Proud Boys seditious conspiracy trial enters 32nd day

From emptywheel, 4/2: Thanks to the generosity of emptywheel readers we have funded Brandi’s coverage for the rest of the trial. If you’d like to show your further appreciation for Brandi’s great work, here’s her PayPal tip jar.

Hello, I’m Brandi Buchman and I am a reporter covering the aftermath of the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. I have covered the events of Jan. 6 since their inception and I have covered the Proud Boys seditious conspiracy trial since its start as well as the first Oath Keepers seditious conspiracy trial gavel-to-gavel.

It is the 32nd day (and eighth week) of the Proud Boys seditious conspiracy trial involving ringleader Henry “Enrique” Tarrio and his cohorts Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl, and Dominic Pezzola. After a break for jurors on Monday—a lengthy motion hearing was held outside of their presence—they will return on Tuesday to hear more evidence from the prosecution as the historic trial trudges toward its expected end this April.

Monday’s motion hearing focused exclusively on the admissibility of certain evidence presented under a key legal argument advanced by the prosecution known as the “tools” theory. In short, prosecutors argue that roughly two dozen associates and/or members of the Proud Boys were utilized as blunt “tools” by the defendants on Jan. 6 to pull off the plot to forcibly stop the certification of the 2020 election.

It was Tarrio and his fellow chapter leaders, the Justice Department contends, who handpicked the “tools” of the conspiracy, and of those individuals identified, most were not charged alongside Tarrio, Nordean, Biggs, Rehl, or Pezzola. The defense has balked over whether some of the tools were truly members of Proud Boys and has suggested this “catch-all” approach by the prosecution is improper.

Presiding U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly has for weeks accepted the government’s “tools” theory as viable, so the fight during Monday’s motion hearing largely revolved around the admissibility of specific video footage featuring roughly two-dozen so-called “tools” of the conspiracy.

Here’s a bit of background for the “tools” listed by prosecutors:

William Pepe, a former Proud Boy of New York, was seen near Pezzola in footage from Jan. 6 and he was originally charged in the same indictment. Pepe was also a member of Boots on the Ground, a Proud Boys chat set up specifically for Jan. 6, 2021. He was not, however, a member of the Ministry of Self-Defense chat where operations for the Capitol assault were allegedly hashed out among a core group of Proud Boy leaders including the defendants.

Barton Shively, a former aspiring Proud Boy of Pennsylvania—allegedly—is seen on footage from Jan. 6 where he’s near the Washington Monument on the morning of the 6th. This was a designated meet-up location for the defendants, prosecutors argue. Shivley has already pleaded guilty to assaulting police.

Christopher Worrell, a Proud Boy of Florida who used a chemical spray on officers and was a member of Boots on the Ground chat, is seen in video clips from Jan. 6 where he’s very close to fellow Proud Boys who breached barriers.

Dan “Milkshake” Scott, a Proud Boy of Florida, breached police lines after marching with Proud Boys. Defense attorneys on Monday vehemently denied Scott’s membership with the organization.

Barry Ramey, an alleged Proud Boy of Florida, was in Scott’s proximity on Jan. 6 as they marched on the Capitol. Ramey has been charged with assaulting police with chemical spray and defense attorneys for Tarrio have argued he is not an official member of the extremist group.

Marc Bru, a Proud Boy from Washington state, is seen on video footage leading a group of people toward the Capitol, according to prosecutors.

Trevor McDonald, who entered the Capitol with defendant Joseph Biggs, has been brought forward as a tool of the conspiracy by prosecutors but evidence of his direct connection to the Proud Boys struck Judge Kelly as thin. McDonald came to Washington on Jan. 6 with his father, Shannon Rusch. In video clips, McDonald is seen near Biggs, Nordean, and Rehl as well as other Proud Boys like Gilbert Fonticoba, Arthur Jackman, and Paul Rae.

Ronald Loehrke, an alleged Proud Boy of Washington state, received a text from defendant Ethan Nordean leading up to the Capitol attack where Nordean suggested bringing him to the front lines. Loehrke promised in return that he would bring “bad motherfuckers” to the Capitol.

