On Monday, the regulator launched an “invitation to comment,” allowing interested parties to submit “any initial views on the impact that the transaction could have on competition in the UK.”

The deadline for comments will be April 27. The CMA is asking that responses be sent to paramount.warnerbrosdiscovery@cma.gov.uk.

The invitation to comment comes after Paramount CEO David Ellison previously met with U.K. Secretary of Culture, Media and Sport Lisa Nandy to discuss issues in the film and TV industry and his bid for Warner Bros. Discovery in January.

In its notice, the CMA said that it has “received the necessary information from the parties to commence pre-notification,” but has not yet launched a formal investigation into the transaction.

“Effective competition helps ensure UK customers can enjoy quality content at a competitive price. The film and TV industries contribute billions to our economy, so it’s important we assess whether deals between studios may harm competition,” a CMA spokesperson told TheWrap. “Today’s invitation to comment is an initial step as we review Paramount’s purchase of Warner Bros Discovery. We expect to launch our Phase 1 investigation in the coming weeks.”

Under a Phase 1 review, the CMA would have 40 working days to decide whether the merger needs a more in-depth review. If it finds concerns with the merger, it will give the merging businesses five days to propose remedies to address its concerns.

The CMA would then have up to 5 more working days to consider the remedies. If none are offered or it does not accept them, the merger would be referred to a Phase 2 review. If if decides to accept remedies provisionally, it would publicly consult on them and consider any responses, with a deadline of 50 working days to make a decision.

If the review moves to Phase 2, an independent “inquiry group,” which consists of 3 to 5 people with a range of business, finance, economic and legal experience, would lead the investigation and makes the final decision within 24 weeks. In special circumstances, a Phase 2 investigation can be extended by up to eight additional weeks.

The inquiry group would then either clear the merger, consider remedies such as asset divestitures or a legal commitment from the merging businesses to behave in a certain way, or block the merger.

The CMA’s move comes after the Hart-Scott-Rodino waiting period in the U.S. Department of Justice’s review expired on Feb. 19. Despite the expiration, the DOJ can still investigate or challenge a Paramount-WBD deal.

Some U.S. lawmakers have also demanded that the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) to conduct a review of the deal, though Paramount has said that the Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds who have contributed equity financing do not meet the threshold that would trigger a mandatory review.

Paramount and Warner Bros. expect the merger to close by the third quarter, subject to regulatory and shareholder approval. A shareholder vote is slated for April 23.

In the event the transaction does not close by Sept. 30, WBD shareholders will receive a 25 cent per share “ticking fee” for each quarter until closing. In the event that the deal does not close at all due to regulatory matters, Paramount will pay WBD a $7 billion termination fee.

The post UK Regulators Ready Investigation of Paramount-Warner Bros. Merger appeared first on TheWrap.

The move will give U.S. District Judge Troy Nunley another seven days, or until April 17, as he prepares a ruling on whether a preliminary injunction is needed to outright block the deal, which would create the largest broadcast station ​group in the U.S. reaching 80% of American households.

On March 27, Nunley put the deal on pause in response to a federal antitrust lawsuit by DirecTV. A group of eight state attorneys general led by California and New York also filed a separate lawsuit seeking to block the merger, which has since been consolidated into one legal action. The legal action came after Nexstar-Tegna was approved by the FCC and DOJ last month and closed just minutes later.

The group alleges the proposed combination would “irreparably drive up consumer costs, reduce local competition, shutter local newsrooms and increase both frequency and duration of blackouts of key local teams and network programming.”

