Falsehoods Unchallenged Only Fester and Grow
https://thefogbow.com/forum/
That's part of what threw me off.realist wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 5:50 pmDitto.pipistrelle wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 5:39 pm I don't understand the distribution of some of the verdicts but I wasn't there (at the trial).
All guilty of obstruction but not guilty on conspiracy to obstruct. So they all just decided on their own to obstruct?
Jurors Have Questions About the Justice Department’s Most Serious Count in the Oath Keepers Trial: Seditious Conspiracy
Mehta brought the jury back in to the courtroom and offered a clarifying instruction.
“The seditious conspiracy charge alleges as one of its two objects to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the U.S. by force. The law of the U.S. for purposes of this charge are the laws governing the presidential transfer of power[.]”
Mehta cited the 12th Amendment of the Constitution, which says the winner of the Electoral College wins the presidential election, and the U.S. Code section mandating that Congress certify the Electoral College votes on Jan. 6.
Mehta then referred the jurors to the jury instructions, particularly page 24, which provides more detailed definitions of the statute’s text and emphasizes: “An agreement to merely violate the law is not sufficient.”
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/1 ... ry-s-handsNestler told the jury that in order to sort out whether the defendants are guilty of seditious conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt, they must understand: they do not have to establish there was a concrete plan.
The defense’s reiteration to this point has been a “colossal waste of time,” Nestleradded.
To find the defendants guilty, the jury must establish whether there was a mutual understanding or agreement.
“That’s what a conspiracy is,” Nestler said before quickly reminding jurors that it was Jessica Watkins who barked into her walkie-talkie on Jan. 6 that she was “sticking to the plan” while storming the Capitol.
Further, to prove guilt, the government is not required to show that conspirators had a written or oral agreement nor does the government need to prove that the conspirators were aware of every detail or even agreed about every detail of a conspiracy.
“To be clear, the evidence has shown you the defendants did have an express agreement. An express agreement to oppose by force if necessary the lawful transfer of power. But you can find these defendants guilty without even finding an explicit agreement, implicit will also suffice,” he said.
bob wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 5:16 pmGupwalla wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 5:13 pm My understanding (from the judge after the more recent case) was that attorneys want to know what evidence or arguments the jurors found especially convincing one way or another. It’s part of the litigators’ ongoing personal development - how to become a better trial lawyer.
And, on a more human level, some jurors want to talk about their experiences, even if just to thank one side or berate the other; it can be cathartic.
Not sure about insufficient evidence. It seems it is exceedingly difficult to convince juries that there does not have to be actual in-person talk and agreement to constitute conspiracy - ala Malheur and the Bundys.
IIRC, they all had been detained pending trial.humblescribe wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:33 pm Were Elmer and his Merry Men remanded into custody pending sentencing, or were they released on bond until sentencing?
We're basically saying the same thing. An agreement can be inferred from actions, but I could see a juror saying there wasn't sufficient evidence of an agreement -- because they didn't perform the "correct" incantation.
Just saw Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn (
@libradunn
) at
@uscapitol
tree lighting. He had just witnessed the Rhodes guilty verdict for Seditious Conspiracy. I’m so happy for Harry and every officer from January 6 that they’re witnessing justice come to roost.
Four of the five were detained throughout the proceedings, and the judge ruled that they should remain behind bars pending sentencing.humblescribe wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:33 pm Omitted in all the accounts:
Were Elmer and his Merry Men remanded into custody pending sentencing, or were they released on bond until sentencing?
Correct about Caldwell: BuzzFeed News (in 2021): An Alleged Leader In The Capitol Attacks Can Go Home As He Awaits Trial:
Which goes back to the conspiracy acquittal: maybe the jury didn't believe this "locker-room talk"Thomas Caldwell and eight members of the Oath Keepers are accused of conspiring in the Jan. 6 insurrection.
A federal judge ruled Friday that Thomas Caldwell, who allegedly conspired with members of the Oath Keepers to storm the Capitol on Jan. 6, can be released from jail and go home while his case is pending.
Caldwell, 66, who has back pain that he says is exacerbated by detention, was not among the members of the Oath Keepers who stormed the Capitol. US District Judge Amit Mehta said there is no direct evidence that he planned to enter the building. He also noted that Caldwell had cooperated with FBI agents when they came to interview him.
* * *
In sometimes colorful filings, Caldwell’s attorney has pushed back on the notion that his client was part of a conspiracy or that he had intended to cause violence. In a motion filed this week, attorney David Fischer argued that his client’s “‘locker room’ talk and male bravado … was not intended for public consumption, was likely done under the influence of prescription painkillers, and didn’t result in him committing one act of violence—on January 6th or before.” The filing said that Caldwell had “double-dog dared” the government to prove a conspiracy and it had failed to do so.
didn't rise to the level of an agreement (even though his later acts sure seemed to indicate agreement).Which may be an interesting take on why some weren't convicted.So what’s the defense?
In two words: No plan.
Despite having sifted through thousands of Signal, Facebook, and text messages extracted from dozens of seized phones; having been provided by an informant with a recording of one of their secret GoToMeetings (a videoconferencing app); having debriefed scores of witnesses, including seven Oath Keepers who pleaded guilty—and, amongst those, three who specifically pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy—the government never produced evidence of any Oath Keeper plan to breach the Capitol on Jan. 6 or, for that matter, any concrete plan of any kind laying out precisely how they would block Biden from taking power.
Me too. Plus, I heard several talking heads yesterday note that this is a sign the DC jurors are taking this seriously and not rubber stamping the guilty verdicts and going home.
Jury selection for the trial of the second group of OathKeepers seditious conspiracy defendants could begin as early as TUESDAY
Standby....
Oath Keeper James BEEKS (formerly of Jesus Christ, Superstar fame) is a 'sovereign citizen' who is now seeking to represent himself at his upcoming trial. Judge Mehta must be thrilled.
That would have been . . . Awesome!humblescribe wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 3:12 pm Shouldn't he have written, "Stand back, and stand by?"
....
Speaking of sentencing, any idea why the judge did not set a sentencing date after the guilty verdicts? Is it common to hold off sentencing if the verdicts are going to be appealed and the defendants are in custody?bob wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:50 pmIIRC, they all had been detained pending trial.humblescribe wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 6:33 pm Were Elmer and his Merry Men remanded into custody pending sentencing, or were they released on bond until sentencing?
I doubt they'll even ask to be released pending sentencing and appeal.
* * *