CNN
—
Prosecutors asked a federal judge on Friday to sentence Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes to 25 years in prison, the government’s first sentencing request for a person convicted of seditious conspiracy related to the U.S. Capitol riot. United States of January 6, 2021.
The Justice Department’s request provides a glimpse, for the first time in more than a decade, of how prosecutors believe a seditious conspiracy conviction should be punished.
“These defendants sought to silence millions of Americans who had voted for a different candidate, to ignore the variety of legal and judicial mechanisms that legally scrutinized the election process until January 6, and to tear apart the democratic system of government enshrined in our laws and our Constitution,” prosecutors wrote in the filing. “And when they didn’t get what they wanted, they acted together by attacking the same people and place at the same time those laws were in action.”
They added: “This Court has previously explained that ‘it has been one of the great tragedies in the history of this country’ to see ‘ordinary, hard-working Americans’ become criminals on January 6th and ‘suffer.'[] the consequences.’ These defendants are partly responsible for that national tragedy; they played an important role in casting doubt on the presidential election and turning others against the government, and are incomparable to the actions of individual actors on January 6.”
Rhodes is scheduled to be sentenced on May 25.
The filing seeks individual sentences for the nine Oath Keepers members and associates convicted by a jury, six of whom were convicted of seditious conspiracy. The lowest sentence prosecutors sought among the group was 10 years in prison for Oath Keeper David Moerschel, who prosecutors said was not a ringleader in the conspiracy.
“A lesser sentence could encourage further abuse not only by these defendants, but by others who disagree with our nation’s upcoming local, state and federal government elections,” prosecutors wrote in the file
While the filing reflects prosecutors’ request, Judge Amit Mehta will ultimately decide how much time each defendant will serve. Mehta could hand down a sentence that exceeds prosecutors’ request or decide to sentence them well below the maximum.
During the more than seven-week trial, prosecutors argued that the riot was more than a political protest that got out of hand, but a violent attack on American democracy. To bolster their case, prosecutors presented the jury with hundreds of messages, audio recordings and videos of the defendants’ revolutionary rhetoric in the wake of Biden’s 2020 presidential victory and their actions as they moved around the Capitol grounds during the riots
Defense attorneys countered those arguments by telling the jury that the defendants’ inflammatory tapes were nothing more than “locker room talk” and arguing that the militia had no uniformed plan.
According to the filing, prosecutors made their sentencing requests for the nine Oath Keepers and associates based on several factors, including whether they were leaders or followers within the far-right group, whether prosecutors believe they a defendant perjured himself during the trial and if they removed. tests
Prosecutors also cited the enhanced sentences for terrorism convictions, writing that “here, the need to deter others is particularly strong because these defendants engaged in acts intended to influence the government through intimidation or coercion, is that is, terrorism”. The terrorism enhancements, which are another reason for the proposed stiff sentences, are necessary, prosecutors wrote, “because these defendants not only contributed to the attack on the Capitol but helped organize it, their convictions will be scored by those who encourage this attack. political violence in the future.”
The Justice Department has previously sought the same enhancement in other cases related to Jan. 6, though judges have so far declined to apply it.
Citing public reports, prosecutors said that political violence is considered more acceptable today than in recent years, and that “the justice system’s reaction to January 6 has a large responsibility to influence whether January 6 becomes a atypical moment or a decisive point”. american history
“If left unchecked, this impulse threatens our democracy,” they wrote.
This story has been updated with additional details.
