Trump Inauguration Charges Dismissed Because Prosecutors Withheld Evidence

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Source: HuffPost

POLITICS 05/31/2018 01:04 pm ET

Trump Inauguration Charges Dismissed Because Prosecutors Withheld Evidence

A judge sanctioned Justice Department attorneys for withholding videos filmed by Project Veritas.

By Ryan J. Reilly

WASHINGTON -- A D.C. judge on Thursday dismissed felony charges against 10 individuals arrested while protesting President Donald Trump's inauguration, finding that the government violated the due process rights of defendants by failing to turn over evidence it obtained from a right-wing media organization. Three of the defendants still face misdemeanor charges.

D.C. Superior Court Chief Judge Robert Morin found that prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, which is part of the Justice Department, had committed Brady violations by withholding undercover videos that James O'Keefe's Project Veritas had turned over to the government.

The ruling in the case against a group of defendants whose trials were about to begin was made as closing arguments unfolded one floor below in the trial of a separate group of defendants. The government had wanted the charges dismissed without prejudice, leaving open the possibility that the government could try to bring the charges again. But Morin ruled that the charges should be dismissed with prejudice, meaning the government is barred from bringing the charges in the future.

Read more: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-inauguration-trial-j20_us_5b0f19a3e4b05ef4c22a76d3

---

The government at one point called James O'Keefe's Project Veritas a "concerned citizen's group." #J20

Link to tweet

-- -- --

Earlier this morning at DU:

Prosecutors hid mountains of evidence in trial of Trump inauguration protesters

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016207518

ThinkProgress is not a news source. They're rehashing old developments.

KneelBeforeHat Retweeted: https://twitter.com/Popehat

Prosecutors hid mountains of evidence in trial of Trump inauguration protesters

Link to tweet

Prosecutors hid mountains of evidence in trial of Trump inauguration protesters

https://thinkprogress.org/j20-evidence-hidden-from-protesters-cfcc9fbc5c95/

A dramatic failure to honor the basic principles of criminal law could put a sudden end to the long-suffering First Amendment case.

ALAN PYKE
MAY 31, 2018, 8:59 AM

Federal prosecutors hid scores of videos from the hundreds of anti-Trump demonstrators they charged with serious felonies in an unprecedented crackdown on Inauguration Day protests, defense lawyers alleged in an overnight filing Wednesday.

The new accusations exacerbate an existing crisis for prosecutors, who already admitted last week to hiding one 55-minute video and misrepresented edits they made to another video. That initial screw-up, known to lawyers as a Brady violation, |already jeopardized the case.

https://thinkprogress.org/prosecutors-hid-evidence-that-favors-anti-trump-protesters-judge-rules-5eec98867027/

But that initial, single Brady violation is actually part of a much broader pattern of evidence-concealing, the lawyers now say. The government has concealed another 69 separate recordings — three audio files and 66 videos — of planning meetings for the Inauguration protests known as #DisruptJ20, defense lawyers say in the motion.

[47of74]

1. Good news

I saw this and thought at first fuck face groupies were getting off for crimes they committed until I realized that these were the charges against people protesting that orange stooge.

[Yonnie3]

2. An instance where "prejudice" is a good thing.

"Morin ruled that the charges should be dismissed with prejudice, meaning the government is barred from bringing the charges in the future."

[Roy Rolling]

4. Good Here

Usually pre-judging (prejudice) is speculative and inaccurate. Here, the case has been pre-judged and can't be judged again in a court of law.


It confused me, too. How can tapes from O'Keefe ever be used to help ascertain the truth? Strange.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

3. This seemed ill-advised.

This seemed ill-advised.

Link to tweet

The shirt @DCPoliceDept Officer William Chatman wore around court last week (he put it on minutes after he finished testifying for @USAO_DC and was seen near jurors in the court’s coffee shop) reads:
“Police Brutality...Or Doing What Their Parents Should Have”

#J20 #J20trials

Link to tweet

[SergeStorms]

18. What a jackass.

He had to be the BIG MAN and let everyone know his personal feelings. Personal feelings are just that, personal, and should be withheld from a place such as a court of law. What a bonehead.

[Pepsidog]

22. What a fuck face asshole. Piece of shit cop makes them all look bad

[Maraya1969]

23. And he's black? What a fucking idiot.

[Gothmog]

5. These charges should never have been brought

This is great news

[bigbrother05]

6. Members of the real Deep (Blue Lives) State

Retrograde policing tactics being abetted by White Wing provocateurs have been outed and slapped back.

Local courts and juries might buy that crap, but DC Circuit don't play.

[Achilleaze]

7. The KGOP republican Police State, Inc. flubs another one

?1446948044

[LiberalLovinLug]

8. still scary

All this means is they got off on a technicality.
It doesn't change anything in that protesters had been charged with a felony for protesting, and presumably can be again.

[grantcart]

19. They can never be charged again

From the clip

But Morin ruled that the charges should be dismissed with prejudice, meaning the government is barred from bringing the charges in the future.

[LiberalLovinLug]

21. Sorry I wasn't clear

What I meant was that OTHER protesters in the future can be charged with a felony now for protesting. Only next time they'll make sure there is no technicality to get in the way. That this was the first time, so presumably precedent setting, that protesting could be deemed a felony, and the justice system seemed to have no problem with that, only that they screwed up on a technicality.

[moriah]

9. The FB group for the Women's March knew O'Keefe et al had penetrated DJ20 and...

... were spreading warnings about any strange emails asking about attendance and routes, and trying to remind people about old protest.planning techniques.

Essentially, the gub'mint doesn't have to pay provocateurs anymore -- "concerned citizens" are getting paid to infiltrate protest groups by large organizations now.

We really need more legal observer, affinity group solidarity, and jail solidarity trainings, and not just in big cities.

[irisblue]

10. Why would a US prosecutor be so stupid?

Surely they know what a Brady violation is, and that the recorded evidence would slip out?

[irisblue]

11. And what does this do to previous convictions the prosecutors

Won? What will this do to their careers?

[avebury]

14. Maybe the Prosecutor really

didn't want to prosecute them and deliberately made the error. He might have been under pressure to prosecute them and subtly tanked the case.

[NewJeffCT]

15. was the prosecutor appointed by Trump?

If so, that might be the answer.

[KPN]

12. Wouldn't it be nice if the prosecutorial tem

or someone(s) on the team did this intentionally knowing it would be grounds for dismissal? Perhaps it's just a fantasy I'm having.

[Hekate]

13. That's a piece of good news, at least

[TimeSnowDemos]

16. the REAL deep state

The government colluded to hide and manipulate evidence to scare people from using their 1st Amendment rights...

People were literally framed by the government and only dumb luck saved them.

This is as scary as anything we've seen under Trump.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

17. "... only dumb luck saved them." That and the ACLU lawyers. NT

[SWBTATTReg]

20. Scary, when our own government 'trumps' up charges just to ...

badger and intimidate people, exercising their first amendment rights. What other things are these people are doing (the prosecutors, justice dept under Sessions, etc.) to violate fellow American's constitutional rights?