed releasing the report, and Trump has persisted in trying to prove that his 2020 defeat was due to fraud.

He appointed Bill Pulte, director of the federal mortgage regulator, last month as Gabbard’s interim replacement and ​said he had authorized Pulte to declassify ​documents related to the 2020 vote. 

The White House also recently formed a task force to investigate elements of the 2020 election, three sources familiar with the matter said on condition of anonymity.

One source said journalist John Solomon, a former Fox News contributor, is working on the effort.

Solomon, the ​source said, has requested access to files related to an analysis that dissented from a U.S. intelligence assessment in 2021 ​that found no indications ⁠that a foreign actor had tried or succeeded in altering ‘any technical aspect’ of the 2020 vote.

The unclassified version of the assessment judged that Russian President Vladimir Putin authorized parts of his government to conduct influence operations aimed at boosting the vote for Trump and undermining public confidence in the U.S. electoral process.

China considered conducting influence operations designed to change the election ⁠outcome but decided ​against doing so, while Iran pursued a ‘multi-pronged’ covert influence campaign to undercut Trump’s candidacy, the assessment said.

The ​report was drafted by the National Intelligence Council, the top body of U.S. intelligence analysts, along with the CIA, the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, the State Department’s intelligence bureau and the National Security Agency.

In an intriguing turn, a South Carolina judge has held crime reporter and podcaster Mandy Matney in civil contempt, demanding she pay $171,500 in legal fees and costs, along with a $5,000 fine. The court ruled she intentionally disregarded a subpoena connected to the Murdaugh family legal proceedings.

Judge R. Keith Kelly issued a comprehensive 22-page order on Monday, which determined that Matney had willfully ignored both a valid subpoena and a prior court directive to attend a deposition. Her defense, citing safety concerns, was dismissed by the court.

The civil contempt ruling is part of ongoing legal battles stemming from the tragic 2019 boat accident that claimed Mallory Beach’s life. Parker’s convenience stores are among those accused of unlawfully selling alcohol to a minor, Paul Murdaugh, who was involved in the fatal incident. Matney was summoned as a witness in this case despite not being directly involved as a defendant.

Beach, 19, was killed in the February 2019 crash in Beaufort County. Paul Murdaugh was later charged with boating under the influence, but those charges were dismissed after he and his mother, Maggie Murdaugh, were fatally shot at the family’s Colleton County hunting estate in June 2021.

The Beach family’s civil lawsuit against members of the Murdaugh family and Parker’s alleges the convenience store chain illegally sold alcohol to the underage Paul Murdaugh before the crash. The litigation ultimately helped expose Alex Murdaugh’s finances as investigators uncovered the disgraced attorney’s financial crimes.

Kelly wrote that Matney refused to appear at the Bluffton deposition site on March 27 despite acknowledging she understood the court had denied her efforts to quash the subpoena and ordered the deposition to proceed. Instead, she remained at another law office in Bluffton while Parker’s attorneys waited at the noticed location.

The order notes Matney instead appeared by Zoom from another law office in Bluffton.

“Based upon the foregoing, there is clear and convincing evidence that Ms. Matney’s failure to appear was not the result of confusion, mistake, or inability, but rather was a deliberate decision to disregard the subpoena and the Court’s March 16, 2026 Order requiring that she be deposed within 14 days,” Kelly wrote.

Kelly also found Matney’s explanation that she feared for her safety was not credible, writing there was “no persuasive evidence” supporting her allegations that Parker’s attorneys were trying to harass her or place her in danger.

Kelly pointed to Matney’s social media posts after the aborted deposition, including photos showing her eating lemon pound cake with attorney Mark Tinsley and later dining in Savannah. The judge wrote the posts “evidence her intent to defy her obligation to appear at the noticed deposition location.”

Parker’s attorneys originally sought more than $310,000 in fees and costs, but Kelly reduced the award by nearly 45%, ordering Matney to pay $171,500, plus a $5,000 fine.

The court awarded $39,900 to Bannister, Wyatt and Stalvey, LLC; $45,950 to Deborah B. Barbier, LLC; and $85,650 to Maynard Nexsen, PC.

Matney criticized the ruling Monday in a Facebook post.

“I’m not angry that Judge R Keith Kelly found me in contempt of court. I’m angry that he’s ordering me to pay an unprecedented amount of legal fees ($171,000 + $5,000 in fines),” she wrote.

“The South Carolina Justice system is exactly what I’ve been saying all along — CORRUPT,” she added. “And this is my punishment for calling it like it is.”

Kelly wrote there was “no persuasive evidence” supporting Matney’s repeated allegations that Parker’s attorneys were using the deposition process to harass or bully her.

He also concluded the contempt proceedings resulted from Matney’s own conduct, writing that had she appeared for her deposition or accepted one of several alternate locations offered, “she would not be before the Court on a contempt motion.”