标签: North America

北美洲

  • Ex-Crips leader found guilty in 1996 murder of rapper Tupac Shakur

    Ex-Crips leader found guilty in 1996 murder of rapper Tupac Shakur

    After nearly three decades of speculation, unanswered questions, and rampant conspiracy theories, one of the most high-profile cold cases in American music history has finally resulted in a conviction. On Monday, a Las Vegas jury found former South Side Compton Crips gang leader Duane “Keffe D” Davis guilty of murder with a deadly weapon for his role in orchestrating the 1996 drive-by shooting death of legendary hip-hop icon Tupac Shakur.

    Court observers described a tense, emotional scene inside the downtown Las Vegas courtroom as the verdict was read. The 63-year-old defendant, dressed in a crisp black suit, remained completely impassive as the jury foreman announced the guilty finding. Moments later, he formally informed Clark County District Court Judge Carli Kierny of his intent to appeal the conviction, a process that will move forward after his sentencing scheduled for October 13. Across the courtroom, members of Shakur’s family reacted with quiet emotion, locking hands, embracing one another, and shedding tears after the verdict was delivered. Shakur’s sister hugged lead prosecutor Binu Palal in a show of gratitude, while devoted fans gathered outside the courthouse cried and cheered at the news of the guilty outcome.

    Shakur, one of the most influential and commercially successful rappers of all time, was just 25 years old when he was gunned down on September 7, 1996, at the height of his career. To date, he has sold more than 75 million records worldwide, and his cultural legacy has only grown in the decades since his killing. The shooting occurred amid a bitter, well-documented rivalry between East Coast and West Coast hip-hop scenes, intertwined with long-standing gang feuds between the Crips and Bloods that shaped much of 1990s rap culture.

    Prosecutors argued during the trial that while Davis did not pull the trigger himself, he was the mastermind behind the killing. According to the state’s case, Davis supplied the 9mm handgun used by his nephew Orlando Anderson, who fired the fatal shots from the passenger seat of a white Cadillac that pulled alongside the BMW Shakur was riding in after a boxing match in Las Vegas. The attack was planned as retaliation for a physical altercation between Anderson and Shakur’s entourage that occurred just hours before the shooting, prosecutors confirmed.

    The case against Davis rested largely on his own repeated public statements about his involvement in the killing. In a 2008 secret police interview conducted as part of the investigation into the murder of fellow rapper The Notorious B.I.G. (born Christopher Wallace), Davis first admitted his presence in the Cadillac and his role in organizing the attack. He expanded on these claims in great detail in his 2019 tell-all memoir *Compton Street Legend*, as well as in multiple documentaries and podcast interviews. These public disclosures voided a prior immunity agreement Davis had struck with authorities, allowing prosecutors to use his 2008 interview as evidence in the trial.

    In closing arguments, Palal urged jurors to accept Davis’ own accounts of his role, noting that the former gang leader had openly claimed responsibility for Shakur’s death across dozens of media appearances over more than a decade. “He’s the shot caller — in every instance in every iteration he’s the leader of the South Side Crips,” Palal told the jury. “When you have the shot caller sitting shotgun when shots are fired, there’s no doubt he’s responsible.”

    Davis’ defense team pushed back hard against the prosecution’s narrative, arguing that the defendant’s public comments were nothing more than exaggerated bravado designed to boost book sales and bolster his reputation within gang circles. Defense attorney Michael Sanft told jurors that the state had no physical evidence linking Davis to the shooting, and that the case relied entirely on unsubstantiated statements from a proven liar. Despite this argument, the jury reached a guilty verdict within just hours of beginning deliberations.

    Following the verdict, Judge Kierny set Davis’ sentencing for October 13, and confirmed that any formal appeal process would move forward after sentencing. The conviction closes one of the most enduring mysteries in modern hip-hop, bringing a long-awaited resolution to a case that has captivated music fans around the world for nearly 30 years.

  • US army secretary resigns after months of tension

    US army secretary resigns after months of tension

    A major shakeup continues to unfold across the top ranks of the US military, as the nation’s top civilian leader for the US Army, Secretary Dan Driscoll, has formally stepped down from his post after just 18 months in office. The departure was first confirmed by CBS News, US media partner of the BBC, which traced the resignation back to months of growing tensions between Driscoll and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

    At 41 years old, Driscoll made history as the youngest person ever to hold the Army Secretary role. He was widely known in Washington circles as US President Donald Trump’s so-called “drone guy,” a nickname he earned for his strong, public advocacy for integrating emerging unmanned and digital battlefield technologies into military operations. In an official statement shared with CBS, the White House praised Driscoll’s tenure, noting he was “highly effective” at advancing the administration’s “Make America Strong Again” agenda and provided “outstanding leadership” during military operations.

