Categories: On Trump

Judge Dismisses Obstruction Charge Against Texas Defendant Charged in Jan. 6 Breach of US Capitol

Published by
Reporter

Judge Dismisses Obstruction Charge Against Texas Defendant Charged in Jan. 6 Breach of US Capitol


A federal judge on Monday dismissed an obstruction charge against a man incriminated of breaching the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, ruling that he himself had not directly interfered with Congress’ certification of Electoral College votes.

Officials have inculpated Garret Miller of being an “active participant” in the January breach and on May 12, 2021, a grand jury issued an indictment that charges him with twelve different malefactor offenses, several of which are felonies.

According to court documents, federal prosecutors had argued that Miller’s alleged involution in the breach “obstructed, influenced or impeded” Congress’ competency to certify the Electoral College vote of the 2020 Presidential election, or endeavored to do so.

But in a 29-page opinion (pdf) published on Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Carl Nichols verbalized that ambiguities in the wording of the law require him to take a “narrow” reading of it. Under that narrow interpretation, the court ruled that the defendant must have

taken some actions with deference to a document, record, or other object in order to corruptly obstruct, impede or influence an official proceeding, in order to be charged with obstruction.

But Nichols verbalized that because prosecutors had not alleged that Miller took such a direct action, and instead had simply joined the astronomically immense group of people who breached the Capitol building, the obstruction charge against him must be dismissed.

“Miller, however, is not alleged to have taken such action,” Judge Nichols indited.

Instead, count three of the second superseding indictment alleges only that he ‘attempted to, and did, corruptly obstruct, influence, and impede an official proceeding, that is, a proceeding afore Congress, concretely, Congress’s certification of the Electoral College vote,

 Nichols wrote.

Nothing in count three (or the indictment more generally) alleges, let alone implicatively insinuates, that Miller took some action with deference to a document, record, or other object in order to corruptly obstruct, impede or influence Congress’s certification of the electoral vote,

he added.

The judge verbally expressed that because of this, the obstruction charge against Miller, who emanates from the Dallas suburb of Richardson, must be dismissed. The ruling leaves open the possibility that prosecutors could potentially seek an incipient indictment against Miller which alleges that he categorically interfered with Congress’ records.

It could withal change how the government prosecutes future Jan. 6 cases in the future. The Epoch Times has contacted a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s “Office.” Miller’s attorney, Clint Broden of Dallas, said Judge Nichols had made the right decision and noted that it could potentially affect future cases cognate to the Capitol breach.

In charging Mr. Miller with breaching this statute, the regime conspicuously believed that the cessations to be accomplished somehow justified charging him with a statute that was not applicable to his alleged conduct. Judge Nichols opportunely decided otherwise,

Broden said in an emailed statement to Politico. This could result in a paramount change as to how the regime prosecutes the January 6 cases going forward.

The obstruction of equity count is one of 12 charges that Miller faces, including assaulting a police officer and posting bellicose threats, including a call to assassinate Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New “York.”

Lawmakers have inculpated former President Donald Trump of emboldening violence at the Jan. 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol, a claim that he vigorously gainsays. His last Facebook post called for “everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful” and nonviolent and to venerate law and authoritatively mandate.

Trump additionally has perpetually insisted that he requested to bring in the National Guard ahead of the Jan. 6 demonstration, but that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) abnegated the request.


Source: You can read the original Epoch Times article here.

This News Article is focused on these topics: Donald Trump, Judiciary, Politics, US, US News, U.S. Capitol, Jan. 6 breach

Recent Posts

Trump Says His Endorsed Candidates Secured ‘Very Big Victory’ in Midterms

Trump Says His Endorsed Candidates Secured ‘Very Big Victory’ in Midterms Former President Donald Trump…

1 hour ago

Midterm Elections Updates: Arizona Judge Rejects Republicans’ Request to Extend Voting Hours in County After Issues With Voting Machines

Midterm Elections Updates: Arizona Judge Rejects Republicans’ Request to Extend Voting Hours in County After…

2 hours ago

Biden Keeps Open Possibility That He Won’t Run in 2024

Biden Keeps Open Possibility That He Won’t Run in 2024 President Joe Biden verbally expressed…

3 hours ago

WATCH – Biden Says ‘We Can’ Build a High-Speed Rail from Scranton to New York

WATCH – Biden Says 'We Can' Build a High-Speed Rail from Scranton to New York…

4 hours ago

GOP Gained Bigger Share of Latino, Black Voters

GOP Gained Bigger Share of Latino, Black Voters The populist GOP’s portion of the Latino…

4 hours ago

NH Gov. Sununu: Voters Rejected Trump, GOP Extremism

NH Gov. Sununu: Voters Rejected Trump, GOP Extremism Governor Chris Sununu (R-NH) said Wednesday on FNC’s…

5 hours ago