Prosecutors hid mountains of evidence in trial of Trump inauguration protesters

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.

But that initial, single Brady violation is actually part of a much broader pattern of evidence-concealing, the lawyers now say.

Prosecutors hid mountains of evidence in trial of Trump inauguration protesters

In a follow up to an article I posted last week, it turns out that the prosecutor representing the US government, Jennifer Kerkhoff, in the J20 protester trials withheld mountains of evidence. Since dropping charges against the majority of the J20 protesters the prosecution's primary piece of evidence has been a video produced by Project Veritas made when they infiltrated the J20 organization meetings.

Up until last week Kerkhoff claimed that the prosecution had provided all of the recordings except for small edits that protect the identity of the videographer. It then came out last week that those edits contained more than what was initially led on. Including parts that could help prove the defendants innocence.

While this withholding of evidence did lead to a Brady violation it looked like the trial would continue. That is until today. It has now come out in court that the prosecution withheld 66 videos and three audio recordings. Among these previously released recordings include organizers discussing de-escalation tactics and avoiding violence unless attacked first. These clips pretty much contradict the prosecution's whole case that this protest was originally planned to be violent.

Due to this new evidence coming to light the judge has dropped all charges.

After 18 months of living in a nightmare the 200 protesters can now rest easily. That said, the attempt by the government to circumvent the rights of these 200 people in order to push their narrative must now be addressed. I think it should go without saying that Kerkhoff needs to be out of a job. I also think it only fair that the defendants be compensated for their trouble. But that really only sweeps the issue under the rug.

When Trump was first elected people were worried his government would violate the First Amendment to crush dissenters. And now it looks like those warnings are coming true. These protesters were only guilty of expressing an anti-Trump message and the government took a dump on the Constitution in an attempt to get a guilty verdict.

Last week when the first Brady violation was discovered there were still people that defended the government's actions. Hopefully this latest news is finally enough to convince people that these trials were nothing more than a witch hunt designed to stifle anti-government speech.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Have you not seen all the videos of anti-Trump people beating up pro-Trump people? Have you not seen the left wing foot soldiers of ANTIFA start violence in order to silence free speech?

So, are these protestors who incited terrorism by torching cars and starting fires and disrupting the peaceful existence of the people living in that area. I suppose they will let them get away with this. That would have never happened if Hillary had gotten in, they would have gone straight to jail and been tried and fined and some of the worst sent to jail.

It is almost like the prosecution may have purposely messed up.

originally posted by: Thejoncrichton
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Have you not seen all the videos of anti-Trump people beating up pro-Trump people? Have you not seen the left wing foot soldiers of ANTIFA start violence in order to silence free speech?

Which has what to do with this specific case, and the violations of the prosecution within?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Actually, they only dropped seven cases due to the prosecution's handling of evidence. There are 52 defendants still facing charges.

a reply to: rickymouse

Its unfortunate but when the person investigating is intentionally negligent and misleading that's what happens. Blame the perpetrators and this bitch.

originally posted by: Thejoncrichton
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Have you not seen all the videos of anti-Trump people beating up pro-Trump people? Have you not seen the left wing foot soldiers of ANTIFA start violence in order to silence free speech?

So your argument is that all anti-trump protesters are therefore guilty by association to these select anecdotes that you didn't even link or source to?

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Actually, they only dropped seven cases due to the prosecution's handling of evidence. There are 52 defendants still facing charges.

Your math is off:

For more than a year, the government has relied on undercover recordings made by James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas team to support its case against participants in the march. After initially charging more than 200 people who were rounded up in a mass arrest that day with felonies, and seeing the first six people tried acquitted on all counts in December, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Kerkhoff dropped cases against all but 59 of the accused.

They dropped 6 cases in December and now recently dropped another 135+ leaving just 59 people on trial. Also, while those 59 are still on trial, they'll likely be facing a mistrial thanks to the prosecution dropping the ball and hiding so much evidence (including evidence that shows they are likely not guilty).

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I'm looking forward to learning more and more about this as information gets released.

One thing is for sure, the lead prosecutor or any prosecutor that was part of the decision to withhold evidence and violate Constitutional rights should be fired. In fact they should be disbarred -- this is such a serious violation if it's all true as reported.

As far as making assumptions as to this coming from the White House or being in any way connected to the President's people -- there is no proof of it and we should not jump to conclusions. It could be an act of a supporter or simply an act of an unscrupulous attorney, overzealous in her work.

