Prichard Colon, a former professional boxer, has passed away at 33, succumbing to severe brain injuries that drastically altered his life over a decade ago.

In October 2015, Colon, who was then fighting in the super-middleweight division, endured a brain hemorrhage following a match against American fighter Terrel Williams in Virginia. This injury came from multiple illegal punches to the back of his head.

After his loss in the ring, Colon collapsed and vomited in the dressing room, leading to an urgent hospital admission where he spent 221 days in a coma. During the bout, a section of his skull had caved in due to the repeated illegal punches, known as rabbit punches, which are forbidden in boxing.

When he awoke from the coma, the once hopeful boxing talent faced a new reality in a vegetative state. With profound injuries, Colon required round-the-clock care from his dedicated family.

Before turning professional, Colon had achieved significant success in the boxing world, claiming numerous national amateur titles and earning a Youth Pan American gold medal.

Colon’s dad and former trainer, Richard, announced the heartbreaking news on social media, writing: ‘Good morning, everyone. I regret to inform you of the passing of my son Prichard from this earthly world. He is now in a better place.’ 

He added: ‘Thank you for so many years of love and prayers. As much as you can, please keep us in your prayers.’

Until that fateful fight almost 11 years ago, Colon had been one of the sport’s most promising prospects. 

He had established an unblemished 16-0 record with 13 knockouts with many in boxing viewing him as a future star. 

Following the bout against Williams, Colon was rushed to the hospital where doctors discovered a subdural hematoma. 

He underwent emergency surgery as medics desperately attempted to relieve the swelling in his brain. After spending 221 days in a coma, Colon awoke unable to walk or talk.  

Despite the traumatic injuries, just three years ago, Colon had vowed not to throw in the towel. 

In an update on his Facebook profile at the time, Colon attempted to speak with his mother and even raised a smile in a moving video.

The post was captioned: ‘I will not give up’.

In other clips, the ex-fighter could be seen attending a truck rally with his family, while also appearing to take a positive step in being able to brush his own teeth.

His mother also shared a video of her son on his 31st birthday where she gave him a cupcake with a candle on it.

Colon’s story is one of the most tragic in boxing history, with former heavyweight champion Deontay Wilder breaking down in tears while discussing it last year.

‘We’ve seen what happens, look at Colon. How he got hit, Prichard Colon, correct,’ Wilder said.

‘This man didn’t have no kids… they don’t understand. Y’all don’t f****** understand what we go through, man.

‘And I don’t even know him like that, but I will always be an advocate for us. Because this man will never know what it’s like to be somebody’s father. And that’s one of the most precious things in the world, to be somebody’s father. But he will never be nobody’s father, man.

‘Because he got in the ring to support his family but now, his family got to take care of him for the rest of his life.’

On Friday, Alex Murdaugh will step back into a South Carolina courtroom, where his defense team aims to nullify the murder charges against him and restrict what evidence can surface during his upcoming retrial. A former federal prosecutor notes that this time around, the defense faces a newfound strategic landscape as they’ve already “played all their cards.”

The former attorney, now disbarred, is slated to appear before Circuit Judge Debra McCaslin at 10 a.m. in Lexington County. This pretrial hearing sets the stage for his April 2027 retrial related to the deaths of his wife, Maggie, and son, Paul.

Unlike the proceedings in June, which primarily focused on scheduling the retrial, Friday’s session follows a whirlwind of legal motions from both camps, highlighting their divergent approaches.

The tug-of-war involves attempts by the defense to throw out the murder indictments entirely, along with disputes over whether prosecutors can revisit Murdaugh’s previous financial misconduct, reuse his initial trial testimony, and introduce various other pieces of evidence to a fresh jury.

Nathan S. Williams, a South Carolina federal criminal defense attorney and former assistant U.S. attorney who served as criminal chief for the District of South Carolina, told News Media that a second trial changes the strategic landscape for Murdaugh.

“There is no surprising the government or the state at trial,” Williams said. “He’s given his testimony, they can prepare infinitely now to cross examine him.”

“That tends to be frankly more helpful for the state. I think they usually have a better chance on retrial,” he added, while noting that limits on some of the state’s evidence could cut the other way.