In addition to the seven-day extension, Nunley has also modified the order after Nexstar and Tegna warned that it would cause “immediate operational harm” and couldn’t be fully complied with. The modifications are as follows:

1. The TRO (paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, and 10) shall allow Nexstar to undertake ordinary course cash management, ordinary-course intercompany transfers, and ordinary-course debt service and repayment activities necessary to comply with Nexstar’s financing obligation, including refinancing activities, security perfection, and guaranty, provided that Nexstar does not use this provision as a pretext to undermine TEGNA’s viability as a going concern
2. The TRO (paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) shall allow Nexstar to take reasonable actions  necessary to maintain TEGNA’s day-to-day operations, including authorizing routine financial transactions such as wire transfers for ordinary course payments, without violating the TRO’s prohibition on “influence” 
3. The TRO (paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) shall allow Nexstar to take actions necessary to establish a functional governance structure for TEGNA, including appointing or reappointing officers, to the extent necessary to permit TEGNA to fulfill the TRO. It shall not be considered “influence” for Nexstar to provide and implement Sarbanes-Oxley requirements, including setting thresholds for contract approval, expenditure authorization and other financial limits similar to the interim operating covenants that applied to TEGNA’s independent management of the business pre-closing. Nexstar shall not appoint current Nexstar employees, or former employees employed within the prior six months, as TEGNA officers and no TEGNA officer shall be an officer of Nexstar;
4. The TRO (paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) shall allow Nexstar to take all reasonable steps to perform all obligations required under its debt instruments, SEC reporting requirements, or refinancing transactions, including coordination with TEGNA personnel as necessary, provided that such coordination is narrowly tailored to complying with reporting  requirements and avoiding breaches under debt instruments. This includes permitting  Nexstar to complete required SEC and debt agreement reporting for the combined company within applicable deadlines, oversight by Nexstar management as to the accuracy of TEGNA financial statements, including compliance with internal controls and  procedures, in coordination with TEGNA personnel. If the sharing of TEGNA’s  confidential information with certain Nexstar employees is necessary to accomplish such reporting requirements, such information must be maintained separately from Nexstar’s files and used solely for those reporting requirements;
5. The TRO shall allow Nexstar to require that management of TEGNA adhere to the interim operating covenants set forth in the Merger Agreement (ECF No. 63-4), in their entirety, and in the same manner as applied pre-closing, provided however that TEGNA shall continue to have authority concerning ordinary course contracts, including contracts concerning retransmission consent, as provided by operating covenant 6.1(b)(xiii);
6. The TRO (paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4) shall allow Nexstar to appoint or reappoint TEGNA  23 officers as necessary for TEGNA to exercise independent decision-making authority for retransmission matters. Nexstar shall not appoint current Nexstar employees, or former employees employed within the prior six months, as TEGNA officers and no TEGNA  26 officer shall be an officer of Nexstar 
7. The TRO shall allow Nexstar to require that management of TEGNA adhere to the interim operating covenants set forth in the Merger Agreement (ECF No. 63-4), in their entirety, and in the same manner as applied pre-closing, provided however that TEGNA shall continue to have authority concerning ordinary course contracts, including contracts concerning retransmission fees, as provided by operating covenant

Nunley’s decision follows an hours-long hearing that was held in Sacramento, Calif. on Tuesday for Nexstar-Tegna and DirecTV and the state attorneys general to present their arguments.

Nexstar attorney Alexander Okuliar argued during the hearing that the combined entity’s larger size would be critical to protecting local broadcast news and would help the companies better compete against Big Tech.

“We don’t want ⁠local broadcast to end up like the local newspaper industry did 30, 40 years ago,” he said.

The deal gives Nexstar a total of 265 television stations in 44 states and the District of Columbia, adding Big-4 affiliate stations in Phoenix, Atlanta, Toledo and Portland. The combined company will also have stations in nine of the top 10 markets, and in 41 of the top 50.

Approval of the deal was subject to raising or eliminating the 39% national TV ownership cap put in place by Congress in 2004 to protect viewpoint diversity, as well as prevent monopolization. However, instead of modifying the ownership rules, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr granted the companies a waiver and asserted that the decision would empower broadcast TV stations and foster local journalism. Additionally, Nexstar agreed to divest six stations across six different DMAs and agreed to make commitments to affordability and localism, helping close the deal.

Nexstar shares are up over 4% on Friday following Nunley’s order.

The post Judge Extends Nexstar-Tegna Merger’s Temporary Restraining Order appeared first on TheWrap.