    Driscoll’s exit is not an isolated event: it marks the latest in a growing wave of high-profile departures among senior military and defense leaders since Hegseth took leadership of the Pentagon. Hegseth has already removed more than a dozen top uniformed and civilian defense officials, including the chief of naval operations and the vice-chief of staff of the US Air Force. Earlier this year in April, Navy Secretary John Phelan stepped down abruptly, and other recent departures include former Army Chief of Staff Randy George, Army Gen. David Hodne and Maj. Gen. William Green. While full details of the behind-the-scenes friction between Driscoll and Hegseth remain undisclosed, CBS reports that Driscoll shared a close personal friendship with George, who was pushed to resign by Hegseth.

    The position of Army Secretary is the highest civilian leadership role for the US military’s ground branch, with oversight over roughly a million active-duty, National Guard and reserve soldiers across the globe. Driscoll brought first-hand military experience to the role: he commissioned as an Army officer in 2007, led a cavalry platoon and deployed to Iraq on a five-month tour in 2009. Beyond his work on military technology, Driscoll held other key roles during his 18 months in office:

    He took a leading role last year in high-level diplomatic negotiations aimed at ending the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, making multiple overseas trips and holding direct talks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. He is also a long-time close ally and personal friend of Vice-President JD Vance, with the pair having met while attending Yale Law School together. During his tenure, Driscoll was a central figure in the Trump administration’s decision to deploy National Guard troops to cities across the US, and he also served temporarily as acting director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The BBC has reached out to the White House, Pentagon and US Army for additional comment on the resignation, with no additional response as of press time.

  • Watch: Moment Duane ‘Keffe D’ Davis is found guilty of Tupac Shakur’s murder

    Watch: Moment Duane ‘Keffe D’ Davis is found guilty of Tupac Shakur’s murder

    After nearly 30 years of speculation, unanswered questions and unproven conspiracy theories that gripped the hip-hop world and popular culture at large, a court has finally delivered a verdict in one of the most high-profile killing cases in modern entertainment history. Duane “Keffe D” Davis has been found guilty of the murder of iconic rap artist Tupac Shakur, marking the end of a decades-long investigation that had stumped law enforcement and fueled endless public debate.

    Shakur, a cultural trailblazer whose work transformed hip-hop and cemented his legacy as one of the most influential artists of the 1990s, was fatally shot in a drive-by shooting in Las Vegas in September 1996. For nearly 27 years following his death, the case remained unsolved, with no arrests made and dozens of competing theories circulating about the circumstances of his killing and the parties responsible. The mystery surrounding Shakur’s death grew into one of the most enduring unsolved puzzles in modern popular culture, captivating true crime fans, music historians and casual observers alike for generations.

    That stalemate broke in 2023, when law enforcement made their first arrest in the case, taking Davis into custody more than two and a half decades after the shooting. Davis, a former street gang leader who had long openly admitted to being in the car from which the fatal shots were fired, was charged with murder after years of new evidence gathering and investigative breakthroughs. After a trial that drew international media attention, the jury returned a guilty verdict, closing one of the most high-profile cold cases in American history.

  • Watch: Why is the US-Venezuela oil deal so controversial?

    Watch: Why is the US-Venezuela oil deal so controversial?

    When former U.S. President Donald Trump made the sudden announcement that Washington had finalized an agreement to take control of more than 65 billion barrels of proven Venezuelan oil reserves, it immediately sparked heated debate across global political and energy circles. This proposed deal, which has remained one of the most contentious energy-related diplomatic moves in recent Western Hemisphere history, touches on a web of overlapping issues including national sovereignty, international energy policy, and geopolitical competition in the Americas.

    Venezuela has long held one of the largest proven oil reserves on the planet, with its energy sector serving as the backbone of the country’s national economy and government revenue for decades. The very framing of a U.S. deal to “control” these reserves immediately drew pushback from sovereignty advocates and regional governments, who argue that any foreign agreement that seizes operational or ownership control of a nation’s natural resources violates foundational norms of international law. Critics of the proposal also point out that the announcement came amid years of strained diplomatic relations between Washington and Caracas, marked by existing U.S. sanctions on Venezuela’s energy sector that had already disrupted global oil markets and created widespread economic hardship for Venezuelan civilians.

