I strongly disagree with the approach taken by the #Jan6 Court in granting relief that neither party requested—a dismissal without prejudice. Before a conviction, the government has the final say on the sufficiency or invalidity of its charges. If the government determines the charges lack merit, it should be allowed to dismiss the case without the court issuing an order that reads like a blend of an indictment and an editorial.

The allegations referenced by the court remain just that—unproven allegations. The court’s reliance on references to other cases is particularly troubling, as it invokes notions of collective guilt, which have no place in a fair legal system.

Furthermore, the 2020 election had absolutely no relevance to our defense. The defendant simply did not commit the acts alleged. In their haste to upcharge him from a one-count information to a seven-count indictment, the government failed to notice that it was someone else’s arm holding the spray bottle.

These are false allegations, and opinions like this—expressed unnecessarily—only serve to fuel criticism of the courts and the perception that a special brand of #J6 jurisprudence is at play.
#Jan6