On Thursday, a three-judge panel for the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan met for two hours to discuss the conviction, per AP News. During that time, legal teams for both the U.S. government and Combs made their cases regarding whether acquitted charges against Combs were improperly considered as part of his sentencing.

Back in October 2025, Combs was sentenced to four years and two months in prison after being found guilty of two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution. Earlier that year, he was acquitted of the most serious alleged crimes: racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking by force, fraud, or coercion involving two women.

Combs’ legal team, which has been trying to overturn his 50-month sentence under the Mann Act for prostitution-related charges, argued that Judge Arun Subramanian, who oversaw his summer trial, should not have considered the alleged abuse in his decision-making. They further argued that Combs was therefore punished for crimes a jury said he was not guilty of, which they say is legally unfair.

“When 12 fellow citizens declare someone ‘not guilty,’ he is not guilty. Period,” Combs legal team stated in their March appeals brief. “‘With an acquittal, the jury as a representative of the community has been asked by the State to authorize punishment … and has refuse to do so.’ That’s what happened here. The jury refused to authorize any punishment for coercive sex or conspiracy — because the evidence showed there was none. The jury only authorized punishment for ‘prostitution.’ It never authorized a sentence four times the typical sentence for that crime. But the district court imposted one anyone.”

However, Assistant U.S. Attorney Christy Slavik stated that Combs’ prison time was below sentencing guidelines and met the standard of similar convictions in the 2nd Circuit.

Since Combs has already served over a year in prison, he’ll likely be released within three years of sentencing. The judge also fined Combs $500,000 and ordered five years of supervised release upon the mogul’s release from prison.

By the end of the arguments, Circuit Judge William J. Nardini called the case “exceptionally difficult” not just for this court but for any federal court in the country.

The post Diddy’s Legal Team Questions Severity of 4-Year Prison Sentence in Appellate Court: ‘Exceptionally Difficult Case’ appeared first on TheWrap.

According to authorities, Sangha sold 51 vials of ketamine to Perry for around $11,000. The drugs that killed the “Friends” star were among that batch of 50 that contributed to his death in October 2023. Sangha pleaded guilty in September 2025 to one count of maintaining a drug-involved premises, three counts of distribution of ketamine, and one count of distribution of ketamine resulting in death or serious bodily injury. She was charged on Wednesday by United States District Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett.

“For years … Sangha operated a high-volume drug trafficking business out of her North Hollywood residence,” prosecutors said in a sentencing memorandum. “To cultivate her business, [Sangha] marketed herself as an exclusive dealer who catered to high-profile Hollywood clientele … While [Sangha] worked to expand and profit from her drug trafficking, she knew – and disregarded – the grave harm her conduct was causing.”

Five defendants, including Sangha, two doctors and the actor’s live-in assistant, were charged in August 2024 in connection with Perry’s death. The arrests came about after an investigation into the source of the ketamine that contributed to Perry’s passing.

While three of the five defendants, including Kenneth Iwamasa, Erik Fleming and Dr. Mark Chavez, pleaded guilty not long after their arrests, Sangha did not enter her guilty plea until she struck a deal in September 2025. Salvador Plasencia, a.k.a. Dr. P, also pleaded guilty back in July to four counts of distribution of ketamine.

On Tuesday, Perry’s stepmother Debbie urged the court to give Sangha the maximum sentence. She cited the “irreversible” pain she and others suffered at the Ketamine Queen’s hands.

“The pain you’ve caused to hundreds, maybe thousands, is irreversible. There is no joy to be found, no light in the window,” Debbie wrote, according to multiple media outlets. “They won’t be back. That thought comes through our day every day.”

The post Ketamine Dealer in Matthew Perry Case Gets 15-Year Sentence appeared first on TheWrap.

The move comes as the company has been conducting an internal investigation into a lawsuit brought against the executive by whistleblower and Las Vegas gambler R.J. Cipriani.

Cipriani has accused Shell of failing to pay him for crisis communications services he allegedly provided to the executive. He also claimed that Shell disclosed material, non-public information to him, including details about Paramount’s $7.7 billion UFC media rights deal and its plans to sweeten its bid for Warner Bros. Discovery. Shell subsequently countersued and accused Cipriani of defamation and extortion and Cipriani responded by widening the scope of his lawsuit to include Paramount, its board of directors and the Ellison family. 