Murdaugh, 58, was convicted in 2023 of murdering Maggie, 52, and Paul, 22, at the family’s Moselle estate in Colleton County in June 2021. The South Carolina Supreme Court later overturned the convictions after finding that former Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill improperly influenced jurors.

The high court ordered a new trial, but the retrial may look significantly different from the first.

At Murdaugh’s first trial, prosecutors argued that years of theft and financial fraud were closing in on him and that the killings were an effort to distract from mounting scrutiny.

The South Carolina Supreme Court did not rule that all evidence of Murdaugh’s financial wrongdoing was inadmissible, but it said prosecutors had been allowed to go too far into the details during the first trial.

McCaslin will now be tasked with determining how much of that evidence can be presented to jurors the second time around.

Williams said he expects the amount of financial evidence to shrink from the first trial. He said “there will definitely be less,” adding, “How much less I think will be a good question.”

Prosecutors are also vying to use Murdaugh’s sworn testimony from his first trial during the retrial.

Murdaugh took the stand in his own defense in 2023 and admitted lying to investigators about his whereabouts shortly before Maggie and Paul were killed. He denied murdering them.

Whether jurors in the new trial will be able to hear portions of that prior testimony could become especially important if Murdaugh chooses not to testify again.

The defense has separately mounted a wider challenge to the charges themselves.

Murdaugh’s attorneys, led by Dick Harpootlian, have asked McCaslin to dismiss the murder and weapons indictments, alleging that false physical evidence was presented to the grand jury that indicted him.

The motion targets testimony from South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) investigator David Owen and raises questions about the evidence used to secure the original charges.

It is not yet clear whether McCaslin will rule on the dismissal motion Friday.

Williams called the dismissal request “a big ask” and “the explosive one, frankly, at this point,” noting that it attacks the validity of the indictments based on alleged misconduct or false statements.

“They’re alleging misconduct or false statements by one of the main case agents,” he said. Williams added that he would be “a little surprised if that gets taken up on Friday,” saying the issue will likely require evidence, testimony and additional briefing.

Another major fight involves forensic evidence.

Murdaugh’s attorneys have sought additional DNA testing using newer techniques, including testing tied to evidence found underneath Maggie’s fingernails.

Prosecutors have not opposed additional testing outright but have sought safeguards surrounding the handling of evidence, testing procedures and access to results.

“Independent testing might be tough,” Williams said. “It wouldn’t shock me if she lets them have a separate new test by the defense. To me, that strikes me as being fair, assuming they have the evidence available to be retested.”

The defense has also sought to move the retrial out of Colleton County, where the killings occurred and where the first trial became a media spectacle.

Murdaugh’s attorneys have argued that extensive publicity surrounding the case, along with the fallout from Hill’s conduct, makes it impossible for him to receive a fair trial there. They have proposed moving the case to nearby Charleston County.

Williams said venue may be one of the more straightforward disputes for McCaslin to address Friday, though the location could be the real fight.

“The battle, frankly, does seem to be not the venue change, but where,” he said. “Personally, I’d be a little surprised if she doesn’t change the venue.”

Other pending disputes involve access to phone data, third-party guilt evidence, discovery rules, polygraph evidence, juror questionnaires and protective orders governing sensitive material.

News Media has reached out to the attorney general’s office and Murdaugh’s defense team for comment.

There’s an old adage among political insiders about how the Republican and Democratic parties handle wins and losses.

Commentators often observe that when Republicans face a defeat, they worry it might be the last time they can recover; conversely, when Democrats celebrate a victory, they tend to govern as though another win is a given.

Virginia provides a clear example of this enduring truth.

During my tenure as Virginia’s Republican Attorney General, from 2022 until 2026, I teamed up with Governor Glenn Youngkin to revitalize a state that was struggling on many fronts.

At the outset of our administration, Virginia found itself languishing at 46th place out of the 50 states in terms of job creation in the post-COVID era.

Our schools were among the last in the country to reopen.

The murder rate had reached a 20-year high, and fentanyl overdose deaths hit new records. 

