Judge throws out riot charges against Trump’s Inauguration Day protestors

A judge has dismissed charges of inciting a riot against all six people currently facing trial for their association or participation in violent protests on President Donald Trump’s Inauguration Day.

Approximately 230 people were arrested in Washington, D.C. during and after the inauguration ceremony and later charged with felony rioting. But D.C. Superior Court Judge Lynn Leibovitz dismissed those charges Wednesday morning for the first group of six people, including a photojournalist.

Source

This is a story that has been developing since the inauguration. A large group of people, including journalists, were arrested during the protests against Trump. All of them were charged with felony rioting as well destruction of property. Some of the accused were looking at 75 years in prison because they protested the President.

Over the past few weeks the first six of the accused have had their day in court. Among those called to testify against them were a member of Project Veritas and a cop that mocked them on social media. Ultimately the prosecution's case boiled down to that these people were there so they're guilty.

Well about an hour ago the judge delivered his verdict. In a move that upholds the sanctity of the First Amendment the judge has found these first six defendants not guilty on the count of felony rioting. While there are still five charges left for these six and another 200+ defendants to go, this certainly sets a good precedent for the way the rest of these cases should go.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Agreed, felony charges should not be leveled on anyone for just being in a situation. Especially one as chaotic as that was. Now if there is any evidence that some of that 200+ took part in any of the violence or destruction of property then level them. Also if they were encouraging that type of behavior they are also guilty of inciting, and should be charged accordingly.

Are you effing serious ?

There is no first amendment protection for rioting.

None for throwing snip.

None for everything Trump haters think PEACEABLE ASSEMBLY means.

It's not illegal when you do it in the name of a just cause.....

Just cause I can..

a reply to: neo96

And there's no proof that any of these people were doing anything destructive. They were simply protesting. A journalist was charged with inciting a riot for simply livestreaming the event.

Should they go to jail for simply being at the wrong spot at the wrong time? Should they go to jail for 75 years because some lit a trash can on fire? Hell, should whoever actually set the fire go to jail for 75 years?

This whole case was ridiculous. Were laws broken? Yes. And if it can be proven that any of these 200+ people broke the law then they should be punished. But that doesn't justify threatening hundreds of people with decades of prison for being present. And it doesn't justify the measures the feds took to try to prove their case only to turn up nothing.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Some of the accused were looking at 75 years.

Sounds reasonable, and not at all like an overkill.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Funny how that works.

Some months ago Trump was accused of 'incitement'.

He was guilty.

Trump haters are always 'innocent' of the CRIMES they commit.

a reply to: Bluntone22

I don't think anyone is saying committing illegal acts are ok...but prosecuting someone without any evidence other than them being present while crimes were committed is an awful precedent to set. If any of these people can be identified in commission of said crimes including encouraging the commission of those crimes ,which would be incitement, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

a reply to: neo96

It was wrong then and wrong now...if we don't stand against these things regardless of the side effected we are doomed to see this continue and probably grow to be the norm. I do not want to see that day come. Left and Right are illusions that distract us from our own common sense. Its not like these things are some kind of insane enigmatic riddles, they're pretty cut and dry. If you commit a crime and there is evidence of it then you face the consequences...if there is no evidence then innocent until proven guilty is the law of the land...regardless of how disgusting we feel they acted.

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: Bluntone22

I don't think anyone is saying committing illegal acts are ok...but prosecuting someone without any evidence other than them being present while crimes were committed is an awful precedent to set. If any of these people can be identified in commission of said crimes including encouraging the commission of those crimes ,which would be incitement, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

If they are dressed all in black with their faces covered, and that GROUP known for being violent and destructive starts their same ole same ole, then BUST their ass!
I despise Antifa cowards and their pathetic mob tactics. Why do they cover their faces? Because they KNOW they will be committing crimes!

a reply to: neo96

That response may have actually meant something if I ever claimed that Trump was guilty of anything. I may not like the man but I've seen no proof of criminality.

That out of the way, do you agree that covering a protest makes a person guilty of inciting a riot? Do you think simply going to a protest makes a person guilty of destruction of property? Do you think visiting an anti-Trump site warrants the feds demanding your personal information?

a reply to: seeker1963

Is there a dress code enforced by law? If there isn't then no they shouldn't be prosecuted for anything. I will say most states have laws against wearing masks in public to prevent anonymity in commission of crimes so if that is the case then yes they deserve the punishment for their actions. I'm just not for leveling charges on people without real evidence of the commission of said crime. It sets an awful precedent that will flip from side to side and be used as a weapon.

a reply to: RickyD


These are the dirtbag, soy boy idiots I am talking about. Many more videos of them on YouTube you can watch! I'll be damned if I defend a God damned one of em!

a reply to: seeker1963

And it can be shown that any of the 200+ advised are guilty of that crime they should be found guilty. But just being present didn't mean a person is guilty and holding 75 years over the heads of some of these purple is outright excessive regardless of guilt or not. That's more than most murderers and rapists face.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I'm with you on this, thanks for posting the story.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I fully agree that each person should be tried separately--mass punishment is never a good thing.

That said, from you Vice link:

The riots that roiled Washington on Jan. 20 threatened to eclipse the main event: Trump being sworn in as the 45th president of the United States. “Black-bloc” anarchists and anti-fascist protesters hurled firecrackers at police and threw rocks through storefront windows, at one point even torching a limousine.

So, obviously, this was more than just "because they protested the President," as you claim.

BUT, that doesn't mean that everyone there was part of the rioting, and therefore, the government should be forced to prove, for each individual, exactly what act they committed and weigh that against the laws. Obviously, there are some very guilty people, and they should be convicted, but again, en masse punishment is not okay to pursue, IMO.

Hopefully the innocent people despise those putting them in this predicament.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

75 years is so far beyond overkill that I can totally understand why people might decide they want to go beyond rioting and just have a full out revolt tomorrow.

a reply to: RickyD

Do you remember the guy that got a tear gas canister to the nuts?

He had his face covered and a backpack full of goodies to chuck at the cops.

No, you can't prosecute someone without proof.
No, most of the crowd are not innocent bystanders.

Facial recognition software would work pretty good.

What I'm most disturbed by is that people think Trump or Hillary or whatever is the problem. I see Trump as mostly irrelevant and inconsequential.

When it's absolutely clear to me that one of our biggest problems is our insane psychopathic legal system. Not to mention the fact that the people who wrote most of the laws believe they are above the law, they fear the citizenry in general, and they care nothing about human life, except of course, their own.

I have a million gripes about all of this stuff, I have don't have time for this today.
Anyways...

a reply to: SlapMonkey

While actual crimes were committed the reaction to these crimes are pretty telling. Mass arrests, excessive charges, and the feds demanding the info on thousands of the US citizens simply for visiting a website (info I don't think even got used in this case) send a pretty clear message.