In a statement, Paramount said that following a thorough review with independent counsel, the “facts demonstrated that these allegations do not establish a securities law violation.”

“Mr. Shell promptly notified [Paramount Skydance] of these accusations and is taking forceful legal action. [Paramount Skydance] and its named Board members will respond in the proceedings to the frivolous and baseless claims against [Paramount Skydance] and its named Board members and stockholders,” the statement continues. “Consistent with Mr. Shell’s commitment to prioritizing [Paramount Skydance]’s success, he has elected to transition from his positions as President of [Paramount Skydance] and a member of [Paramount Skydance]’s Board of Directors to focus on this lawsuit. [Paramount Skydance] is grateful for Mr. Shell’s many contributions and to have relied on him as a valued advisor.”

Cipriani is seeking at least $150 million in damages, while Shell is seeking an unspecified amount of compensation for all damages and losses caused by Cipriani’s accusations, as well as an “injunction restraining Cipriani from further defaming Shell.”

A spokesperson for Shell declined to comment.

Prior to being recruited by David Ellison, Shell was ousted from NBCUniversal in 2023 over allegations of sexual harassment from former CNBC correspondent Hadley Gamble, with whom he admitted to having an “inappropriate relationship.”

He would ultimately land at Gerry Cardinale’s RedBird Capital Partners, which helped fund Skydance’s $8 billion acquisition of Paramount and is backing the $47 billion in equity financing for Warner Bros. alongside the Ellison family. He would officially join the Paramount Skydance leadership team after the announcement of the merger in July 2024.

Shell’s departure comes as the Paramount-Warner Bros. merger is expected to close by the third quarter, subject to regulatory and shareholder approval. A shareholder vote is slated for April 23.

In the event the transaction does not close by Sept. 30, WBD shareholders will receive a 25 cent per share “ticking fee” for each quarter until closing. In the event that the deal does not close at all due to regulatory matters, Paramount will pay WBD a $7 billion termination fee.

The post Jeff Shell Out as Paramount Skydance President appeared first on TheWrap.

The actor’s stepmother, who is married to his father, John Bennett Perry, made the request in a victim impact statement submitted to the court on Tuesday, one day before Sangha was set to be sentenced after pleading guilty in the DOJ’s criminal case tied to Perry’s death.

“The pain you’ve caused to hundreds, maybe thousands, is irreversible. There is no joy to be found, no light in the window,” Debbie wrote, according to multiple media outlets. “They won’t be back. That thought comes through our day everyday.”

After noting there was “no escape” from their grief, Debbie appeared to speak directly to Sangha, writing, “You caused this … You who has talent for business, enough to make money, chose the one way that hurts people. How sad for you. How will you ever find joy – have you ever found joy? How sad for us all. We miss him.”

Before concluding her note, Debbie made her request to the court, stating, “Please give this heartless woman the maximum prison sentence so she won’t be able to hurt other families like ours.”

In October 2023, Perry died at the age of 54 in his Pacific Palisades home from the acute effects of ketamine. He had long been open about his addiction struggles, detailing them at length in his memoir, “Friends, Lovers, and the Big Terrible Thing.”

Five defendants, including Sangha, two doctors and the actor’s live-in assistant, were charged in August 2024 in connection with Perry’s death. The arrests came about after an investigation into the source of the ketamine that contributed to Perry’s passing.

While three of the five defendants, including Kenneth Iwamasa, Erik Fleming and Dr. Mark Chavez, pleaded guilty not long after their arrests, Sangha did not enter her guilty plea until September 2025, when she struck a plea agreement with prosecutors. Salvador Plasencia, a.k.a. Dr. P, also pleaded guilty back in July to four counts of distribution of ketamine.

The post Matthew Perry’s Stepmom Asks Court to Give ‘Heartless Woman’ Jasveen Sangha the Maximum Prison Sentence appeared first on TheWrap.