James Haffner of Washington state appears in Jan. 6 footage wielding chemical irritants, and prosecutors say evidence shows Haffner standing close to Biggs before helping tear apart barricades at the Capitol.

Nicholas Ochs, a Proud Boy chapter leader from Hawaii and onetime elder of the extremist group, made it into the Capitol on Jan. 6 and recorded another Proud Boy, Nicholas DeCarlo, writing “Murder the Media” onto a door. Once inside, prosecutors say Ochs interacted with Nordean.

Gilbert Fonticoba, a member and alleged “captain” of the Proud Boys Ministry of Self Defense group, Fonticoba participated in the Proud Boys Boots on the Ground chat where operations for Jan. 6 were siloed. Prosecutors say Tarrio invited Fonticoba into the Ministry group chat but defense attorneys have denied this connection. Other evidence shows Fonticoba reported his location back to Proud Boy Aaron Wolkind during some of the thickest rioting and after Wolkind told Proud Boys he was “storming the Capitol” several times.

Paul Rae made it inside of the Capitol on Jan. 6 and prosecutors argue they heard Rae on footage telling members to “find” former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

Arthur Jackman met up with Proud Boys at the Washington Monument on the morning of Jan. 6 and is an alleged member of the group.

Eddie George Jr. of Florida, a member of the Ministry of Self-Defense chat, appeared in a selfie with Biggs and Nordean on Jan. 6 and faces multiple charges including obstruction, disorderly conduct, and civil disorder.

Nate and Kevin Tuck, are a father-son duo from Florida. Kevin Tuck was a police officer and Nate Tuck was a former police officer who resigned in 2020. Kevin Tuck resigned after his arrest in July 2021.

Alan AJ Fisher III was a member of both the Ministry of Self Defense and Boots on the Ground chat who joined Nordean and Joseph Biggs at an AirBnB in D.C. on the eve of the insurrection. Footage shows Fisher at the lower west terrace tunnel archway of the Capitol on Jan. 6, close to where some of the worst violence of the day occurred.

Brian Boele ends up at the lower west terrace tunnel archway and may have been a direct part of the violent push inside the tunnel.

Dion Rajewski ends up at the lower west terrace tunnel archway with Fisher III and Zach Johnson and others.

Zach Johnson, a member of Boots on the Ground chat appeared in a selfie with defendant Biggs, at the lower west tunnel archway. He also appears in video footage from the west plaza where Biggs, Nordean, and others are spotted near him. Also appearing in the video from this time and place are Rae, Boele, Fonticoba, and Fisher.

James Brett IV was at the lower west tunnel archway and was later seen inside of the Capitol.

Other individuals like Robert Gieswein and William Chrestman were initially featured on the government’s list of “tools” of the conspiracy. But on Monday, neither Gieswein nor Chrestman made the cut.

Though he was short on details on Tuesday morning once court was underway, Judge Kelly said he would exclude evidence from Barry Ramey and Barton Shivley.

“The constellation of information we knew about these two people didn’t get over the hump as far as evidence being sufficiently relevant,” Kelly said.

Video evidence identifying Dion Rajewski, Brian Boele, and James Brett will be excluded in part for now but videos showing AJ Fischer and Zach Johnson in this group can be included. Kelly said footage involving AJ Fisher and Zach Johnson can come in because they are seen marching with defendants on the national mall.

To save the jury time this morning, Judge Kelly said he would explain his decisions at length about the “tools” of the conspiracy in writing later.

87 replies
  1. harpie says:
    9:17 AM · Mar 7, 2023

    Roger Roots for Dominic Pezzola, now calls for a motion for mistrial in light of the Jan. 6 video footage that Tucker Carlson aired on his program last night.

    Prosecutors wanted Roots to specifically ID what videos released by Tucker he thinks the govt is withholding. Judge Kelly knows the jury is waiting and doesn’t wish to spend more time on this request this a.m.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if this is one of the reasons that CARLSON propagated this bs yesterday.

