Qanon shaman...likely to get a new trial considering the government withheld video evidence from the defense....

[AZrailwhale]

Great!

This is the fist time I've heard a defense lawyer who said he asked for the tapes but was denied.

Shit's going to get real now.

The prosecution didn't DENY defense requests, it IGNORED them deliberately. Heads need to roll; lawyers need to be disbarred AND sentenced to jail time. This is a violation of the foundation of our legal system.

 

[Marener]

very simple. The officer leads him around and accompanied him. This act alone imparts that the actions he was engaged in were ok. He was not denied access, and the officers were no in fear for their own safety. The actions of the officers implied that what was happening was ok. This is not going to end well for the prosecutors. this is exculpatory evidence which exonerates him.

You do know of course that Chansley was part of the mob rushing and breaking through multiple lines of police barricades. Chansley was only able to enter the Capitol after rioters smashed a window feet away from him and then kicked the doors down from the inside.

He cannot rationally claim ignorance as to whether his actions were okay or not.

This all comes before the video you reference, which, I might add has no audio. To claim merely being followed by an officer without knowing what was being said cannot imply anything. Video of Chansley in the Capitol with audio indicates the officers were repeatedly telling him he needed to leave and he chose not to.

You have a mere implication, which you infer based on a deep seated bias. Even if we accept your belief, it’s tenuous. An objective judge would not be so bias as to believe this video implies what you think it implies.

 

[JoeB131]

Wrong.....he took a plea based on a prosecution that hid wxculpatory evidence

Nope......they were asked for this evidence and they hid it.....doesnt matter now what it shows

Except the evidence isn't exculpatory.

The only evidence was that of the Capitol Police respecting his white privilege.

Because you know if he was a brother, they'd have pinned him to the floor five feet in.

Instead, they tried to reason with someone who was pretty clearly emotionally disturbed.

He was trespassing in the capitol and committed vandalism.

 

[JoeB131]

You do know of course that Chansley was part of the mob rushing and breaking through multiple lines of police barricades. Chansley was only able to enter the Capitol after rioters smashed a window feet away from him and then kicked the doors down from the inside.

He cannot rationally claim ignorance as to whether his actions were okay or not.

This all comes before the video you reference, which, I might add has no audio. To claim merely being followed by an officer without knowing what was being said cannot imply anything. Video of Chansley in the Capitol with audio indicates the officers were repeatedly telling him he needed to leave and he chose not to.

You have a mere implication, which you infer based on a deep seated bias. Even if we accept your belief, it’s tenuous. An objective judge would not be so bias as to believe this video implies what you think it implies.

Exactly. The fact is that the Capitol Police were trying to defuse the situation without killing him. That's actually... commendable.

As bad as January 6th was, it could have been a lot worse if the Capitol Police had shown less restraint.

 

[bodecea]

The guy who wore the indian headdress in the capitol will likely get a new trial......the prosecution withheld video evidence from the defense....

Albert Watkins, whose client Jacob Chansley pleaded guilty to felony charges in connection with the Capitol riot and was sentenced to 41 months in prison, said Department of Justice prosecutors were legally bound to turn over the footage. Clips shown on Carlson’s Fox News Channel program show Chansley walking freely and peaceably through the building, often accompanied by multiple police officers.



“We did not receive that video footage,” Watkins said. “We asked for it, and not just once or twice. Whether we asked for it or not is irrelevant because the government had an absolute, non-compromisible duty to disclose that video and they did not do so.”

“And all the while, they were actively representing to the court and the American people that Jake was a leader, leading the charge into the Capitol,” he said. “They did not disclose that footage because it ran contrary to their rote narrative.”
------
Court filings in Chansley’s case corroborate Watkins’ claim that he repeatedly asked for all videos of his client.

“Our position is that the government must identify any evidence it believes to capture [defendant], regardless of whether it intends to rely on the same in its case in chief,” one said.

‘It’s Appalling’: QAnon Shaman’s Lawyer Says DOJ Lied, Withheld Videos Aired By Carlson | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

Another look.....

This is why, perhaps, they refused to share the video with Chansley’s lawyer, which among other things violates his constitutional rights, big time. They are supposed to disclose all such materials in discovery, and failing to is prosecutorial misconduct.
----
Ed noted before we knew this tidbit:



If true, and I believe that it is extremely likely that it is, then the DOJ lawyers involved should be in some serious legal jeopardy. At least if there is a semblance of legal integrity left in the federal government.

I am no lawyer, but what is at issue is something called Brady Disclosure, named after a case where theSupreme Court ruled that the government provide any exculpatory evidence to defendants in criminal cases.

The ruling was necessary, obviously, because prosecutors can be very…enthusiastic…about winning their cases and didn’t always disclose facts that would undermine their cases, leading to people being convicted based upon flawed or incomplete evidence.

DOJ broke the law when prosecuting "Q-Anon Shaman"

hotair.com

The guy who pled Guilty.

 

[jotathought]

Explain how it’s exculpatory.

Chansley was portrayed as the leader on January 6, and the new footage clearly demonstrates otherwise -- evidence which would have been shown to a jury had he gone to trial.

 

[Marener]

Chansley was portrayed as the leader on January 6, and the new footage clearly demonstrates otherwise -- evidence which would have been shown to a jury had he gone to trial.

