Prosecutors hid mountains of evidence in trial of Trump inauguration protesters

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Following the events of today the judge dismissed charges for two groups of defendants that amounted to seven people in total.

There is another case going on right now being overseen by another judge. Prosecution made their closing statements a few hours ago. The new evidence was not allowed in that case but you can bet that if the defendants are found guilty they will appeal.

On top of that there's still about another dozen or so cases to go. But it's expected that the government will only be going for misdemeanors in those cases.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

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

Minus the seven dropped just yesterday. Your math is off.

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.

Shhhh.. don't ruin some good propaganda to cover up yet more disgusting left-wing violence.

originally posted by: Grambler

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.

Much respect, that's how I feel.

a reply to: UKTruth

The only reason those cases haven't been dismissed is because they haven't gone to trial yet. The prosecution has already said they will not be using the videos as evidence in those cases which is the entire basis for the conspiracy to riot charge.

That leaves them with misdemeanor charges. None of which have stuck in any of the other cases.

The only reason the government isn't dropping the while thing altogether is because they have 18 months worth of money and resources in these cases. They're throwing a Hail Mary in the hopes they can have at least something to show for all the taxpayer dollars they've wasted.

Let's hope Federal prosecutors take the indictments against Hillary Comey and Lynch more seriously.

Doesnt anyone remember why those folks were there in the 1st place ? To disrupt an inauguration of a US President .
Guilt by association. All of em.
Some "weaseled" themselves out of it
Others are trying

The Freedom of Speech covers protests
The Freedom of Speech does not cover disrupting a public gathering
The latter goes to jail

Neither the Prosecutors nor the Defendants have any legal obligation to present their evidence until court day
The police , not the court system , arrested em

Some folks are guilty of disrupting ATS using illogical debate points.

a reply to: Gothmog

According to the new evidence the protesters were definitely planning on a peaceful protest.

And yes, the prosecution is legally bound to provide all evidence they have collected. Especially if that evidence can exonerate the accused.

I have to say it's really sad to see how members of this site care more about what a private corporation does with a single employee than they do about the US government violating the Sixth Amendment rights of 200 people in order to violate their First Amendment rights.

Much like alt-Right icon Richard Spencer admitted recently, ATS has shown they don't really care about the Constitution. They just pay it lip service as a way to further their political ideology.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Gothmog

According to the new evidence the protesters were definitely planning on a peaceful protest.

And yes, the prosecution is legally bound to provide all evidence they have collected. Especially if that evidence can exonerate the accused.

I have to say it's really sad to see how members of this site care more about what a private corporation does with a single employee than they do about the US government violating the Sixth Amendment rights of 200 people in order to violate their First Amendment rights.

Much like alt-Right icon Richard Spencer admitted recently, ATS has shown they don't really care about the Constitution. They just pay it lip service as a way to further their political ideology.

You really , really need to research the group that was sponsoring the "protest" ( they themselves called it disruption) and why....
If you go to a public event to disrupt , you are guilty . Doesnt matter what you do there. (best thing you could do was leave. Or move your peaceful protesting elsewhere)
As one that knows through experience to one that does not know

And yes, the prosecution is legally bound to provide all evidence they have collected. Especially if that evidence can exonerate the accused.

Again , they are not under any legal obligation . That would be the Defense's responsibility as both are able to access any "evidence" from the court system
Get it ? They both can access any evidence.
I have now fulfilled my obligation to ATS in Denying Ignorance

a reply to: Gothmog

There is literally video and audio of evidence of the organizers teaching de-escalation tactics and advising against violence. But feel free to continue to push that narrative. Just be aware that the evidence against it is so strong that the judge dismissed with prejudice the charges for it in multiple cases.

a reply to: Gothmog

You did a pretty bad job denying ignorance since everything you said was wrong.

Check out Brady v. Maryland. The Supreme Court ruled that the prosecution cannot withhold evidence from the defense that would be beneficial to the defendant. To do so violates due process.

That is exactly what the prosecution did in this case 70 times.

Wow! I'm surprised more people don't care about the US government violating the First and Sixth Amendment rights of 200 people over a period of 18 months.

I guess all the people that claim to hold the Constitution up as a sacred document are only paying it lip service. They only care about it when it's serving them. Good to know for future discussions.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

When did protesting become a felony?

a reply to: Thejoncrichton

No.

a reply to: rickymouse

You'd think there would have been video of that. I don't even remember any violent protests at his inauguration.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: rickymouse

You'd think there would have been video of that. I don't even remember any violent protests at his inauguration.

There were videos of that going on. Maybe you didn't see them. It was on the news and there are videos on a few cars burning and some windows broken on the net yet. www.usatoday.com...

There are still videos on the net but I have problems with linking videos to exact location most times, for some reason I am not aware of it just goes to the news station when trying to paste the link. You can google it and hit videos.

This crap burns me up. There is a special place in hell just for those that would ruin a person's life just to further their career. Just imagine how many more victims of the "justice" system there are that were not discovered. They should not just be fired, they should be locked up. If there is not a criminal law against doing this, there should be! Karma is a bitch and I hope every single one of them experiences just that!