  2. harpie says:

    Marcy [at “Welcome to Brandi” post]: (the lawyer Joe Biggs shares with Alex Jones, Norm Pattis, claims he wants to call Donald Trump to testify)

    Bmaz comments that Kelly would have to be insane.

    This is from Kyle Cheney, yesterday:
    12:05 PM · Mar 6, 2023

    Biggs attorney Norm PATTIS says you could reasonably argue that many people in the Jan. 6 crowd are “tools” of someone else, “including the 45th president of the United States.”

  3. Rugger_9 says:

    Thanks for the background Ms. Buchman, and for the work done on documenting the various trials of J6 defendants. I’m sure you have the patience of Job to listen to all of it and not barf.

    I do have a question for the board regarding Speaker McCarthy’s ‘release’ to Tucker Carlson of (allegedly) vetted 40k+ hours of footage. We know from the Speaker’s ‘clarification’ that Carlson was only interested in certain parts of the tape (which would mean it will be edited) and that one of the PB lawyers (IIRC Pattis) is already pushing for a mistrial based on what he’s claiming the government is hiding. I would expect further motions based upon selected excerpts with the usual RWNM attention to slanting the story.

    Essentially, the question is this: would it be wiser for the judge to subpoena the footage sent by McCarthy for the court’s review and evidentiary hearing or to prohibit using it as hearsay because of what McCarthy and Carlson will do to the record by their editing? While the former choice would cause some delays, it would at least remove any legitimate claim of bias. The latter choice means that the jury sees what the government presents as evidence already vetted through the pretrial motions, meaning the defense had a chance to challenge it and will do so again in court. As noted, we will see at least two weeks of defense argument where I would be surprised if they don’t try to bring in some of the Tucker Tapes.

    • Rugger_9 says:

      The first set was aired last night and it was bad enough that Chuck Schumer ripped it on the Senate floor. So, perhaps this is a better procedural question. Does the defense have to show cause or fight to include these edited videos as evidence? I would think they would since the preliminary hearings would have sorted out what the government could present as evidence.

    • chum'sfriend says:

      I was rather unimpressed with the tape footage that Tucker Carlson released. Maybe it was new to his audience, but it was really nothing that we hadn’t seen before.

      • Rwood0808 says:

        Judging from the total lack of anything to do with the Dominion suit or Tucker’s comments on the Fox News website I would say that it’s all they have seen. Tucker is doubling down on his claims and doing so with the confidence of a man who knows he’s operating an echo chamber.

        I asked one of my neighbors, he of the MAGA tribe, what he thought of the Dominion lawsuit against Fox and he had no idea what I was talking about. There are millions more of him.

        The fun part is imagining the stress levels of the OAN and Newsmax leadership. They’d love to aid in the take-down of Fox, but can’t do it without exposing their own brand of BS and incriminating themselves.

        The snake is eating itself.

    • harpie says:

      Igor BOBIC:
      6:52 PM · Mar 7, 2023

      Incredible gaggle with McCarthy just now in which he said he doesn’t regret giving Tucker Carlson Capitol security footage, citing transparency. He refused to answer questions about Carlson downplaying the riot, claiming he didn’t see his program.
      […] [THREAD]
      McCarthy: “I don’t know what Tucker Carlson said.”
      Reporter: He said it was mostly peaceful chaos.
      McCarthy: “Well, that’s what you said. I don’t know what Tucker Carlson said.”


      Igor BOBIC documented the insurrection, live:

  4. Fiendish Thingy says:

    Woo hoo! Welcome to emptywheel Brandi! And thanks to Marcy for making the space for your invaluable reporting!

  5. Baltimark says:

    Normally and rightfully, repetitive comments are bad form here at EW.

    But there are exceptions, of which this is one, and I just want to add my voice to the chorus of those who have been extremely impressed with your work to date and are pleased to see you in this new venue prior to Whatever Comes Next.

    Thoughts too for your family and your father.

    Finally, I for one hope the morning establishing shot photos will continue as well. They’ve been a deft means of gaining some visibility and reinforcing your presence there and mostly they’ve been a cheery appetizer for each day’s quite serious main course.

