WASHINGTON – A Tennessee man photographed in the Capitol on January 6 with tactical equipment and a plastic handcuff with a zipper will be jailed while his criminal case continues, a federal judge in Washington Wednesday definitely.
In a 17-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth in Washington, DC, agrees with federal prosecutors that there are no conditions for release for Eric Munchel and his co-accused and mother Lisa Eisenhart, who “the safety of the community would not reasonably insure. ”Munchel and Eisenhart pose a clear danger to our republic, ‘the judge concluded.
“Given Munchel’s shameless conduct before hundreds of law enforcers and the outright contempt for the rule of law, the court is not satisfied that Munchel will meet any exemption conditions,” Lamberth wrote. “Munchel has indicated that he is prepared to take action against Congress again, and nothing but detention before trial can stop him from doing so.”
The judge described Eisenhart as a ‘self-avowed, would be martyr’, and noted that after the riot she conducted a media interview in which she said that she would ‘rather than a 57-year-old woman die than live under oppression ‘and’ Would rather fight. ‘ Lamberth wrote that this is proof that Eisenhart, like Munchel, is prepared to ‘repeat her behavior’ if he is allowed to go home.
Lawyers for Munchel and Eisenhart argued in a court hearing before Lamberth on Wednesday that because their clients are not accused of assaulting someone or destroying property, it undermines the government’s argument that they are a danger to the community. But Lamberth wrote that the “depiction of the alleged transgressions is merely transgression or civil disobedience unconvincing and detached from reality.”
“To storm the Capitol to interrupt the counting of election votes is not a similar situation,” the judge wrote.
The vast majority of the more than 200 people who took part in the uprising were allowed to go home while their cases were pending without prosecutors. Judges in these cases have usually imposed travel restrictions and some accused are in house custody. In a small number of cases, prosecutors have argued for privileged detention on the grounds that defendants pose a danger to the community or a flight risk; they tended to discuss the requests for cases involving people accused of assaulting police officers, carrying weapons, planning in advance for violence, or of having to take any leadership role in the assault on the Capitol.
Munchel was arrested in Tennessee on January 10, four days after the uprising at the Capitol; Eisenhart was arrested on January 16. Both made their initial court appearance in Tennessee where the government unsuccessfully asked a federal magistrate to keep them in custody. Prosecutors rushed to Washington federal court – where all Capitol cases are finally being prosecuted – to appeal Munchel and Eisenhart’s release, and a judge has agreed to keep them in jail pending another round. review of the detention issue.
On February 12, a federal jury returned a indictment accusing them along with three charges: obstruction of an official process, entering a restricted building or site with a dangerous weapon, and violent trespassing or disorderly conduct with a dangerous weapon. . According to prosecutors, Munchel was wearing a Taser as he entered the Capitol, and he and Eisenhart could be heard in a video Munchel recorded the day of stabbing other weapons outside the Capitol; They are also accused of picking up the handcuffs of the American Capitol police with plastic, known as ‘flexicuffs’, in the building.
Government court documents describe how Munchel’s video captures him and Eisenhart inciting other rioters and helping people climb over a wall in front of the Capitol. At one point, prosecutors say an unidentified person can be heard saying to Munchel and Eisenhart as they approach the Capitol, “You look like you’re ready to go,” and Munchel replies, “Fucking ready to shit.”
Prosecutors also noted in the arrest note that when Munchel and Eisenhart came across an unidentified person handing out the brackets from a cabinet, that Munchel could be heard in his video saying, ‘Zip ties! I need to get some fuckers for myself. Prosecutors described the two as part of a mob seeking members of Congress, arguing Munchel grabbed the shackles and understood that they were instruments of restraint and kidnapping.
Lamberth heard arguments on Wednesday. Assistant U.S. Attorney Ahmed Baset began his presentation by saying that Munchel and Eisenhart arrived at the Capitol with a full combat gear – Munchel in military fatigue, a tactical vest and face mask that only showed his eyes, and Eisenhart in a tactical vest. Baset argued that Munchel and Eisenhart not only picked up the plastic shackles, but also did so “with joy.” Baset also said that Munchel and Eisenhart did not show remorse after the riots, and he told Lamberth that the government had sent texts via the secure messaging program Signal after January 6, which showed that Munchel was showing interest in joining the Proud Boys, ‘ an extremist-extremist group that described its members as ‘Western chauvinists’.
Munchel and Eisenhart are charged together, but have their own lawyers. Sandra Roland, Munchel’s lawyer, argued on Wednesday that the fact that Munchel had made arrangements to surrender himself and hand over evidence from his phone showed that he was not a flight risk, and noted that he did not ‘ had a history of violence. Both she and Eisenhart’s attorney, Gregory Smith, focused on the fact that none of the defendants were charged with injuring anyone or destroying property, and asked Lamberth to accept the order of the judge in Tennessee to to release the two.
“He did not use force. He did not threaten violence. “He did not encourage anyone else to commit violence,” Roland said of Munchel.
Roland argued that Munchel came to Washington to protest and send a ‘message’, an argument that prompted Lamberth to jump in and push her to explain why Munchel picked up the plastic shackles once he was in the Capitol was.
“It also sends a message, doesn’t it?” asks the judge.
Roland argued that the government did not provide evidence as to what Munchel’s intention was to wear the handcuffs, and that he ultimately did not use them.
“Happy,” Lamberth said in response.
Smith accused prosecutors of overselling the evidence of what Munchel and Eisenhart had done during the approximately ten minutes they were in the Capitol; he said the Tennessee judge did not agree that the government supported an allegation that Eisenhart was pursuing police officers. He also argued that Lamberth should focus on whether Eisenhart, who does not have a previous criminal record, poses a risk to the community in the future, and not on what happened on 6 January.
What did the government fear Eisenhart would do, Smith asked, ‘now that Donald Trump is no longer in office, now that the election vote has been confirmed, now that there is a fence around the Capitol?’
Baset responded to Smith by arguing that the ‘conditions’ that led to the violent assault on the Capitol were ‘always present’, suggesting that the National Guard was present in Washington and the threat assessments related to possible protests in early March. Baset did not elaborate on the threat assessments, but Newsweek reported this week that law enforcement officials are monitoring the potential activity around March 4, a date of significance for fans of the collective error QAnon. He argued that the “extraordinary circumstances” of these cases warranted privileged detention, saying that Munchel and Eisenhart “felt entitled” to enter the Capitol while Congress was in session, and that they were “dressed for battle, dressed” for violence ‘.
Munchel’s lawyer noted that he could be heard in a video admonishing other people in the Capitol not to break anything. Baset argued that the weight to the argument would be like giving a burglar because he did not break a vase.
This is an evolving story. Check back for updates and follow them BuzzFeed News on Twitter.