People and businesses were voting with their feet: For the first time in a century, Virginia experienced eight consecutive years of net population loss. 

Commonsense conservative ideas and leadership changed the trajectory.

Under Youngkin, Virginia climbed from the bottom tier of job creation to the top five. 

Smart fiscal discipline produced budget surpluses every year, even while delivering more than $9 billion in tax relief.

Over $156 billion in new business investment flowed into the commonwealth, more than under the previous six governors combined.

The murder rate fell, and Virginia led the nation in reducing drug overdose deaths because we chose to work with law enforcement rather than against it.

Some dubbed it the “Virginia Renaissance.” 

Virginia Democrats have rejected that Renaissance.

In doing so, Gov. Abigail Spanberger has managed to become one of the least popular governors in modern state history after a little more than half a year in office.

All it took was five easy steps. 

Step 1: Drive businesses away 

Virginia Democrats have proposed more than $37 billion in new taxes in 2026, one analysis found — despite the budget surplus that Youngkin’s policies left them.

Democrats in Richmond have enacted a sweeping payroll tax and a carbon tax, and their new regulatory burdens have increased the effective cost of hiring in Virginia by 22.5% , the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy estimates.

Under Spanberger, Boeing, Amazon and many other companies have announced closures or layoffs in the commonwealth. 

Step 2: Impose an energy tax 

Virginia must double its baseload electricity capacity over the next decade to meet growing demand.

The rational response would be expanding natural gas and nuclear energy — proven, reliable and affordable energy sources.

Instead, Spanberger is pushing energy suicide by advancing an extreme green agenda centered on intermittent wind and solar power.

Democrats are forcing ratepayers to purchase “renewable energy credits” that generate no actual electricity — a de facto carbon tax that’s costing Virginians hundreds of millions of dollars annually, and will soon add up to $1 billion or more a year. 

Step 3: Prioritize offenders over victims and tie law enforcement’s hands 

Under the Democrats’ “Enhanced Earned Sentence Credits” program, more than 9,000 convicted felons have been released early, some with decades remaining on their sentences; nearly half of them have already been re-arrested.

As a former prosecutor, I can affirm that justice means accountability — and accountability means serving the sentence imposed.

Moreover, one of Spanberger’s first official acts was ordering state law enforcement to stop cooperating with federal authorities to deport violent illegal immigrants, even those convicted of rape and murder, putting innocent Virginians at risk. 

Step 4: Undermine workers’ rights and force unions on local governments 

Virginia’s right-to-work law has been key in attracting and retaining manufacturing jobs — but Spanberger, while in Congress, was a co-sponsor of the PRO Act, which would have abolished right-to-work protections in Virginia and 26 other states.

Now, as governor, she is poised to sign mandatory collective bargaining legislation that forces all government employees into bargaining units, stripping local governments of flexibility and guaranteeing property-tax increases across the board.

Chesterfield County alone estimates the cost to its taxpayers at $200 million per year. Extrapolated across Virginia, the fiscal damage will be devastating. 

Step 5: Push partisan politics in defiance of the state constitution 

In 2020, Virginia voters amended their state constitution — by a two-thirds supermajority — to enact a nonpartisan redistricting process.

Yet Spanberger, who campaigned as a pragmatic leader who would transcend party politics, supported an egregious partisan gerrymander under which the 46% of Virginians who voted Republican in 2024 would have held approximately 9% of the state’s congressional seats.

And while our state Supreme Court struck down the power grab, the damage to Spanberger’s credibility was done. 

The Virginia Renaissance was the product of principled, disciplined governance focused on the people rather than the political class.

What’s unfolding now in Richmond is its deliberate undoing at the hands of Spanberger and her Democrat allies.

Now, businesses and families are making their own calculations about whether to stay or go.

History, and the voters, will render their verdict in time. 

Jason Miyares, Virginia’s attorney general from 2022 to 2026, is a partner at Torridon Law PLCC. Adapted from City Journal.

The Trump administration has stepped into a poignant legal clash over a surrogate’s determination to save a child diagnosed with a serious heart condition, going against the biological parents’ decision to terminate the pregnancy.