    • dk_20SEP2017_1340hET says:

      Hear, hear!

      [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Because we can’t support super short usernames, yours will be temporarily changed to reflect the date of your first known comment until you’ve selected a new username. Thanks. /~Rayne]

  6. harpie says:
    11:34 AM · Mar 7, 2023

    [about VIDEO presentation] At 12:23 on 1/6, moments after Trump had mentioned marching to the Capitol in his speech, an unidentified person says “they said he’s gonna march and they’re gonna wanna keep him close to the beast”

    he = trump, the beast = prez limo
    Donohoe and Rehl are talking privately in pic

    WHO is “they”?

    12:16 PM [First mention of the word “walk” by TRUMP]

    TRUMP: Now, it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you, we’re going to walk down, we’re going to walk down.

  7. harpie says:
    12:06 PM · Mar 7, 2023

    And again, it should be highlighted that PB chapter leader Ethan Nordean said they needed to wait for Alex Jones to “link up” with them on 1/6 and [link to Marcy]

    11:05 AM · Mar 7, 2023

    Caroline Wren was giving Ali Alexander (who was with Jones and Shroyer) 5-minute updates on Trump’s plans.

    So this is one degree of separation from updates on Trump.

    12:19 PM ALEXANDER [who is with JONES] to WREN [text]:
    [Asks “– if POTUS is walking and for her to give you an update every 5 minutes”] [J6CTr]

  8. David F. Snyder says:

    Thank you, Brandi, for providing a thorough context and for the up-to-the minute update on trial proceedings. Thank you for being there “gavel to gavel” bearing witness to the dynamics of the trial.

    And best wishes for you and your family.

  9. Savage Librarian says:

    Good to see you here, Brandi. Thanks for all your hard work and for helping us understand the who, what, why, when and how. Much appreciated.

  10. subtropolis says:

    It’s great to see your coverage continuing here, Brandi. And thanks, Marcy, for making the offer!

  11. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Why is it so hard for the MSM to describe Tucker Carlson’s mockumentary of the Jan. 6th attack on the Capitol as “edited?” He has not released the tapes to which McCarthy gave his team: he’s published a carefully edited excerpt, a lying flashback.

    • PJB2point0 says:

      At first, I was astonished (I know, I know..) FOX would permit Carlson to do this after the Dominion voting revelations. But then it hit me, Carlson might already be bigger than FOX. If they try to sit on him, he could bolt and take a large share of his audience with him to some further right infotainment outlet. And since we know that the prime directive there isn’t journalism but maintaining market share, it makes all the sense in the world for FOX not to expose itself as powerless to stop him.

      • Hychka says:

        Throw them both off the air!
        Canada doesn’t put up with FOX bs, so why should we?

        • Rayne says:

          Canada also doesn’t have to comply with the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.

          How do you think Carlson and Fox News can be legally thrown off the air?

            • Rayne says:

              There’s only a couple ways a network and/or personality can be “thrown off” a cable network.

              By “thrown off” one might mean the network or personality has been proven to be a foreign asset and must label their work as such, ex. RT America (Russia Today).

              Or bankrupted by lawsuits, but Dominion won’t be able to claim a large enough financial settlement to do that.

              That’s about it. I don’t know where people come up with the idea we can simply ignore the Constitution.

          • BROUX says:

            Who do you think you are? People in Canada can perfectly express their views without a US Constitution, thank you very much.

            • bmaz says:

              We think we live in the US, not Canada. And the differences between the two come into focus occasionally, and that is fine. Healthy even.

            • Rayne says:

              Don’t be obtuse. The point was the U.S. has a specific Constitution amendment barring what a Canadian commenter suggests the U.S. should do.

              And good luck with that free speech stuff in Canada. Shall we ask First Nations people how they fare with that?

        • canajan,eh? says:

          Fox News is not banned in Canada.
          Our constitution has a useless Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
          Section 2 says we have “(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication”
          Section 33 says “Parliament or the legislature of a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or of the legislature, as the case may be, that the Act or a provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in section 2”

        • Fiendish Thingy says:

          Um, FOX news is alive and, well, still in Canada.

