[ad_1]
Under a deal with prosecutors, Croy sought to plead guilty to a single charge of parade or picketing on Capitol Hill. This carries a maximum sentence of six months in prison and a fine of up to $ 5,000.
However, Howell’s comments during Croy’s hearing indicated that she had broader concerns about the prosecutors’ approach than how they handled the fairly typical Croy case.
Croy initially agreed with Howell that his actions on January 6 were taken in an attempt to prevent Congress from certifying the electoral vote in the 2020 presidential election.
But soon after, his defense attorney, Kira Anne West, added that there was no deal with prosecutors that was Croy’s intention that day. In fact, West said, his client said he had “no intention of stopping a vote” and had no real knowledge that the Electoral College’s votes were to be counted when the historic building went down. been taken by storm.
These statements did not seem to fit Howell well.
“This is the puzzle of this petty offense charge. … It is to parade, demonstrate or picket. … It’s usually for an end, ”said the judge. “Demonstrating is usually about something. It’s parading about something.
Howell then questioned the prosecutor in charge of the case, Clayton O’Connor, about why prosecutors had not insisted on Croy admitting as part of the plea that he was trying to block the electoral vote.
“Why is it not in the statement of offense?” Asked the judge.
In response, O’Connor laid bare aspects of prosecutors’ decision-making that have rarely been discussed publicly: why some defendants who entered Capitol Hill but who are not accused of violence against others or damage to the property are facing a felony Congressional charge that can result in up to 20 years in prison, while others who appear to have acted the same that day have escaped with misdemeanors.
“In large part, because of the elements related to the obstruction charge with which many of Mr. Croy’s co-rioters have been accused,” said O’Connor. “Upon examination of the investigation, this fact has not been revealed to such a degree that the government can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt with respect to Mr. Troy.”
The handling of other Jan. 6 cases by the US attorney’s office in Washington and its superiors at the Department of Justice has highlighted such a distinction. Cases where defendants posted on social media about trying to stop the vote generally produced more serious charges, while those without such evidence appear to have been treated with more leniency, although the acts allegedly committed were similar.
Still, Howell didn’t seem to buy it and repeatedly suggested that it could be inferred that those who entered Capitol Hill weren’t just there by a lark.
O’Connor, the district attorney, agreed.
“Contextually, we agree with you, it’s obvious,” he said, before insisting that the government needed more proof of intent in each case than just the entry. in the building.
Howell also appeared to bemoan the fact that those who plead guilty to minor offenses carrying the maximum sentence of six months in prison could not be released on probation by the court if they were also given a prison term. Such an option is available and commonly used by judges in criminal cases.
“For minor offenses, there are only two options the court can do: probation or jail time,” she said.
Howell also said she was puzzled as to why prosecutors were using an amount of roughly $ 1.5 million to calculate restitution in cases, while Congress agreed last month to allocate 521 million dollars to the National Guard for costs incurred in ensuring the security of the Capitol for four months after the Jan.6 assault. Biden signed the bill on July 30.
“Could you explain why the US attorney’s office limited the restitution to just under $ 1.5 million in repairs to the building itself, when the total cost of this riot to US taxpayers is half a billion? Asked the judge.
“I’m glad to get you that answer,” replied O’Connor.
“Thank you. I would appreciate that response,” Howell said, adding that the meager amount of compensation requested was “a bit surprising” given the government’s usual approach to these issues.
“I am used to the government being quite aggressive in criminal cases involving fraud and other types of cases,” said the judge, a former lawyer on the Senate Judiciary Committee appointed by President Barack Obama.
In previous hearings in other cases, Howell has suggested that the charges against some of the defendants on January 6 may underestimate the gravity of their actions, as the chaos they have contributed has diverted police from the most senior members. menacing from the crowd. Howell also questioned other rulings by prosecutors in riot-related cases, such as the government’s failure to challenge an appeals court ruling that made it harder to detain non-violent defendants.
Despite the reluctance she expressed on Monday, Howell finally accepted Croy’s plea and set the sentence for October 15. She ordered prosecutors to file details of the calculation of restitution, which the government agreed to $ 500 in her case, when it proposes a sentence. .
A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office declined to discuss Howell’s latest comments and said any response from prosecutors would come through court proceedings or cases.
Prosecutors said the estimate of $ 1.5 million came from information provided by the architect of the Capitol. This office cited higher numbers in congressional testimony, but appears to have brushed aside other categories of riot-related spending. An estimate given to lawmakers in February called for spending $ 30 million through the end of March for repairs and temporary fencing.
In other developments on Monday related to the January 6 riots:
– Prosecutors released a new indictment adding two more defendants, Florida resident David Moerschel and Georgia resident Brian Ulrich, to a conspiracy case against so-called Oath Keepers accused of being involved in an attack planned against the Capitol. The two new additions bring the number of people indicted in the massive case to 18.
– A judge handling another conspiracy case – one focused on the so-called Proud Boys allegedly involved in the riot – rejected a defendant’s request that prosecutors provide more details on the details of the case. Judge Timothy Kelly said prosecutors had already answered many questions posed by lawyers for the defendant Ethan Nordean, and the other answers emerged from the “great details” contained in the indictment in that case.
–Following an order from Kelly and a request from news agencies, prosecutors released a video of Capitol Riot advocate Douglas Jensen bragging on social media about his actions on Jan.6.
“I’m the one touching the fucking White House,” Jensen says in the video. “That’s why we’re here… at the White House, just so you know it.”
Shots in the middle of the 18-second video clearly show that Jensen and the crowd around him were in fact outside the Capitol, not the White House.
Kelly ordered Jensen’s provisional release on bail last month, subject to high-intensity surveillance.
Kyle Cheney contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
Source link