    Supporters of the Trump administration’s move at the time argued that expanding U.S. access to Venezuelan oil would help reduce global energy dependence on less stable oil-producing regions, lower domestic fuel prices for U.S. consumers, and counter growing geopolitical influence from other major powers in Latin America. Even so, the announcement failed to address critical unresolved questions: what legal framework would govern the deal, how would existing Venezuelan oil infrastructure and industry stakeholders be affected, and what long-term impact would the agreement have on Venezuela’s ability to leverage its own natural resources for national development.

    To this day, the proposed agreement remains a flashpoint for discussions about U.S. foreign policy in Latin America, the balance of power between energy-consuming and energy-producing nations, and the intersection of economic interests and sovereign rights. It continues to be cited in debates over Western intervention in the Western Hemisphere and how major global powers approach access to critical natural resources in developing nations.

  • Amazon rigged billions in ad pricing, lawsuit from states and US watchdog alleges

    Amazon rigged billions in ad pricing, lawsuit from states and US watchdog alleges

    A major new legal challenge has been brought against e-commerce and tech giant Amazon, as the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) joined by a bipartisan coalition of 22 states has filed an antitrust and consumer fraud lawsuit accusing the company of systematically inflating advertising costs for millions of sellers through manipulated auction processes. The legal action, lodged Monday in Washington state—the company’s home jurisdiction—lays out claims that the alleged hidden scheme has siphoned an estimated $20 billion in improper revenue from advertising clients since 2019, harming both sellers and everyday consumers in the process.

    At the core of the complaint is an allegation that Amazon intentionally overrides legitimate auction results for its high-demand ad placements to impose higher prices than what sellers would otherwise pay. On Amazon’s platform, thousands of brands and third-party sellers compete for prime Sponsored Product and Sponsored Brands ad slots, which appear when users search for specific product keywords. These slots are marketed to sellers as “second-price” auctions, where winners only pay one cent more than the second-highest bid. According to the lawsuit, however, Amazon secretly overrides this rule nearly 80% of the time for Sponsored Product ads, instead charging winning advertisers their full bid amount—a move that directly boosts the company’s bottom line at sellers’ expense.

    The complaint notes that Amazon implemented this opaque practice because corporate leadership was dissatisfied with the revenue the ad auctions were originally generating. Beyond harming advertising clients, the FTC and states argue that ordinary Amazon shoppers also bear the cost of these overcharges, as sellers pass inflated ad expenses through to retail prices. “Consumers are suffering, have suffered, and will continue to suffer substantial injury as a result of Amazon’s unlawful conduct,” the complaint reads.

    In an immediate response to the lawsuit, Amazon pushed back hard against the allegations, saying it “strongly disagrees” with the claims and calling the legal action “misguided.” The company rejected the FTC’s framing that the case impacts consumer prices, arguing that regulators have “fundamentally misunderstands how advertisers operate.” Amazon noted that advertisers regularly adjust their bids based on real campaign performance, not technical descriptions of auction rules. The company also released counter-data showing that average winning bids for Sponsored Products search ads dropped by 50% between 2019 and 2025, and that approximately 92% of ad placements are not awarded to the highest bidder.

    News of the lawsuit triggered an immediate market reaction, with Amazon’s share price closing 2.5% lower on the day of the announcement. This is not the first high-profile clash between Amazon and the FTC: just last year, the company paid a $2.5 billion settlement to resolve another case brought by the regulator, which accused Amazon of enrolling millions of users in its Prime subscription service without explicit consent and deliberately creating barriers to easy cancellation. The $2.5 billion settlement covered both civil penalties and refunds for harmed consumers.

    The latest lawsuit marks a continued escalation of U.S. regulatory scrutiny of big tech platforms, particularly their growing advertising businesses that have become major profit drivers for companies like Amazon, Google and Meta. As the legal process moves forward, the case will test how courts interpret fair business practices for digital advertising marketplaces that serve millions of small and large businesses alike.

  • Supreme Court clears way for Trump to keep building White House ballroom

    Supreme Court clears way for Trump to keep building White House ballroom

    In a highly partisan and closely watched 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled to allow the continuation of a $400 million construction project that includes a new ballroom and helipad on White House grounds, handing a legal victory to former President Donald Trump’s administration. The ruling blocks lower court decisions that had ordered work to stop on the above-ground segment of the development, which required the demolition of the historic original East Wing of the White House that Trump ordered launched last fall.