          You may be thinking of Murdoch’s other channel, Sky News, which was rejected by Canada’s cable carriers a few years ago.

      • Hychka says:

        It would be so nice to able to read whatever responses were made to my comment. Can’t you all clean up this format to something ledgible. And, fyi, bzmt, laws can be written and vile conduct can be declared illegal.

        • bmaz says:

          Couple of things:

          The “responses made to your comment” are perfectly readable. Our “format” is completely “legible”, I have no idea what you are grousing about. I am bmaz not “bzmt”, and, no, laws against whatever you personally consider “vile conduct” cannot necessarily be always easily written so that your pet peeves are “declared illegal”.

        • P J Evans says:

          Are you reading on mobile?
          Otherwise, you should be able to read everything here. You can even make the text bigger.

        • Sloth Sloman says:

          Laws can be written, sure. But unless you also repeal the 1st Amendment, they will all be unconstitutional as they pertain to this matter. If that’s the route you want to take, then vote Republican.

      • gertibird says:

        Yes, Carlson is the only one Murdoch has not thrown under the bus. Interestingly it was him only who McCarthy gave the Jan6 tapes.

        Just recently from the Hill: “Rupert Murdoch, owner and co-chairman of Fox Corp., worried to Fox News Media CEO Suzanne Scott that top hosts Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham “went too far” in endorsing former President Trump’s false claims about the 2020 election, new court filings show.” in email’s released by Dominion.

        From NPR: “Asked by a Dominion attorney whether “Fox endorsed at times this false notion of a stolen election,” Murdoch demurred, saying, “Not Fox, no. Not Fox. But maybe Lou Dobbs, maybe Maria [Bartiromo] as commentators.””

        From the NYT: “In the cross hairs now is Ms. Scott, who joined the network at its inception in 1996 as a programming assistant and worked her way up to become chief executive in 2018. Media analysts have speculated that she may take the fall; Mr. Murdoch testified in a deposition that executives who knowingly allowed lies to be broadcast “should be reprimanded, maybe got rid of.” But Fox later put out word that she was not in danger.”

        • Ginevra diBenci says:

          I haven’t finished reading the new release yet, but so far I get the impression that Rupert (especially), Keith and Lachlan Murdoch all are doing everything possible to keep Tucker out of the bus’s path. I’m most interested in flares sent up prior to Mike Lindell’s appearance on January 26, 2021 on Carlson’s show, during which Lindell apparently ranted about Dominion without pushback from the supposedly most careful and critical primetime host.

          It’s a valid question, gertibird. Does Tucker Carlson really call the shots?

  12. Doug_Fir says:

    Really appreciate Brandi’s reporting, and Emptywheel for supporting it. Very well done all ’round!

  13. harpie says:

    9:35 AM · Mar 8, 2023

    Norm Pattis, for Joseph Biggs, says he’s concerned about Tucker Carlson’s broadcast re: J6 videos. Pattis notably calls it Carlson’s “understanding” of the Q-Anon Shaman aka Jacob Chansley (aka Angeli) […]

    Pattis says re Tucker Carlson and J6 footage: “I’m worried a jury will hear this and take it out on our clients….The events are becoming politicized… I’m concerned the smallest whiff of this is going to hurt fair trial rights…”

    PATTIS is OUTRAGED by what CARLSON said.

  14. earlofhuntingdon says:

    This will give Ron DeSantis and his pet legislature paroxysms of fear, eliciting legislation to criminalize Japanese mice – and any other organism made with the same, two-fathers, technology – and to criminalize teaching about it. Pity that their energy and focus are so harmful to more than mice – who also had no voice in the manner through which they came into being.

    • harpie says:
      9:46 AM · Mar 9, 2023

      While we wait – let’s start unpacking some of what happened late yesterday.
      When FBI Special Agent Nicole Miller came under cross by atty Nick Smith (for Ethan Nordean), Smith raised questions about a spreadsheet cataloging several msgs sent in the FBI’s msging system, Lync.

