Capitol Riot arrests (2 Viewers)

[Bigdaddysaints]

Figured we should start a separate thread on the arrests and those involved in the storming of the Capitol. I know it has been talked about in the other thread a lot, but for the ones who just want to follow the ones arrested and/or charged, this will be an easier way to see updates on the investigations.

Link below is everyone who has been arrested. But we know there will be more.

Capitol Breach Cases

www.justice.gov

The website seems to be updated with new information daily.

The ones who are getting the most air time:

Notable Arrests After the Riot at the Capitol (Published 2021)

Dozens have been charged since a mob of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

www.nytimes.com

Jake Angeli

Adam Johnson

Richard Barnett

Kevin Seefried

Eric Gavelek Munchel

Larry R. Brock
Lisa Eisenhart
Robert Keith Packer
Klete Keller
Aaron Mostofsky
Anthime Joseph Gionet
Peter Francis Stager
Christine Priola

 

[Optimus Prime]

Was the Houston doctor the demon sperm lady?

 

[superchuck500]

Was the Houston doctor the demon sperm lady?

Oh yeah.

And people were all like "Yeah but Ivermectin is the cure and the media and Fauci are just trying to suppress it - so I support demon sperm lady, she seems like a credible source of medical advice."

 

[Optimus Prime]

WASHINGTON — A member of the United States Army who re-enlisted in the military after he pepper sprayed cops at the Capitol on Jan. 6 was sentenced to more than 3.5 years in prison on Friday.

James Mault was fired from his union job after the insurrection, but was able to re-enlist in the U.S. Army even though he had been interviewed by the FBI about his actions on Jan. 6. At the time of the initial FBI interview, the bureau was apparently unaware that he assaulted officers that day.

Chief Judge Beryl Howell sentenced Mault alongside his co-defendant Cody Mattice. Both received 44 months in prison, as well as three years of supervised release. Howell said that Mault and Mattice had preplanned for violence.

“They were not patriots on Jan. 6,” Howell said. “No one who broke police lines that day were. They were criminals.”.........

MSN

 

[gummbo]

WASHINGTON — A member of the United States Army who re-enlisted in the military after he pepper sprayed cops at the Capitol on Jan. 6 was sentenced to more than 3.5 years in prison on Friday.

James Mault was fired from his union job after the insurrection, but was able to re-enlist in the U.S. Army even though he had been interviewed by the FBI about his actions on Jan. 6. At the time of the initial FBI interview, the bureau was apparently unaware that he assaulted officers that day.

Chief Judge Beryl Howell sentenced Mault alongside his co-defendant Cody Mattice. Both received 44 months in prison, as well as three years of supervised release. Howell said that Mault and Mattice had preplanned for violence.

“They were not patriots on Jan. 6,” Howell said. “No one who broke police lines that day were. They were criminals.”.........

MSN

206 Republicans just voted to not, I repeat not identify white supremacist in the military and police ranks. This is gonna turn out just lovely

 

[Optimus Prime]

206 Republicans just voted to not, I repeat not identify white supremacist in the military and police ranks. This is gonna turn out just lovely

while at the same time denying that they are playing footsie with those groups

 

[Optimus Prime]

A man who attacked police officers with poles during the riot at the U.S. Capitol was sentenced on Tuesday to more than five years in prison, matching the longest term of imprisonment so far among hundreds of Capitol riot prosecutions.

Mark Ponder, a 56-year-old resident of Washington, D.C., said he “got caught up” in the chaos that erupted on Jan. 6, 2021, and “didn’t mean for any of this to happen.”

“I wasn’t thinking that day,” Ponder told U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, asking her for mercy before she sentenced him to five years and three months in prison.

That was three months longer than the prison sentence requested by prosecutors. And it’s the same sentence that Chutkan gave Robert Palmer, a Florida man who also pleaded guilty to assaulting police at the Capitol.

More than 200 other Capitol riot defendants have been sentenced so far. None received a longer prison sentence than Ponder or Palmer…….

Man's 63-month prison term matches longest for Capitol riot

A man who attacked police officers with poles during the riot at the U.S. Capitol was sentenced on Tuesday to more than five years in prison, matching the longest term of imprisonment so far among hundreds of Capitol riot prosecutions.

apnews.com

 

[Optimus Prime]

 

[nolaspe]

His daughter spitting a truth bomb...

 

[DaveXA]

His daughter spitting a truth bomb...

Lol, I saw that this morning and thought, hey, she's got a point!

 

[Optimus Prime]

(CNN) - The son of Guy Reffitt, the first US Capitol riot defendant to go to trial rather than take a plea agreement, said his father "absolutely" deserves the 87-month prison sentence that was handed down Monday.