Michelle Dick is charged with seven counts, including felony stalking, criminal threats, assault with a deadly weapon and vandalism, stemming from incidents between October 2021 and late last week, when she allegedly threw an unknown substance on Buckingham as he was on his way to an appointment in Santa Monica. The complaint says the conduct occurred while Dick was subject to a restraining order.

A separate stalking count alleges Dick targeted a second person, identified only as Stephanie N., repeatedly following and harassing her and making threats between October 2021 and March 2026. That person is likely to be Fleetwood Mac singer Stevie Nicks, as Buckingham does not have any relatives with that name or initial; a publicist for Nicks did not immediately respond Tuesday to a request for clarification.

Prosecutors also allege Dick also approached Buckingham in December with statements intended to be taken as threats of death or great bodily injury. She is also accused of a March 19 incident in which she allegedly assaulted him with a motor vehicle and vandalized his Mercedes-Benz.

The complaint was filed Friday by the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office. A judge found probable cause to issue an arrest warrant and set bail at $300,000.

Dick told KTLA last week that Buckingham is her biological father, and that she was unaware of the restraining order. She also admitted approaching Buckingham in the March incident, as well as at his Brentwood home.

Buckingham, 76, joined Fleetwood Mac in 1975, writing several hits including “Go Your Own Way,” “Tusk” and more. During his time with the group he earned two Grammys, and later pivoted to a solo career in 1981.

Buckingham hasn’t shied away from publicly discussing his exit from the band. In September 2021, he blamed ex-bandmate Nicks and ex-manager Irving Azoff for his firing.

The post Lindsey Buckingham Attacker Charged With 7 Counts Including Stalking, Threats and Assaults Over 5 Years appeared first on TheWrap.

But this just might be the start.

Experts tell TheWrap the ruling is part of a rising tide of planned or ongoing litigation from EU countries, and may prompt the European Commission to investigate whether broader action into content providers may be needed.

For Netflix, this could impact a significant chunk of the more than 101 million subscribers it counts in its Europe, Middle East and Africa, or EMEA, region. Netflix stopped breaking out subscriber figures publicly at the end of 2024, but has surpassed the milestone of 325 million globally.

“The practical takeaway is that Europe is now the real legal risk for Netflix’s pricing model, while U.S. subscribers are unlikely to see anything comparable absent a significant shift in federal consumer protection law,” Braden Perry, a regulatory and government investigations attorney, told TheWrap.

Germany and Spain’s respective consumer protection groups have already taken similar legal actions, he noted, while Poland’s consumer protection authority has opened an investigation with potential fines of 10% of annual turnover.

“The Italy ruling isn’t a Roman peculiarity,” Perry added. “It will embolden consumer organizations across every EU jurisdiction where Netflix raised prices without specifying the contractual grounds for doing so.”

Stefano Bonini, an associate professor of finance at Stevens Institute of Technology, said he’s “absolutely certain” that the European Commission would also look into the matter, but noted it could take awhile as they investigate Netflix’s pricing strategy across the EU.

“If they haven’t already, they will look into that and see if this is common practice that has been used systematically across countries to circumvent existing regulation,” he said.

The timing of the ruling comes as Netflix hiked prices across its U.S. plans for the second time in over a year after its $83 billion deal for Warner Bros. Discovery’s studio and streaming assets fell apart. But given Italy’s consumer protection laws are more comprehensive and much stricter than the U.S., experts said it’s unlikely that customers here would get any relief. 

A Netflix spokesperson told TheWrap it would appeal the court’s decision, adding that it takes consumer rights “very seriously” and believes its terms have “always ​complied with Italian laws and practice.” Representatives for the EC did not immediately return TheWrap’s request for comment on this story.

A court ruling against Netflix

On Friday, a court in Rome upheld a lawsuit filed by the consumer group Movimento Consumatori and invalidated clauses that allowed Netflix subscription prices and other contractual terms to be changed between 2017 and January 2024. It also declared that Netflix price increases implemented in 2017, 2019, 2021 and November 2024 (with the exception of increases related to contracts signed after January 2024) were unlawful.