I never saw him portrayed as a leader. I saw him portrayed as an example of the sad fringe weirdos that Trump took advantage of.

The leaders were and are on trial for seditious conspiracy.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The demoquacks have egg on their faces over J6

 

[BlueGin]

I never saw him portrayed as a leader. I saw him portrayed as an example of the sad fringe weirdos that Trump took advantage of.

The leaders were and are on trial for seditious conspiracy.

Democrats have no room to talk about sad weirdo’s ..since they like to collect them and give them positions in the Biden administration .

Luggage thief anyone??

 

[Care4all]

The demoquacks have egg on their faces over J6

Nah, Tucker is building up to a come to Jesus moment.... He continues to dance with the Devil in the bright moon light, or he reevaluates himself and his lies told, for money..... and changes his "demonic force" ways.... He said Trump was a "Demonic Force", he needs to look in the mirror before he casts that first stone....at Trump, imho.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So you support withholding evidence?

Of course he does...
Just like dems support shooting unarmed women like Ashlili Babbit.
Remember the dem motto,party over all else.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Nah, Tucker is building up to a come to Jesus moment.... He continues to dance with the Devil in the bright moon light, or he reevaluates himself and his lies told, for money..... and changes his "demonic and dangerous" ways.... He said Trump was "Demonic and dangerous", he needs to look in the mirror before he casts that first stone....at Trump, imho.

So Tucker hates Trump yet he's willing to go to bat for him.
That should tell you something but since you're an idiot I doubt you'll get it.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Nah, Tucker is building up to a come to Jesus moment.... He continues to dance with the Devil in the bright moon light, or he reevaluates himself and his lies told, for money..... and changes his "demonic and dangerous" ways.... He said Trump was "Demonic and dangerous", he needs to look in the mirror before he casts that first stone....at Trump, imho.

You keep right on believing that

 

[BlueGin]

So Tucker hates Trump yet he's willing to go to bat for him.
That should tell you something but since you're an idiot I doubt you'll get it.

Not sure why democrats think that is a good talking point?

Tucker may hate Trump,but he obviously hates political prisoners and constitutional violations more.

 

[jknowgood]

Why you bring Biden's lack of intelligence into this?

 

[jotathought]

I never saw him portrayed as a leader. I saw him portrayed as an example of the sad fringe weirdos that Trump took advantage of.

The leaders were and are on trial for seditious conspiracy.

Reality vs. perception casts two different stories .. undoubtedly, Chansley was thee most recognized individual from January 6, and was portrayed by media and others as a focal point of the event (translated: a leader). We'll find out more detail now that new video footage, intentionally withheld by the government, is put into play. No need to convince anyone otherwise .. the defense will initiate next steps. Cheers!

 

[Dogmaphobe]

No wonder Chuck Schumer was hot

This has to be the first time in recorded history that anybody referred to the lying little weasel as hot.

 

[jotathought]

This has to be the first time in recorded history that anybody referred to the lying little weasel as hot.

This is not the first time in recorded history where a partial quote was taken out of context. Cheers!

 

[IM2]

There will be no new trial. No evidence was withheld and the fact he entered the congressional chambers made him part of obstructing a legal proceeding.

 

[Faun]

The guy who wore the indian headdress in the capitol will likely get a new trial......the prosecution withheld video evidence from the defense....

Albert Watkins, whose client Jacob Chansley pleaded guilty to felony charges in connection with the Capitol riot and was sentenced to 41 months in prison, said Department of Justice prosecutors were legally bound to turn over the footage. Clips shown on Carlson’s Fox News Channel program show Chansley walking freely and peaceably through the building, often accompanied by multiple police officers.



“We did not receive that video footage,” Watkins said. “We asked for it, and not just once or twice. Whether we asked for it or not is irrelevant because the government had an absolute, non-compromisible duty to disclose that video and they did not do so.”

“And all the while, they were actively representing to the court and the American people that Jake was a leader, leading the charge into the Capitol,” he said. “They did not disclose that footage because it ran contrary to their rote narrative.”
------
Court filings in Chansley’s case corroborate Watkins’ claim that he repeatedly asked for all videos of his client.

“Our position is that the government must identify any evidence it believes to capture [defendant], regardless of whether it intends to rely on the same in its case in chief,” one said.

‘It’s Appalling’: QAnon Shaman’s Lawyer Says DOJ Lied, Withheld Videos Aired By Carlson | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

Another look.....

This is why, perhaps, they refused to share the video with Chansley’s lawyer, which among other things violates his constitutional rights, big time. They are supposed to disclose all such materials in discovery, and failing to is prosecutorial misconduct.
----
Ed noted before we knew this tidbit:



If true, and I believe that it is extremely likely that it is, then the DOJ lawyers involved should be in some serious legal jeopardy. At least if there is a semblance of legal integrity left in the federal government.

I am no lawyer, but what is at issue is something called Brady Disclosure, named after a case where theSupreme Court ruled that the government provide any exculpatory evidence to defendants in criminal cases.

The ruling was necessary, obviously, because prosecutors can be very…enthusiastic…about winning their cases and didn’t always disclose facts that would undermine their cases, leading to people being convicted based upon flawed or incomplete evidence.

DOJ broke the law when prosecuting "Q-Anon Shaman"

hotair.com

What a pity for horned guy those videos are not exculpatory.