    The legal challenge to the project was brought by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, a nonprofit organization that advocates for the protection of culturally significant American landmarks. The group argued that the executive branch lacked unilateral authority to greenlight and carry out major construction on federal property in Washington D.C., pointing to longstanding federal law that requires explicit congressional approval for any new permanent structures on federally managed grounds in the capital.

    The ruling’s narrow margin reflects deep ideological divisions on the nation’s highest court. Earlier in the week, Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative justice, had issued a temporary stay allowing construction to proceed while the court weighed the full emergency request from the administration. In a surprise twist, Roberts ultimately joined the court’s three liberal justices in dissent. In his dissent, Roberts wrote that the planned construction is likely unlawful, noting that Congress has explicitly barred the construction of new buildings on federal District of Columbia grounds without explicit congressional authorization, and no such authorization has been granted for this project.

    The five-justice conservative majority that backed the project issued an unsigned order justifying their decision. They wrote that the Trump administration had met the standard for a stay by showing it would face irreparable harm if construction were halted at this stage, and that the balance of legal and equitable considerations favored allowing work to continue. The majority also cast doubt on the challenger’s legal standing to bring the suit, noting the government is likely to ultimately prevail in its argument that the National Trust for Historic Preservation lacks sufficient legal standing to challenge the East Wing project in court.

    President Trump has long defended the project, framing it as a necessary upgrade to the White House’s event infrastructure. He has argued that the existing facility lacks a large enough space to host official state events, gatherings, and receptions, and has more recently emphasized that the project includes upgrades critical to presidential security. The work also includes construction of a new helipad on the White House South Lawn, with active construction work ongoing as of August 24, 2026 in Washington D.C.

    The National Trust for Historic Preservation has countered that the project already has caused and will continue to cause irreversible damage to the White House, a landmark that holds deep historical and cultural significance for the United States. The legal fight is expected to continue as the case moves forward through lower courts, even as construction can proceed in the interim.

  • Festival honouring Dolly Parton set for Nashville and London

    Festival honouring Dolly Parton set for Nashville and London

    Country music legend Dolly Parton, who passed away at 80 on August 25 following a short battle with cancer, will be celebrated through a unique, star-studded two-day festival planned for London and Nashville, according to an official announcement from her estate released this Monday.

    Named DollyFest, the event will roll out across two consecutive weekends in 2027, with exact dates to be revealed at a later stage. What many fans do not know is that the celebration traces its origins back to Parton herself, who originally conceptualized an earlier iteration of the festival where she would host and take the stage alongside fellow artists. That first planned event, scheduled for January 2026, was quietly canceled before any public announcement after Parton faced unexpected health complications.

    Instead of a conventional public memorial service, which Parton explicitly did not want, DollyFest will stand as the official public tribute to her decades-long legacy. Parton was laid to rest this past Friday at a private family funeral held in Nashville, where she was interred beside her late husband Carl Dean at the city’s Woodlawn Memorial Park and Mausoleum, confirmed by her great-niece.

    Danny Nozell, founder and CEO of CTK Enterprises and the lead organizer of DollyFest, explained that the festival aligns perfectly with Parton’s personal wishes. “It feels more appropriate for us to take a beat, let all the tributes that immediately make sense occur naturally, and then, see through this festival-style concept that was truly dreamed up by Dolly,” Nozell said in the press release. He added that the event stays true to who Parton was, giving artists and fans across the globe space to participate, while also allowing everyone time to grieve and make preparations to join the celebration. The estate has also noted it does not discourage fans from holding their own personal tributes to Parton in whatever ways feel meaningful to them. “A lot of people always say, WWDD (What Would Dolly Do?), and, well, at this moment, DOLLYFEST is WDWD (What Dolly Would Do!),” Nozell added.

    Born in the Smoky Mountains of Tennessee, Parton built a seven-decade career as one of the most influential figures in modern music, alongside work as a celebrated philanthropist and businesswoman. Her discography includes some of the most recognizable songs in country music history, such as *Coat of Many Colors*, *Jolene*, and *I Will Always Love You*. Over her career, she earned 10 Grammy Awards, sold more than 100 million records worldwide, and penned thousands of original tracks. Parton often prioritized her identity as a songwriter over any other title, once saying: “It’s my way of expressing myself. It’s my therapy.”