The court has also ordered Netflix to publish the content of the ruling on its website and in major national newspapers and to inform all consumers, including those who had canceled their subscriptions, of the invalidity of the clauses and of their right to a refund. Failure to do so within 90 days could result in a penalty of €700 for each day of delay.

Movimento Consumatori’s lawyers Paolo Fiorio and Riccardo Pinna estimate that the premium plan increase amounts to €8 per month, while the standard plan increase amounts to €4 per month. A premium customer who activated the subscription in 2017 and now pays €19.99 is entitled to the same service for €11.99 under the order, while a standard customer who pays €13.99 will have to pay only €9.99. 

They added that a premium plan subscriber who has paid for Netflix continuously since 2017 is entitled to a refund of about €500, while a standard plan subscriber is entitled to a refund of about €250. It’s estimated that Netflix has 5.4 million subscribers in Italy as of October, up from 1.9 million in 2019. 

Based on that total subscriber figure and an average refund of €375, Netflix could owe Italian subscribers more than €2 billion, or about $2.3 billion. 

Movimento Consumatori argued that if Netflix intends to put the rights of its subscribers and consumers first, it should “respect the Rome Court ruling and provide refunds, thus saving itself from massive class-action and individual litigation that will last years, damaging its reputation and resulting trust.”

The firm, which has launched an online form to join a class-action lawsuit, noted that over 25,000 consumers have contacted the association in an effort to get refunds and that more are likely calling Netflix and other consumer associations directly.

“If Netflix does not immediately reduce prices and refund customers, we will launch a class action lawsuit to ensure all users receive the refund of the amounts unduly paid,” Movimento Consumatori President Alessandro Mostaccio added. 

What does this mean for the EU and U.S.?

Netflix will fight the decision, but even if it loses, don’t expect the company to radically change  how it operates globally, Bonini said. He said the streaming giant could make minor changes or clarifications to their policies in an effort to mitigate future legal challenges.

Ultimately, Bonini said he expects Netflix will try to negotiate a settlement to lower the overall reimbursement payout to consumers and fight to keep the current pricing in place. 

“Netflix can always say, ‘There’s been tremendous inflation from 2017 to 2024 when this was done. I should have given a heads up or allowed for more ability to cancel, but at the end of the day as a market participant, I am free to set the price wherever I want’,” Bonini said. “They will never roll it back to the original price, that is for sure, they’re going to fight that. But they can say, ‘Whoever wants to cancel can cancel tomorrow and I’ll give them the money back and we’ll see how many people are really willing to give up Netflix.’ I don’t think there would be a lot of people.”  

Expect even less movement in the U.S. 

Tre Lovell, an entertainment and business lawyer, said the Italy ruling is unlikely to translate to the U.S. given that companies can make unilateral changes to contracts and are typically offered more leeway so long as they are being transparent.

“The U.S. consumer protection laws, although they’re good, are not quite as strict. They pretty much allow companies like Netflix to do price increases as long as there’s plenty of notice and you give the subscriber a chance to cancel,” Lovell told TheWrap. “Italy requires Netflix to put inside its initial subscriber agreement a justification for raising rates. The language that, ‘Hey, we have the right to do it,’ is not enough to replace a justification for it. And if they don’t have that, then it’s unconscionable.”

Though the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general have the authority to enforce Unfair, Deceptive or Abusive Acts or Practice (UDAP/UDAAP) laws, Perry said that “neither has shown appetite for treating streaming price increases as actionable unfairness.” 

It comes down to a difference in how the EU and U.S. view those terms. 

“The EU treats unfair contract terms as a substantive consumer right that courts can enforce collectively,” Perry said. “The U.S. treats subscription pricing as a matter of contract, and the contract itself routes disputes into individual arbitration where class-wide remedies aren’t available.”

TheWrap’s Tess Patton contributed to this report

The post Italy Ruled Netflix’s Price Hikes Are Illegal. Will the Rest of the EU Follow? | Analysis appeared first on TheWrap.

The rapper was arrested and charged with four felonies in August for suspicion of battery on an officer and was subsequently hospitalized for a possible drug overdose.

