WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge on Wednesday acquitted a New Mexico man of misdemeanor charges that he illegally entered the U.S. Capitol and engaged in disorderly conduct after he walked into the building during last year’s riot....Martin is the third Capitol riot defendant whose case has been resolved by a trial. He is the first of the three to be acquitted of all charges that he faced,Martin, whose bench trial started Tuesday, testified that a police officer waved him into the building after the riot erupted. A prosecutor dismissed that testimony as “nonsense.”The judge, however, said video shows two police officers standing near the Rotunda doors and allowing people to enter as Martin approached the doors. One of the officers appeared to lean back before Martin placed a hand on the officer's shoulder as a possible sign of gratitude, the judge said.
I have previously mentioned that a former prosecutor explained the no bail jailing of defendants because they represented a violence risk but also to get them to take plea-bargains. Because the Speedy Trials Act requires trial within 70 days of being charged, this is clearly unlawful, assuming law means anything anymore to federal judges. I wonder how many who took plea-bargains to get out of jail might have fought the charges at trial with similar results?
I have seen video of the QAnon shaman being escorted into the House chamber by a policeman along with several other aggravated tourists. It is hard to imagine that he could not have arrested them.
UPDATE: I have updated the title because a reader pointed out that a acquittal means that the prosecutor failed to prove guilt because a reasonable doubt. This is a distinction rather like an old Scottish verdict of "not proven" as a third choice. In practical terms, he is free of further prosecution or punishment. Most people consider these equivalent. A person acquitted of robbery is not assumed to be somehow suspect because he was prosecuted.
Acquittal does not mean the same thing as innocent. Your headline is erroneous.
ReplyDeleteIn a formal sense, true. The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. In practice, anyone acquitted is generally recognized as not a criminal.
Delete