Feds charge controversial Kent State University professor Julio Pino with lying to FBIHistorians in the News
tags: antisemitism, Julio Pino
Federal prosecutors on Monday charged a controversial Kent State University professor known for his anti-Israel views with lying to the FBI.
Julio Pino, 58, of Kent is charged with one count of making a false statement to law enforcement. The history professor was charged by way of a criminal information, which usually means a plea agreement is forthcoming. His attorney Warner Mendenhall confirmed Monday that he is in negotiations with the U.S. Attorney's Office to resolve Pino's case.
Pino, who has worked at Kent State since 1992 and specializes in Latin History and the Third World, has a history of making controversial statements. The federal charge against him, though, appears to stem from an FBI investigation into threats made by a St. Louis man against a family court judge presiding over his child custody battle.
Mendenhall said Pino has put in to retire from Kent State University at the end of this semester. He declined to discuss the specifics of Pino's case, citing the ongoing plea negotiations.
Kent State spokesman Eric Mansfield said in a statement Monday afternoon that Pino was suspended after he was charged. He is also prohibited from going onto any Kent State campus, Mansfield said. ...
comments powered by Disqus
- At Summit Meetings, Kremlin Often Tried to Steamroller U.S. Presidents
- How A Tariff Loving Utah Senator Became A Cautionary Tale About Protectionism
- Pompeii excavation project reveals secrets
- In Ireland, Drought and a Drone Revealed the Outline of an Ancient Henge
- Sarcophagus Found. Contents Unknown. (‘No Guessing, Please.’)
- Oxford professor counts 93 penises in Bayeux Tapestry
- Medieval Scholars Call for Transparency and Anti-Racism at Conference
- Robert Dallek's FDR Book Invites Comparisons To Trump's Presidency
- Ridley Scott to Adapt Israeli Author's "Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind" Into a Movie
- Partisans assail historians for judging the past by today’s standards. Here’s why they’re wrong, says classicist