      The messages were between Miller and another agent identified as T. Wang in the docs. Smith contends that when he began reviewing the spreadsheet, he uncovered hidden rows containing msgs between the agents and that those msgs suggest there’s been a violation of atty-client priv

      Smith’s motion below.
      Per Smith, there’s an Oct. 21 ’21 msg between Wang/Miller where Wang seems to indicate that he’s reviewed or overheard discussion between defendant Proud Boy Zachary Rehl and his then-attorney, Jonathan Moseley (since suspended) […]

      I’m looking forward to Brandi’s promised write up here on Friday.

      • harpie says:

        Brandi’s coverage of SMITH [for NORDEAN] cross of FBI agent Miller on 3/8/23 begins here:
        4:11 PM · Mar 8, 2023

        Nick Smith for Ethan Nordean now begins cross of Agent Miller.
        He elicits: she’s a case agenT along with 6 other agents, investigating this matter and she’s been here from the beginning.
        Smith: Along w/Agent Hanak?
        Yes [THREAD]

        • harpie says:

          The NEXT DAY [3/9/23]:

          11:21 AM · Mar 9, 2023

          Smith begins with Miller: We were discussing the spreadsheet yesterday and what you produced to govt initially had about 26 rows of Lync stmts you may have sent related to this case?
          Objection by DOJ.
          Bal: this is not the spreadsheet i was discussing w/Miller

          Smith reads from transcript from yesterday:
          Smith: so well 1st ms miler, are there hidden rows in this spreadsheet?
          M: not that I’m aware of
          you created this right?
          there shouldn’t be hidden rows in the memo
          S: so when i click clear, do you see there are about 8k rows here?

          so it appears someone hid rows, right?
          m: i haven’t seen it like this before

          Smith: So my question, following on what Balantine just asked, whether witness filtered initial dump of Lnc msgs originally delivered to her from FBI HQ. She had indicated she had filtered but when

          Smith cont.: …I showed you spreadsheet yesterday and click unfilter, you testified you had not seen a spreadsheet like that before. [THREAD]

      • harpie says:

        This is the beginning of Roger Parloff’s coverage of the same:
        4:05 PM · Mar 8, 2023

        Now we’re looking at this column of police cars going down the street again.
        AUSA Kenerson is done.

        Smith (Nordean) begins cross of Agent Miller.
        Smith establishing that she’s a case agent. She says there are 6 case agents. She’s a lead case agent along with Nick Hanak. /143 [THREAD] […]

        [Here, I think he means S for SMITH instead of N[ordean >]
        N: have you ever gained access to atty client protected comms?

        Nordean is trying to introduce “impeachment” evidence.
        Permission to publish?
        Permission denied.
        N: are there hidden rows?
        not that I’m aware of. /146

    • harpie says:

      On 12/18/21, Marcy wrote:


      […] The surprising appearance, however, is from Jonathon Moseley. Moseley currently represents Kelly Meggs — one of the Oath Keepers with ties to Roger Stone — and until Tuesday, [12/15/21] also represented Zach Rehl, one of the Proud Boys accused of conspiring with Stone associate Joe Biggs to mastermind an attack that encircled the Capitol and involved Stone associate Alex Jones, using the excuse of permits obtained using covers by Alexander, luring unwitting Trump fans to the East doors just before they opened from inside.

      Moseley’s legal promiscuity among these coup plotters is itself notable.

      Crazier still is his claim to be representing Alexander just over two months after [10/8/21] — back when he was ostensibly representing Rehl — filing a motion suggesting that Alexander (whom he repeatedly called “Ari”), not Rehl, should be the one held accountable for any crimes arising from the riot. […]

    • harpie says:

      [continuing to read through]… Judge to REHL attorney:

      Kelly tells Hernandez she’s offering an opinion about the basis of classification that she doesn’t have authority to offer.
      Hernandez says these are text msgs and if govt says they’re classified, govt should have to mark it.
      (I promise I’m not picking on atty, but that’s wrong)

    • harpie says:

      Then, there’s Roger Roots for PEZZOLA:
      [I’m really appreciating Brandi’s observations, ie: “and I’m paraphrasing lightly” LOL!]

