Chief federal judge in D.C. assails 'almost schizophrenic' Jan. 6 prosecutions
Source: Washington Post
The chief judge presiding over the federal court in Washington on Thursday unleashed a blistering critique of the Justice Departments prosecution of Capitol rioters, saying fiery rhetoric about the events horror did not match plea offers to minor charges. No wonder parts of the public in the U.S. are confused about whether what happened on January 6 at the Capitol was simply a petty offense of trespassing with some disorderliness, or shocking criminal conduct that represented a grave threat to our democratic norms, Judge Beryl A. Howell said in court Thursday. Let me make my view clear: The rioters were not mere protesters.
While she and other judges have expressed similar concerns before, this was Howells first time sentencing a rioter and her first chance to fully air her views and demand answers from prosecutors. She took the opportunity, spending over an hour interrogating prosecutors on the decision to let Tennessee video game developer Jack Jesse Griffith plead guilty to the misdemeanor of parading inside the Capitol. Howell, who was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2010, also oversaw portions of the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Before taking the bench, she served as a prosecutor and worked on cybersecurity law in the public and private sector.
Why, she asked, when prosecutors called the riot an attack on democracy .?.?. unparalleled in American history, were Griffith and other participants facing the same charge as nonviolent protesters who routinely disrupt congressional hearings? It seems like a bit of a disconnect, Howell said muddled and almost schizophrenic. The parading charge carries a sentence of at most six months, with no supervised release. Is it the governments view that the members of the mob that engaged in the Capitol attack on January 6 were simply trespassers? Howell asked incredulously. Is general deterrence going to be served by letting rioters who broke into the Capitol, overran the police .?.?. broke into the building through windows and doors .?.?. resolve their criminal liability through petty offense pleas?
After asking for probationary sentences in several cases, the government sought a three-month jail sentence for Griffith. Howell questioned what distinguished those cases from this one. Assistant U.S. Attorney Mitra Jafary-Hariri said prosecutors gave some defendants credit for early acceptance of responsibility. Griffith, she added, displayed a lack of remorse after the attack and continued to spread false election claims. Probation should not be the norm, Howell said, but added that Griffith should not be punished more than others who engaged in similar conduct. Instead, she put him on probation for 36 months.
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/judge-howell-capitol-riot-case/2021/10/28/8f6da2c2-3809-11ec-9bc4-86107e7b0ab1_story.html
Full headline: Chief federal judge in D.C. assails almost schizophrenic Jan. 6 prosecutions: The rioters were not mere protesters
bottomofthehill
(8,346 posts)I am in complete agreement with you.
Thank you for commenting on how wrong the undercharging is.
jimfields33
(15,948 posts)Progressive Jones
(6,011 posts)blm
(113,091 posts)Wants to kill us.
LogicFirst
(572 posts)bucolic_frolic
(43,281 posts)groundloop
(11,522 posts)Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)
Post removed
Response to Post removed (Reply #6)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
modrepub
(3,502 posts)and didn't load them into a patty wagons for processing, I knew there weren't going to be any serious repercussions for anyone involved. You don't just let folks walk away then half-heartedly try and herd them back in for prosecution. How many of these bozos would have not had any charges against them at all if it wasn't for the on-line sleuths?
Wild blueberry
(6,655 posts)Jon King
(1,910 posts)All the cable news legal experts said the initial charges were just that, initial charges. They said once the Garland DOJ got in they would likely simply review the cases and add more charges. Yet nothing.
I have no idea why DOJ is being so easy on these traitors.
gab13by13
(21,402 posts)for more than slaps on wrists. Some judges even had to up the sentence. If I say anything bad about Garland I gat attacked.
Not hearing from Garland about Bannon scares me. If he comes out and says that Democrats can pursue Bannon's case in civil court I'm moving out of the country.
hadEnuf
(2,212 posts)FakeNoose
(32,748 posts)What's up with that? The U.S. attorneys are asking for fines of $500 ... WTF??? The attorneys are asking for light sentences and in some cases, probation-only with no time served. WTF???
Some of these judges are getting disgusted and going over the recommendations of the prosecutors. If everyone who got convicted paid a $500 fine, there would be no way to cover the costs involved. No way, this is ridiculous!
NQAS
(10,749 posts)If they were Black
Or Muslim
Or Puerto Ricans some five decades ago
Theyd haven charged with more serious crimes and would gave been sentenced to decades in prison.
But theyre white. And theyre running for office.
onecaliberal
(32,894 posts)Thunderbeast
(3,419 posts)Farmer-Rick
(10,207 posts)The DOJ cowering in fear of a tongue lashing from the oligarchs. The oligarchs will be upset if you hold their gang of traitors to account. So, best let the treason go unnoticed and pretend it didn't really happen, like we pretend Zuckerberg didn't betray our democracy when he played patty-cake with the Russians.
The meetings and the attack meet the legal standard for Treason of Levying War against the United States. There is so much documentation, recordings and evidence of their blatant Treason. But not to worry, since Trump failed to come through on his promised blanket pardons, it will always hang over their heads because there is no statute of limitations on Treason.
