Defendants accused of offenses related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, are demanding trial extensions to analyze newly released footage. Shane Jenkins became one of the most recent defendants when he filed a request through his attorney to delay the trial in response to the January 6 release of around 41,000 hours of security footage.
Mr. Jenkins requested that his trial date, which is slated for March 21, 2023, be moved so that defense counsel can analyze the new information, attorney Dennis Boyle stated in his motion.
Since taking control of the House of Representatives, Republicans have given the video surveillance footage to Fox News and stated they would provide it to any defendant who wishes to watch it.
According to a recent request, Jenkins has not been able to evaluate almost 25,000 hours of film from this batch. According to Jenkins’s attorney, the request for extra time is essential to thoroughly and diligently evaluate all discovery connected to Mr. Jenkins and to determine if any video provides significant and substantial information pertinent to Mr. Jenkins’ defense. Boyle stated that video evidence portraying Mr. Jenkins would constitute exculpatory and substantial evidence, which would necessitate government disclosure. Since Mr. Jenkins is now detained and a considerable amount of footage is being provided, so they need further time to analyze the information and prepare for trial.
Obama-appointed U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta has not yet ruled on Jenkins’s motion. Among other offenses, Jenkins has been charged with physical assault on Capitol grounds or in the building and disruptive behavior.
Another defendant, William Pope, claimed that he had been denied “more than 99 percent of discovery” despite being arrested more than two years ago.
Pope stated that prosecutors resisted making most of the video accessible since the Legislative Branch was the original owner of the material. But, now that the Legislative Branch has approved defendants’ access to legislative files under due process, the government’s already feeble claim to deny due process has collapsed. This court should immediately provide Pope full access to discovery, he argued.
Pope claimed that the case should be dismissed if the government continued to deny him access to evidence essential to his defense. A civil disorder charge and other offenses have been filed against him.
Another Obama appointment, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras, is supervising the Pope case. During a status hearing after the motion was submitted, Contreras postponed the trial to allow the government time to reply to a second request, which asked the court to unseal video from three undercover officers on January 6.
Ryan Nichols, the third Defendant, has requested that his trial be postponed until his attorneys and crowdsourcing volunteers study the newly provided film.
Nichols, through his attorneys, stated the Defendant’s position is straightforward: there is no justifiable reason why this newly available evidence was not made available earlier; therefore, Defendant’s constitutional right to defend himself dwarfs any potential prejudice the prosecution might suffer from a continuance. Nichols has been charged with bodily assault, obstruction, and other offenses. Reagan-appointed U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth has not yet decided on the subject.
Sara Carpenter’s plea to postpone her trial due to current events was denied. During a March 3 hearing, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, an Obama appointee handling the case, denied the motion.
Carpenter’s attorneys argued that the surveillance revealed by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) far exceeds what was previously revealed by the government and known to exist and that the government had disclosed a fraction of the footage. Her attorney said the footage shows gaps between the moments Ms. Carpenter enters and exits the Capitol.
The government argued that trial extensions should not be allowed on the baseless assertion that relevant material may exist someplace, and neither the prosecution nor the defense is now aware of it. According to Boasberg, Carpenter failed to demonstrate that the previously unreleased film would prove exculpatory, as reported by Politico. He warned that permitting a postponement for Defendants may derail dozens of cases slated in the next few months. Carpenter has been indicted on three charges, including intentionally entering or residing in a restricted facility or grounds without lawful permission.
Rachel Powell, another January 6 defendant facing more than half a dozen counts, stated that she had not received evidence necessary to her case. McCarthy has informed reporters that Defendants had access to the material prior.
Powell emailed The Epoch Times that she is a J6 Defendant who has not received her evidence after more than two years. McCarthy’s claim that Defendants had access to the material on January 6 is thus false, and he may be lying. Powell stated she was preparing a request for a trial delay.
Attorney William Shipley, who is representing several Defendants, stated on Twitter that attorneys have access to hundreds of hours of film. Still, the Department of Justice (DOJ) database does not contain material that Congress did not provide to the agency. He added that if Congress withheld footage, DOJ could not include it in its database. According to Shipley, it is not feasible to establish right now that any defense counsel has or had access to all the footage that Tucker/Fox is displaying. McCarthy claims he handed everything to Fox, which may include footage not provided to the DOJ.
For more news: