New York (CNN) -- Three defendants pleaded guilty in federal court Wednesday to conspiring to defraud a Holocaust reparations organization out of $57.3 million, according to court documents. Genrikh Kolontyrskiy, Moysey Kucher and Dora Kucher, all of Brooklyn, helped produce and process some of the thousands of fraudulent applications for the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany that are under investigation. The organization, also known as the Claims Conference, distributes more than $400 million a year from funds provided by the German government to victims of the Holocaust. "Our efforts to hold to account all of the individuals who participated in defrauding an organization that exists solely for the purpose of aiding victims of Nazi atrocities continues," said Preet Bharara, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, in a statement. The defendants aided in defrauding two funds managed by the Claims Conference, the Article 2 Fund and the Hardship Fund, of $45 million and $12.3 million, respectively, according to court documents. The Article 2 Fund makes monthly payments of around $400 to survivors of Nazi persecution who make less than $16,000 per year "and either lived in hiding or under a false identity for at least 18 months," according to a news release from the U.S. Attorney's office. The Hardship Fund pays a one-time payment of $3,500 to "victims of Nazi persecution who evacuated the cities in which they lived and were forced to become refugees." Kolontyrskiy, 80, knowingly processed fraudulent applications for payment while employed with the Article 2 Fund, according to court documents. Moysey Kucher, 66, and Dora Kucher, 58, recruited individuals to provide identification documents that were used to prepare fraudulent applications for both funds, in exchange for money paid out to the false applicants, according to court documents. Jesse Siegel, Kolontyrskiy's attorney, said his client was by no means a major instigator, but he takes responsibility for his actions.

When Genrikh Kolontyrskiy, Moysey Kucher and Dora Kucher submitted applications fraudulently, what two organizations did their money come from?

Right after the Pentagon was hit, NEADS learned of another possible hijacked aircraft. It was an aircraft that in fact had not been hijacked at all. After the second World Trade Center crash, Boston Center managers recognized that both aircraft were transcontinental 767 jetliners that had departed Logan Airport. Remembering the "we have some planes" remark, Boston Center guessed that Delta 1989 might also be hijacked. Boston Center called NEADS at 9:41 and identified Delta 1989, a 767 jet that had left Logan Airport for Las Vegas, as a possible hijack. NEADS warned the FAA's Cleveland Center to watch Delta 1989. The Command Center and FAA headquarters watched it too. During the course of the morning, there were multiple erroneous reports of hijacked aircraft. The report of American 11 heading south was the first; Delta 1989 was the second. NEADS never lost track of Delta 1989, and even ordered fighter aircraft from Ohio and Michigan to intercept it. The flight never turned off its transponder. NEADS soon learned that the aircraft was not hijacked, and tracked Delta 1989 as it reversed course over Toledo, headed east, and landed in Cleveland. But another aircraft was heading toward Washington, an aircraft about which NORAD had heard nothing: United 93. United Airlines Flight 93 FAA Awareness. At 9:27, after having been in the air for 45 minutes, United 93 acknowledged a transmission from the Cleveland Center controller. This was the last normal contact the FAA had with the flight. Less than a minute later, the Cleveland controller and the pilots of aircraft in the vicinity heard "a radio transmission of unintelligible sounds of possible screaming or a struggle from an unknown origin." The controller responded, seconds later: "Somebody call Cleveland?"This was followed by a second radio transmission, with sounds of screaming.

What entity did NEADS warn in response to a 767 jet that had left Logan Airport for Las Vegas?

The violent arena of domestic abuse litigation has grown a bit more volatile here, now that a judge has decided to hold two women in contempt of court for returning to men who had been ordered to stay away from them. "You can't have it both ways," said Judge Megan Lake Thornton of Fayette County District Court in recently fining two women $100 and $200 respectively for obtaining protective orders forbidding their partners from contacting them, then relenting and contacting the men. Ruling that the order was mutually binding, Judge Thornton also cited the men for contempt. "It drives me nuts when people just decide to do whatever they want," said Judge Thornton, who is experienced in the state's thick domestic abuse docket, which produces close to 30,000 emergency protective orders a year. Kentucky officials say there is a virtual epidemic of abusive relationships in the state. Judge Thornton's ruling has alarmed advocates for battered women, who plan to appeal it. The advocates say the finding goes beyond existing law and is unrealistic because some renewed contacts often prove unavoidable in domestic abuse cases, which involve economic and family dependency and other complications of daily living. The state office on domestic violence has pointedly agreed, warning that the ruling could cause abused women to hesitate in bringing their plight before the courts for fear of being chastised for their trouble. "The reality is it's easy to say they should never have contact," said Sherry Currens, executive director of the Kentucky Domestic Violence Association, an advocacy and legal protection group. "But we're talking about people in long-term relationships. They may have children in common. It's pretty hard to say, 'Never speak again.' People have financial difficulties. They may love the partner. It's not an easy thing." But Judge Thornton declared in court, "When these orders are entered, you don't just do whatever you damn well please and ignore them." The ruling stunned Cindra Walker, the lawyer for the two women, who is with Central Kentucky Legal Services, which represents many of the thousands of indigent women caught in abusive relationships. "For over five years, I've been in court practically every day on these abuse cases," Ms. Walker said, "and I've never before had a victim threatened with contempt."
What ruling made by Judge Thornton are advocates for battered women planning to appeal?