Maybe in a couple of years someone will grow a spine.
onecaliberal
(32,894 posts)Lonestarblue
(10,064 posts)Had the Capitol attackers been black, I suspect there would have been many troops around the Capitol on January 6 and sentences for insurrection would have been in years, not a few months that are a slap on the wrist for white terrorists. Insurrection is a serious crime, and these sentences are treating it like little more than taking a loaf of bread from a store. Totally disgusted.
BumRushDaShow
(129,441 posts)to actually admit to something called "domestic terrorism"?
"Terrorists" were always "other" (mostly "foreign" ). There were many excuse treatises written to pretzel-twist and move goal-posts for who was a "terrorist" and it was never the Hitler-worshiping, Confederate flag-waving, Jew-hating racist scum who threatened and carried out harassment and violence "domestically" because the claim was they "weren't political" or hadn't written some "manifesto" or other such nonsense.
Many of them are apparently operating under some decades-long "definition" and "profile of a terrorist" that needs to be deprecated and rewritten.
CaptainTruth
(6,601 posts)...was absolutely positively NOT acceptable & those who engage in such activities will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
trof
(54,256 posts)He's sure not a fire in the belly guy.
Read his wiki entry.
Apparently he's brilliant.
Described as a 'moderate'.
But why is his department not going after these assholes?
markpkessinger
(8,401 posts)dalton99a
(81,570 posts)tonekat
(1,820 posts)They vigorously pursue their agenda, in which they are united.
Democrats...yeah, still bringing a pea shooter to a machine gun fight. I'm so disappointed. They're limp noodles.
Remember how shocked everyone was that McConnell passed over Garland because what Mitch wants happens?
Now that he's AG, I wonder if he just doesn't care since he didn't get installed on SCOTUS?
maybe he actually wants another opportunity to be on SCOTUS once Breyer departs and is trying to do whatever is necessary ingratiate himself with the GQP leadership and conservative media. He seems extremely reluctant to take any actions that may upset them or the MAGA cult.
AnrothElf
(591 posts)Fucked
Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)
jfz9580m This message was self-deleted by its author.
Bobstandard
(1,328 posts)In another thread, we who question Garland, wish he were more aggressive, and suggest it would be better if he were replace are mocked for our cupidity. But here a judge who sees all the info reacts as we do
So dont go telling me I dont know enough about the law, that I should suppose Bidens man is playing some kind of long game that I couldnt possibly understand.
Garland and his DOJ is letting us down.
And the stakes couldnt be higher
markpkessinger
(8,401 posts)JudyM
(29,274 posts)Those who say wait and see are dampening the social appetite to see actual justice done. We need to champion this narrative. We should be clamoring for justice instead of letting this outrageous prosecutorial minimalism abide.
It.is.not.ok.
hay rick
(7,639 posts)I can not imagine maintaining a democracy following the present course.
rockfordfile
(8,704 posts)malthaussen
(17,216 posts)But they are bound by the deals the prosecutors make. Still, calling a 30-day sentence a "serious penalty" is some pretty wild rhetoric.
-- Mal
Progressive Jones
(6,011 posts)-they aren't bound to weak sentences.
If prosecutors ask for a sentence of, say, "20-30 months", why are judges giving anything less than that "30 months"?
I would love to hear what the DOJ has to say about these weak deals. What is the rationale? Just because one of these assholes says "I'm Sorry", they shouldn't be let off the hook. I know these are "wins" for the prosecution, but this was an attack on the United States of America. I don't give a fuck about some rank and file prosecutors padding their resume. There should be NO MERCY for these terrorist assholes.
SpankMe
(2,966 posts)I think Garland is trying to set a precedent that will make it harder for Republican AG's in the future to overreach and charge liberals with sedition.
Republicans are extremists. When liberal antifa and anti-racist protesters in Portland damaged federal buildings and federal property, AG Barr encouraged the Oregon feds to try and go for sedition charges against the protesters. His little mind was trying to classify any and all violent acts directed toward any federal entity - be it property or people - as an attempt to overthrow the government by force, regardless of the true motivation of the vandals.
Garland may be thinking that if he charges the Jan. 6 insurrectionists with "attempt to overthrow the government by force" (i.e., sedition - which is exactly what it was) that future right-wing crackpot AG's would try to charge any liberal who acts out on a beef against the government with sedition.
I know this precedent wouldn't legally forestall a future AG from attempting such charges. But, it would give defendants and liberal leaders ammo to resist such charges in the future.
markpkessinger
(8,401 posts). . . The man simply isn't that calculating. No, what we are seeing i play is Garland's excessive caution, which under some circumstances might be laudable, but not when our democracy is at stake!
HighFired49
(351 posts)It won't keep them from doing anything that they feel like doing; deserved or not.
Response to markpkessinger (Reply #35)
ExTex This message was self-deleted by its author.
Justice matters.
(6,941 posts)The next RepubliQon POTUS will trash Democracy and replace it with a cruel Theocracy.
BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)live love laugh
(13,129 posts)The DOJ, DOA, IRS, USPS -- all agencies ... and its not going to away overnight.
BumRushDaShow
(129,441 posts)career ones and/or converted Schedule Cs (to civil service).