According to the New York Post, the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office for Civil Rights has issued a stern directive to hospitals in Texas, mandating that they provide essential medical care to the newborn. The baby, delivered by McKenna West, is at the center of this heart-wrenching narrative.

Despite requests from biological parents Nausheen Gilkar and Omar Ahmed, West delivered the child, whom she has affectionately named Baby Gabriel, in Dallas on a recent Wednesday.

Gilkar and Ahmed had initially urged West to end the pregnancy upon learning their unborn child was afflicted with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, a condition that, while serious, is addressable.

Determined to give the child a chance at life, West traveled to Texas to deliver him. Her efforts have garnered the support of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who has successfully obtained a court order guaranteeing that Baby Gabriel receives necessary medical treatment post-birth.

Now Trump officials have thrown their support behind the order and said that they would be sending a letter to Children’s Medical Center for Dallas and UT Southwestern Medical Center over the baby’s medical treatment. 

The HHS’ civil rights office informed the two Texas hospitals that federal law prohibits withholding medical treatment based on a person’s disability. 

Those federal protections, which included the withholding of treatment based on a judgement that the life of someone with a disability has less value or would be a burden on others, extend to decisions involving life-sustaining treatment, HHS told Fox News. 

According to the outlet, HHS said it would be monitoring Gabriel’s case and offering technical assistance to both hospitals as they determine his care. 

The agency also urged the hospitals to seek a review by an infant care committee should doctors withhold or withdraw medical treatment, Fox reported. 

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton had also told UT Southwestern Medical Center and Children’s Medical Center of Dallas of their legal obligations to provide Gabriel with ‘medically necessary, life-saving care upon birth,’ according to the outlet. 

‘The court has made the right decision in immediately acting to protect baby Gabriel’s life and ensure he receives the care he deserves,’ Paxton said following a court order ensuring Gabriel’s after-birth care. 

‘My office utilized every tool at our disposal to protect life, and we will not back down in continuing to support baby Gabriel’s well-being. Every child in our state deserves to be cared for and protected, and that’s exactly what I’ll fight for.’

Andrew Kolvet, a spokesperson for Turning Point USA, also supported West and dubbed her a ‘hero’ on X.   

‘McKenna West is a hero in my book. She saved this baby’s life, and I am praying she gets to keep baby Gabriel. That baby cannot go back to the California couple who wanted him dead. Surrogacy is weird and unnatural in the first place, so I default to a simple logic: Your womb, your baby,’ he wrote. 

The couple told TMZ on Thursday that they have physical custody of the child and their lawyer, Lee Bunder, told the outlet that Gabriel is receiving medical care in their custody. 

Bunder added that his clients are focused on the baby’s health and following the advice of medical professionals about treatment for his hypoplastic left heart syndrome. 

The couple became concerned after a 20-week ultrasound revealed that he would have the birth defect.

West did some research and found a hospital in Dallas that has had a 100 percent success rate in recent years with the first of three surgeries a baby would need right after birth.

Babies who undergo that first surgery have a 75 percent chance of making it to the age of five, and those who make it to their first birthday have a 90 percent chance of making it to the age of 18, according to New York Presbyterian Hospital.  

West then told her contacts at Connecticut-based Worldwide Surrogacy Specialist LLC that she could live with a friend in Texas to mitigate costs to Gilkar and Ahmed.

But a liaison at the agency told her the couple was still concerned about the baby’s future quality of life living with the heart condition.

West then received a call from the liaison telling her the parents officially requested she undergo an abortion – something she was morally against.

As she would be 24 weeks pregnant at the time of the abortion, West said in court documents she was appalled at the idea that doctors would inject the baby with ‘a solution that will stop his heart and then he’ll be literally ripped apart and dismembered as he’s taken from [her] uterus.’ 

As West continued to struggle with the biological parents’ request, her brother reached out to her and offered to adopt the child.

West then flew down to Texas to deliver the child and seek legal protections, as Texas state law recognizes anyone who gives birth in the state as the legal mother of that child.

However, Tuesday’s ruling forbids her from making any medical decisions for or on behalf of the child and states the child’s biological parents can make medical decisions on behalf of their son.

The two parties are now due back in court on August 25.