    Since news of her death broke earlier last week, heartfelt tributes from celebrities, political figures, and millions of adoring fans have flooded social media platforms around the world, a testament to the far-reaching impact of her life and work. Now, DollyFest is set to deliver the large-scale celebration the icon always wanted, turning her original vision into a once-in-a-lifetime gathering for all who loved her music and legacy.

  • Ex-congressman George Santos banned from betting platform for life

    Ex-congressman George Santos banned from betting platform for life

    Leading prediction market operator Kalshi has implemented a permanent trading ban against former U.S. Representative George Santos, following an internal investigation that found evidence of insider trading tied to bets on his own attendance at former President Donald Trump’s 2026 State of the Union address, the company announced in a formal disciplinary notice.

    Santos, a disgraced ex-lawmaker who was expelled from Congress in 2023 over multiple felony fraud and identity theft convictions, placed the series of controversial bets on the attendance outcome back in February. According to Kalshi’s compliance review, Santos held non-public information about his own plans that allowed him to manipulate the market for profit. The platform took proactive, independent action to issue the ban without waiting for external regulatory enforcement, marking one of the highest-profile penalties for misconduct in the fast-growing prediction trading sector.

    In a post on social platform X, Santos responded flippantly to the ban, thanking Kalshi and challenging the company’s long-term viability. The BBC has reached out to Santos for additional comment on the ruling, but has not received a formal response as of reporting.

    The current disciplinary action is the latest in a string of legal and regulatory consequences for Santos following his 2024 conviction on wire fraud and aggravated identity theft charges. Santos was sentenced to seven years in federal prison, but only served three months before former President Trump issued a full commutation of his sentence in 2025. Just two months prior to Kalshi’s permanent ban, Santos agreed to pay a $35,000 settlement to resolve a federal probe into the same State of the Union trades conducted by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

    Alongside the lifetime ban, Kalshi has imposed a financial penalty of $71,356 (equivalent to roughly £38,000) connected to the misconduct. The company confirmed it flagged Santos’s suspicious account activity to federal law enforcement authorities earlier this summer, after internal monitoring systems picked up irregular trading patterns.

    Kalshi’s investigation laid out clear details of the alleged scheme: the market in question let users wager on whether Santos would attend Trump’s State of the Union speech, an outcome Santos could directly control. Between February 2 and February 25, Santos placed multiple large bets on the outcome, and made false public statements about his attendance plans that moved contract prices on the platform. In the end, Santos walked away with $17,839.57 in illegal profits from the trades, per Kalshi’s findings.

    Santos has consistently denied wrongdoing in most public matters related to his conduct, though he has admitted to stealing the identities of nearly 12 people, including deceased family members, to advance his political career and personal finances. He pleaded guilty to the federal felony charges in 2024. Ahead of his 2022 election to Congress, Santos fabricated nearly all details of his professional and personal biography, including false claims of employment on Wall Street and family ties to the Holocaust. He became only the sixth sitting member of Congress in U.S. history to be expelled from the legislative body.

    The Santos case comes as the entire prediction market industry faces growing regulatory scrutiny. Prediction markets, which let users place wagers on outcomes ranging from federal elections to key economic indicators, have seen a surge in mainstream user adoption in recent years, but have also drawn increased attention from regulators over market manipulation and compliance risks. Both Kalshi and its top competitor Polymarket have reported a rise in unusual, potentially manipulative trading activity in recent months, pushing platforms to upgrade their monitoring systems and take stricter action against rule-breakers.

    Industry observers note the Kalshi ruling underscores the mounting compliance burden facing prediction markets as they edge closer to becoming mainstream financial products. U.S. regulators have already signaled that platforms will be held to stricter conduct and oversight standards as the industry matures, particularly for markets tied to high-stakes political and economic events.

  • US singer D4vd’s celebrity lawyers withdraw from murder case

    US singer D4vd’s celebrity lawyers withdraw from murder case

    In a major development in a high-profile Los Angeles criminal case, the team of high-profile celebrity attorneys that was set to defend rising US musician D4vd, legally known as David Anthony Burke, has formally withdrawn from the 21-year-old artist’s upcoming capital murder trial. The 21-year-old performer, who faces horrific charges including first-degree murder, sexual abuse of a minor, and mutilation of human remains, has now been assigned a court-appointed public defender from the Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office to lead his defense.

    Burke is accused of killing 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez in April 2025. Hernandez’s remains were discovered last September inside a Tesla registered to an address linked to Burke. Prosecutors have laid out a disturbing narrative alleging that after years of ongoing sexual abuse, Burke stabbed the teenager to death and dismembered her body to cover up the abuse. They argue the killing was motivated by financial and professional self-preservation: Hernandez had threatened to expose her underage relationship with Burke, a move that would have destroyed his multi-million-dollar music career. The case carries special circumstances tied to this alleged motive that make Burke eligible for the death penalty if convicted.

