Judge grants rare Jan. 6 prisoner release in rebuke of DOJ warnings
By: Kaelan Deese
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A Washington, D.C., judge granted a request by a Jan. 6 riot defendant to be released from prison pending his appeal, a decision that directly rebuked Justice Department prosecutors' claims that he posed a "heightened danger" during an election year.
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, granted the request from convicted Confederate flag-wielding Jan. 6 defendant Kevin Seefried to be released from prison pending his appeal, writing in an 11-page order that prosecutors failed to prove a suggestion that he poses a threat or that "events that led to the riot are reasonably likely to recur."
Insurrectionists loyal to President Donald Trump, including Aaron Mostofsky, right, and Kevin Seefried, left, walk down the stairs outside the Senate Chamber in the U.S. Capitol, in Washington, Jan. 6, 2021. A federal judge on Wednesday, June 15, 2022, convicted Kevin Seefried and his adult son Hunter Seefried of charges that they stormed the U.S. Capitol together to obstruct Congress from certifying President Joe Biden's 2020 electoral victory. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta, File)
Seefried was sentenced to three years in prison last February after he was charged with obstructing an official proceeding and four trespassing and disorderly conduct misdemeanors, which altogether amount to a potential 23-year prison sentence.
Following his conviction, Seefried appealed the verdict and moved for his release from prison pending appeal. His request came not long before the Supreme Court agreed to take up a Jan. 6 defendant's case known as Fischer v. United States, which is challenging the way the obstruction statute 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c) is properly applied to hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants facing charges for violating it.
When the Supreme Court agreed to take up the Fischer case in December and schedule oral arguments in the dispute for April 16, the judge said Seefried's issue was "again alive" and that his felony conviction could be vacated depending on how the justices rule in the case.
McFadden's decision was a swift rejection of allegations made by U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves, who wrote on Jan. 8 that granting Seefried's request would be "releasing defendant into the same political maelstrom that led him to commit his crimes in the first place."
"The prospect of this additional time may make it more likely that he flees rather than returning to prison," Graves added at the time.
McFadden countered on Wednesday that the law demands Seefried must be released because he satisfied two key prongs, including showing he is "not likely to flee or pose a danger to … the community if released" and that the government failed to prove the defendant is "likely to reoffend."
The judge doubled down against the Justice Department's "fact-free approach" to reviewing Seefried's request and accused the government of a "class-based" approach.
"People who have already gone to prison, as a class, cannot be released. January 6th defendants, as a class, cannot be released during an election year," McFadden wrote. "In the end, if specific facts about Seefried lead the Government to believe that he is imminently likely to engage in criminal conduct, options remain open to the Government."
McFadden's approval of Seefried's request marks a rare occurrence where a Washington, D.C., judge has sided with a defendant seeking to alter the terms of their sentence, or possibly remain free on appeal, while the Supreme Court is preparing to take on the Fischer case.
The judge said that the date of his release would be one year from the date he surrendered to the Bureau of Prisons, which was May 31, 2023.
Moreover, the parties were ordered to file a joint status report no later than 14 days after the Supreme Court's release of an opinion in Fischer, which could come between early May and the end of June.
The DOJ has brought the obstruction charge against more than 332 defendants in the sweeping federal prosecutions it has pursued since the violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, when a riot formed at the complex out of anger and frustration during Biden's election certification. At least four members of the Proud Boys and even Trump have also been charged with obstruction of an official proceeding, meaning the high court's eventual decision could affect these cases as well.
If the Supreme Court sides with the defendant and discards the obstruction charge, hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants could appeal their convictions and shave years off their sentences. Some are facing the prospect of years behind bars.
Keep ON TOPIC. (The source is not the topic. Off topic comments will be removed.)
Keep your "fascist" and "but Trump" (or any variant thereof) comments on YOUR articles (neither are the topic).
Keep Civil. (Calling members "trolls" or ""dishonest" will result in your comment being deleted.)
Post your meme's in YOUR articles.
Tags
Who is online
423 visitors
Really? Sounds like the DOJ is trying to save face.
Good for him. Now, hopefully, Mr. Seefried, will go home and sit his butt down. Mr. Seefried don't do anything stupid(er) so this judge trusting you to go home and state out of trouble won't regret it.
So don't act like the not so peaceful Summer of Love rioters; and come back out rioting (now about the war in Gaza) since the weather is getting milder?
Of course the vast majority of them were never charged; even though they assaulted federal officers, destroyed federal property; and caused federal buildings and courts to shut down (that should qualify as insurrection using the Garland/DOJ playbook).
Sorry, sounds like you have a "federal case" you should see the "Feds" regarding. Commenting on it here won't help as it is the wrong venue.
Appointed by Trump, says it all .
The DOJ has brought the obstruction charge against more than 332 defendants
I want to know how they identified all those people and how they couldn't or wouldn't do it during the 2020 riots?
Had video of the shit balls .
There's video of the shit balls from the 2020 riots.
Next pathetic excuse.
Very few of the J6 defendants really belong in prison.
But, . . .Biden does according to MAGAs. Yet, the "J6 defendants" did not simply go to jail. . .they had evidentiary trials with law/s, prosecutors, and judges. That used to mean something once upon a time in the law and order 'party.'
Wonder what happened. (Rhetorical.)
Apply those same damn laws to the Summer of Love rioters who are guilty of far worse.
The Constitution and laws don't mean shit to Democrats/Leftists. Equal application of the law means D's and their minions walk; while R's and their minions get charged beyond the full extent of the law.
Not really, haven't seen any of them at the end of a rope, the one they wanted to use for bag-licker Pence . Insurrectionist = Traitor = Domestic Terrorist . Max penalty !
See 1.1.2.
Yeah, that's what we'll call that clusterfuck.
Your right, they all belong in GTMO !