      Roger Roots for Pezzola: Your honor we have caught the FBI —
      Judge Kelly stops him. Asks him what his question is WITHIN THE SCOPE of the issues here.

      Roots starts up again with same line of discussion about nefarious FBI activities
      Kelly stops him again and asks him, as he holds his face in his own hands, what this is getting to

      Roots: The American people need to know the full extent of this. These are serious federal crimes..

      Roots starts talking about whether recess of congress was necessary on 1/6 and Judge Kelly says: get to your point right now.

      This witness [FBI Agent Miller] needs to be informed that she needs an atty, I don’t believe she can be examined at all, Roots says and accuses agent of breaking law

      Judge Kelly tells Roots, after Roots accuses FBI Agent Miller of committing crimes, and I’m paraphrasing lightly, he’s off topic

      AUSA Kenerson looks exhausted as Carmen Hernandez approaches and begins reading bits and pieces from materials she thinks are innocuous. […]

    • harpie says:

      So, it’s now 11:09 AM and Brandi writes:

      Judge Kelly also told Pattis he doesn’t know if there’s even a provision for that in federal court (re: video recording Agent Miller)
      Kelly: The impact of her credibility is negligible
      Pattis: Tell that to my client if there’s a conviction
      Cross-talk between Kelly and Pattis

      Kelly tells Pattis he’s made his point and asks for the witness to be brought in.

      [11:12 AM] Balantine begins with inquiry of Agent Miller to assess how she filtered messages.
      Bal: Did you conduct a pull of your Lync msgs in connection with preparing Jencks packets in this case?
      M: I did
      Was the pull you requested from 1/6/21-11/1/22?
      I believe so yes

      Bal: Did you receive from HQ multi line excel spreadsheet tied to request for pull of msgs?
      M: I did
      Lync exists on FBI’s classified systems?
      Objection. Leading. Overruled.
      Miller: Yes

      Bal: When you rec’d excel spreadsheet back from HQ did the cover memo to that spreadsheet
      Smith: Objection. leading.
      Bal: Can i finish my question?
      Smith: this is inappropriate
      Kelly reprimands Smith for overspeaking

      • timbozone says:

        Occam’s Razor would indicate it’s more likely just a mistake with a spreadsheet. Have to agree though that it’s not great when a spill like this has a complaint about “338 pieces of evidence” being destroyed as the ‘classified spillage’… :/

    • harpie says:
      9:07 AM · Mar 9, 2023

      […] … Smith’s motion (for Nordean) also contains some potentially explosive accusations. Here Smith says that in one message Agent Miller said her boss had assigned her to “destroy” 338 items of evidence. (There’s no indication that she did destroy anything.) /8 [screenshot]

      That’s actually NOT what that screenshot said. [I’m not criticizing Parloff, I could never live tweet anything!]. This is what that screenshot says:

      – Miller’s communications with another agent who states that the agent’s FBI “boss assigned [her] 338 items of evidence I have to destroy.”

    • harpie says:

      About an hour ago, Parloff with an UPDATE [my numbers]:
      3:25 PM · Mar 10, 2023

      Update on spreadsheet-gate in Proud Boys case: Govt has provided defense
      1] a replacement spreadsheet with “classified & sensitive materials removed” &

      2] “context” for 5 messages def Nordean’s counsel considered suspicious.

      3] Will provide additional production later today. … 1/2 [screenshot]

      … The case seems on track to resume Monday. Full govt filing here: > 2/2

    • harpie says:
      10:13 AM · Mar 9, 2023

      Judge: agree that this “spill” issue creates need for parties to interact — more basis for excusing jury for weekend. [Jury wasn’t going to sit tomorrow anyway.]
      Pattis: I’d join Mr. Smith’s motion in opposing delay … I’ve faced suspension from practice for inadvertently … disclosing something i shouldn’t have. … we do want to go forward with the jury now.

      This is what Pattis is referring to, I guess:

Comments are closed.