    During a preliminary hearing held last month, court officials reviewed evidence of threatening text messages Hernandez sent to Burke days before her death. On April 22, 2025, amid an argument over Burke’s friendship with another minor, Hernandez sent a profanity-laden message reading, “I swear to GOD I will kill u,” followed by threats to strangle him, lie to her father about his actions, and “end ur career and ur life.” Prosecutors say that the day after these threats were sent, Burke arranged for an Uber to pick up Hernandez and bring her to his Hollywood home, where he allegedly carried out the killing.

    Last month, a judge ruled that there was sufficient evidence to move forward with a full murder trial. During Monday’s court proceeding, charges were formally read to Burke, and he formally re-entered his not guilty plea to all counts. The three lead defense attorneys — Blair Berk, Marilyn Bednarski, and Regina Peter — confirmed their exit from the case in an official statement shared with the BBC, noting that the court had granted their request to withdraw and that Burke meets eligibility requirements for court-appointed counsel.

    Berk, the lead attorney on the original team, is one of the most well-known criminal defense attorneys in the entertainment industry, having previously represented high-profile clients including actor Mel Gibson, disgraced film producer Harvey Weinstein, pop icon Britney Spears, and actress Lindsay Lohan. In their statement, the outgoing legal team reaffirmed their support for Burke, saying, “We continue to support David and his defense against these serious charges. We are grateful that the Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office has taken over the representation and that David has a highly capable and committed team of attorneys and investigators behind him.”

    Walid Kandeel, a deputy public defender now leading the defense, emphasized the core right to counsel in the American justice system in an official statement. “Burke is entitled to a defense that takes his circumstances seriously and carefully examines the evidence,” Kandeel said, adding, “We are committed to providing him with that defense.” A pretrial hearing to outline next steps for the case is scheduled for October 19, with a full criminal trial expected to begin at a later date.

  • Company offering reward for safe return of truckload of beer

    Company offering reward for safe return of truckload of beer

    A brazen cargo theft at a Southern California distribution center has left iconic brewer Pabst Brewing Company turning to the public and social media to recover thousands of pounds of stolen Pabst Blue Ribbon (PBR) beer, worth an estimated $25,000. The incident, which unfolded on August 17 at Anheuser-Busch’s Montclair distribution facility, is one of two linked cargo heists pulled off the same day that have law enforcement investigating a potential coordinated fraudulent theft ring.

    According to Montclair Police Department officials, the alleged perpetrator gained access to the PBR shipment by presenting falsified pickup documentation. The 18,144-kilogram (40,000-pound) load was bound for retailers in San Diego when it was driven off the lot. The theft occurred just one hour after a separate, similarly fraudulent pickup of a cargo shipment valued at $45,000 that was en route to Tucson, Arizona. To date, that first shipment remains missing two weeks after it was supposed to arrive at its destination.

    Investigators have confirmed multiple key similarities between the two incidents, noting that all details provided for the supposed trucking company, driver, and vehicles involved contained significant inconsistencies that are still being probed. While Pabst Brewing is an independent brand, it holds a production contract with Anheuser-Busch that sees the lager brewed at Anheuser-Busch facilities, including the Montclair center. It has not yet been confirmed whether the missing Arizona-bound shipment also contained PBR products.

    A company spokesperson clarified to CBS News, a partner of the BBC, that the theft was carried out by a single bad actor who impersonated the authorized carrier scheduled to collect the shipment before driving away with the full load.

    In a playful yet earnest social media appeal, Pabst has leaned into its brand identity while asking for the public’s help locating the stolen beer. The company acknowledged the situation sounds inherently absurd, but emphasized that it is treating the theft with full seriousness. “We realise how ridiculous that sounds, but it’s the truth,” the company shared in its public post. “This is real and we are deadly serious.”

    In a lighthearted nod to its founding year, Pabst extended a limited amnesty offer to the thief, giving them exactly 18 years and 44 minutes to return the full shipment with no questions asked. Beyond the amnesty window, the brewer has also put up an unspecified reward for any tip that leads to the safe recovery of the stolen PBR load. Law enforcement is continuing to work through inconsistencies in the fraudulent paperwork and vehicle details to identify the perpetrators behind the linked heists.