If this were in any way connected to the White House, or the administration was asking for it, it would be beyond concerning -- this would be simple Gestapo tactics; and I cannot believe anyone would have the audacity to be that flippant such a short time after taking office.

So, until there is evidence otherwise, I'm gonna go with -- dirty lawyers being dirty lawyers, regardless of who they work for.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

You're right. However, it has been made clear that the videos will not be used in evidence for any trials going forward. It's also very likely the government will only be going for misdemeanor charges in all future trials.

a reply to: Thejoncrichton

So because there are violent elements on the Left it justifies rounding up anyone that has a negative opinion of this administration and then violating their Sixth Amendment rights?

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I think that the attacks from some people (perhaps some that were charged) were disgusting and should have been prosecuted.

However, my feelings on the defendants are irrelevant.

Unethical behavior on the part of investigators or prosecutors should never be allowed, and they should be held to account for these abuses if they did in fact occur.

a reply to: rickymouse

Prosecution didn't have a case in the first place. Hell, most of the violence and destruction occurred when these people were already in the kettle.

Prosecution didn't need to sink their case. They did however need all the help they could get to get a guilty verdict.

a reply to: Grambler

They did occur. Prosecution has admitted to it but couldn't explain why the evidence had been withheld through multiple trials and being asked by a judge if any other evidence existed.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Thejoncrichton
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Have you not seen all the videos of anti-Trump people beating up pro-Trump people? Have you not seen the left wing foot soldiers of ANTIFA start violence in order to silence free speech?

So your argument is that all anti-trump protesters are therefore guilty by association to these select anecdotes that you didn't even link or source to?

No, I'm saying I've seen the videos of violent leftists at this "protest". Why do left wingers think they have a pass for violence? They just figure its like everything else and the media will get their backs?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

LM was actually right. There are still 52 defendants awaiting trial but word is that the government will no longer be pursuing felony conspiracy to riot charges.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Grambler

They did occur. Prosecution has admitted to it but couldn't explain why the evidence had been withheld through multiple trials and being asked by a judge if any other evidence existed.

I am sick and tired of crap like this.

This is off topic sort of, but it reminds me of this.

There is audio of negotiators talking with David Koresh from waco about the initial siege.

Koresh is telling this negotiator that the front door of his compound will show many bullet holes going IN to the door, which is a crime (as police can not shoot through a closed door, in this example there were kids in the house)

There is video of after the end of the seige, that door being collected in to evidence.

And guess what happened? Mysteriously, that door, along with a lot of other evidence, came up missing.

That was my first wake up call to this type of possible corruption.

So again, if this happened, i hope the defendants use it to get off, and the prosecutors or investigators or whoever did this get charged with crimes.

And I am saying that as a trump supporter who probably doesnt like most of these defendants.

originally posted by: Thejoncrichton

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Thejoncrichton
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Have you not seen all the videos of anti-Trump people beating up pro-Trump people? Have you not seen the left wing foot soldiers of ANTIFA start violence in order to silence free speech?

So your argument is that all anti-trump protesters are therefore guilty by association to these select anecdotes that you didn't even link or source to?

No, I'm saying I've seen the videos of violent leftists at this "protest". Why do left wingers think they have a pass for violence? They just figure its like everything else and the media will get their backs?

Were those videos of these defendants or other, unrelated leftists?

Because there’s not one damn person here claiming people shouldn’t be held accountable for their violence, but this thread is about the corrupt prosecution of people who happened to be at a protest at which violence happened.
Shall we hold everyone at “unite the right” responsible for one lunatic in a Challengers actions?

Stop trying to chisel some partisan bull# out of a case of prosecutorial misconduct.

originally posted by: Thejoncrichton

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Thejoncrichton
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Have you not seen all the videos of anti-Trump people beating up pro-Trump people? Have you not seen the left wing foot soldiers of ANTIFA start violence in order to silence free speech?

So your argument is that all anti-trump protesters are therefore guilty by association to these select anecdotes that you didn't even link or source to?

No, I'm saying I've seen the videos of violent leftists at this "protest". Why do left wingers think they have a pass for violence? They just figure its like everything else and the media will get their backs?

Who said they get a pass? Unless those people you are referring to are the ones on trial here then you are just making a weak whataboutism fallacy.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Krazysh0t

LM was actually right. There are still 52 defendants awaiting trial but word is that the government will no longer be pursuing felony conspiracy to riot charges.

The source says 59 though... I'm not following where this 52 number is coming from.