Judge Alan Schneider determined that his behavior was “aberrant from his normal conduct” and was related to his bipolar diagnosis. He also determined that his assault charges would be cleared as long as he complies with his mental health treatment plans and does not get into any trouble with the law for the next two years, according to Rolling Stone.

The “Old Town Road” singer, whose real name is Montero Hill, attended his court hearing Monday, in which the judge stated that the singer “appears to be doing very well.”

Hill’s defense lawyer Christy O’Connor told the court that the Grammy winner received nearly two months of “absolutely successful” impatient care at The Meadows in Arizona after voluntarily checking himself in. O’Connor also told the court that he meets weekly with a psychotherapist and has psychiatry appointments every three months.

“I’m thankful. Just very thankful. It could have been much worse,” the rapper told Rolling Stone after the hearing. “[I’m] just going through the flow of life.”

The August incident saw the rapper walking around Studio City wearing nothing but underwear and cowboy boots and charged with three counts of battery against a police officer and one count of resisting an executive officer. He pleaded not guilty during his arraignment and was facing up to five years in prison if convicted.

The judge will decide in April 2028 whether or not to dismiss the charges for good, so long as Nas meets his orders.

The post Lil Nas X’s Assault Charges to Be Dropped If He Continues Mental Health Treatment, Obeys All Laws appeared first on TheWrap.

The anonymous sender, who has previously reached out to Levin and TMZ “incessantly,” claimed to know who kidnapped the 84-year-old mother of “Today” co-host Savannah Guthrie along with her location.

And while Levin and TMZ executive producer and host Charles Latibeaudiere said in a social media video Monday that the FBI has never appeared to take action on the sender, they forwarded Monday’s letter to investigators and hoped for the best. Levin said his “spidey senses tell me that there’s something about this guy” and that he has a feeling the sender really “knows something.”

“We got another letter today from this person, an email saying, ‘I know where her body is and who the kidnapper is. Give me half a Bitcoin and I’ll tell you.’ And this person has been really persistent, knowing that if it’s a scam, it’s a federal crime,” Levin said at the top of the segment, embedded below.

“Right, but they also made the point that they wanted to make it clear that they had nothing to do with it, they’ve been out of the country — who knows, and again, we forwarded to the FBI, as we have in the past,” Latibeaudiere added. “For whatever reason, and this is the thing we haven’t figured out, you have to assume that the law enforcement, they believe that this person is not legit. Otherwise, they would have advised Savannah to pay the money.”

Levin wasn’t buying it, and he explained why.

“I’ll tell you what, my spidey senses tell me that there’s something about this guy because one of the emails he sent said early on, ‘Time is of the essence to do this,’ and then the next day he said, ‘Time is no longer of the essence,'” the founder said. “If he was pulling a scam, why would you say time is no longer of the essence? You want to keep the value high. And the fact that he’s said this made me think this guy knows something.”

TMZ received yet another ransom note from a repeat sender this morning concerning the abduction of Nancy Guthrie, as viewers watched Savannah make her return to the "Today" show anchor desk. pic.twitter.com/F26OvcvulE

— TMZ (@TMZ) April 6, 2026

Levin emphasized that he’s “not FBI,” but Latibeaudiere appeared to agree with the assessment.

“We’re not privy to all the information they are,” he said, “but from the outside looking in, it sure seems like this person knows something.”

The ransom letter was reportedly sent to TMZ Monday morning, the same day Savannah returned to anchor “Today” two months after the search for her missing mother began.

The Pima County Sheriff’s Department and the FBI are both continuing to lead the Arizona investigation into Nancy’s disappearance. Savannah has offered a $1 million reward in addition to the FBI’s $100,000 reward for information that leads to her mother’s recovery.

The sender of the TMZ ransom note reportedly demanded “half a Bitcoin” to share the information they have on Nancy’s whereabouts. At the time of publishing, one Bitcoin is worth $69,954.02.

The post TMZ’s Harvey Levin Believes New Nancy Guthrie Ransom Note Is Legit, Despite FBI Not Pursuing | Video appeared first on TheWrap.