"I mean, I'm not happy at all. I haven't been happy to this whole situation. No one in my family has either, but to say I'm surprised would be a lie," Jackson Reffitt told CNN's Brianna Keilar on "New Day" Tuesday in reaction to his father's sentence. "I mean, everything my dad did, he's his own person. And his action has consequences. But I'm not happy at all." …….

 

[coldseat]

(CNN) - The son of Guy Reffitt, the first US Capitol riot defendant to go to trial rather than take a plea agreement, said his father "absolutely" deserves the 87-month prison sentence that was handed down Monday.

"I mean, I'm not happy at all. I haven't been happy to this whole situation. No one in my family has either, but to say I'm surprised would be a lie," Jackson Reffitt told CNN's Brianna Keilar on "New Day" Tuesday in reaction to his father's sentence. "I mean, everything my dad did, he's his own person. And his action has consequences. But I'm not happy at all." …….

Convicted US Capitol rioter’s son says he ‘absolutely’ agrees with father’s sentence | CNN Politics

The son of Guy Reffitt, the first US Capitol riot defendant to go to trial rather than take a plea agreement, said his father “absolutely” deserves the 87-month prison sentence that was handed down Monday.

www.cnn.com

This young man seems incredibly reasonable and well rounded to have come from that family. I guess the apple can fall far from the tree.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

Convicted US Capitol rioter’s son says he ‘absolutely’ agrees with father’s sentence | CNN Politics

The son of Guy Reffitt, the first US Capitol riot defendant to go to trial rather than take a plea agreement, said his father “absolutely” deserves the 87-month prison sentence that was handed down Monday.

www.cnn.com

This young man seems incredibly reasonable and well rounded to have come from that family. I guess the apple can fall far from the tree.

His mom, on the other hand, can join her boo in prison far as I'm concerned.

 

[superchuck500]

(CNN) - The son of Guy Reffitt, the first US Capitol riot defendant to go to trial rather than take a plea agreement, said his father "absolutely" deserves the 87-month prison sentence that was handed down Monday.

"I mean, I'm not happy at all. I haven't been happy to this whole situation. No one in my family has either, but to say I'm surprised would be a lie," Jackson Reffitt told CNN's Brianna Keilar on "New Day" Tuesday in reaction to his father's sentence. "I mean, everything my dad did, he's his own person. And his action has consequences. But I'm not happy at all." …….

The one thing I really dislike about this is the idea that refusing a plea and making the government prove its case is somehow an aggravating factor. The judge even mentioned it in his sentencing.

That’s wrong. We have a fundamental right to a criminal trial by jury. End of story. It’s not somehow wrong or aggravating to exercise this right.

Apparently in the world of criminal defense, it’s called a “trial tax” - where a judge in sentencing claims to have considered the fact that the convicted defendant went to trial is something the court should hold against him. It’s wrong.

 

[DaveXA]

The one think I really dislike about this is the idea that refusing a plea and making the government prove its case is somehow an aggravating factor. The judge even mentioned it in his sentencing.

That’s wrong. We have a fundamental right to a criminal trial by jury. End of story. It’s not somehow wrong or aggravating to exercise this right.

Apparently in the world of criminal defense, it’s called a “trial tax” - where a judge in sentencing claims to have considered the fact that the convicted defendant went to trial is something the court should hold against him. It’s wrong.

Agree 100%.

 

[gummbo]

His daughter spitting a truth bomb...

Geez, I didn’t see this reported on Fox News. I wonder why?

 

[dtc]

The one thing I really dislike about this is the idea that refusing a plea and making the government prove its case is somehow an aggravating factor. The judge even mentioned it in his sentencing.

That’s wrong. We have a fundamental right to a criminal trial by jury. End of story. It’s not somehow wrong or aggravating to exercise this right.

Apparently in the world of criminal defense, it’s called a “trial tax” - where a judge in sentencing claims to have considered the fact that the convicted defendant went to trial is something the court should hold against him. It’s wrong.

How is it wrong if honest remorse is viewed as a mitigating factor at sentencing?

It's not part of the consideration for conviction, but it seems a terribly reasonable consideration during sentencing.

 

[superchuck500]

How is it wrong if honest remorse is viewed as a mitigating factor at sentencing?

It's not part of the consideration for conviction, but it seems a terribly reasonable consideration during sentencing.

Because it’s not all or nothing - someone can be remorseful and still go to trial. Someone can be remorseful after a verdict. If remorse is the issue make it the issue - but making the government prove its case doesn’t necessarily mean the person couldn’t be remorseful.

 

[dtc]

Because it’s not all or nothing - someone can be remorseful and still go to trial. Someone can be remorseful after a verdict. If remorse is the issue make it the issue - but making the government prove its case doesn’t necessarily mean the person couldn’t be remorseful.

I'll certainly defer as I have no basis to disagree, but I have no problem with harsh sentencing for a guilty party who refused a plea. The refusal to plea and lying denials are the opposite of mitigation and eliminate remorse.

JHMO