BOSTON (AP) – There is no doubt that the Oath Keepers were up to something on January 6. The central question in the criminal case against its members and associates in the attack on the Capitol is: What exactly did they intend to do?
Authorities suggested during hearings and papers for weeks that members of the far-right militia group planned their attack in advance in an attempt to block the peaceful transfer of power. But prosecutors have since said it is not clear whether the group targeted the Capitol prior to January 6.
“The plan was to unlawfully stop the Electoral College’s vote certification … and the plan was to be willing to use force if necessary,” Assistant US Attorney Kathryn Rakoczy said at a hearing this month. . But the oath keepers “were not sure exactly how violence and violence might be necessary to support this plan,” she said.
Authorities are still combing through a sea of evidence in what they believe is probably the most complex investigation ever prosecuted by the Justice Department. More than 300 people are facing federal charges and more are expected. The most serious accusations have been brought against 10 people described as members and associates of the Oath Keepers and several members of another far-right extremist group, the Proud Boys.
But as the extensive investigation unfolded, prosecutors sometimes struggle to maintain a consistent narrative and have had to reverse statements made during hearings or on paper. It has created an opening for defense attorneys to cast doubt in the case.
“The government presented a theory (without evidence) that there was a plan of weeks to invade the Capitol,” wrote attorney for one of the Oath Keepers, Jessica Watkins, in a recent lawsuit. “There was no such plan.”
In one case in January, prosecutors stated in court documents that there was “strong evidence” that the pro-Trump gang was intended to “arrest and murder elected officials.” The Justice Department quickly made it clear that it had no such evidenceand accused it of a miscommunication between prosecutors.
After being urged by a judge at a recent hearing, Rakoczy admitted that authorities “are not” at this point telling anyone explicitly, ‘our plan is to force entry into the Capitol to stop certification,’ “but warned that the investigation is ongoing.
“Part of the reason there wasn’t necessarily such a concrete plan that you would expect is that they were waiting to see what the leadership was doing,” she said.
Just a month earlier, Rakoczy told the same judge that there is no other way to read the group’s messages about the stationing of a ‘rapid response force’ outside of town, other than that they needed weapons’ in case the activities in the Capitol going badly ‘.
“And those activities in the Capitol were a planned and very well-coordinated attack on the Capitol,” she said.
Defense attorneys allege that all discussions their clients had before Jan. 6 involved providing security during the pre-riot meeting or protecting themselves from potential attacks by antifa activists.
The defendants could still be convicted of conspiring to obstruct Congress, even if the plan was formulated just moments before storming the Capitol, said Jimmy Gurule, a former federal prosecutor who is now a professor at the University of Law School. Notre Dame. And prosecutors have “pretty compelling circumstantial evidence,” he said.
Statements in court documents indicate that the group discussed matters such as equipment and training in the weeks leading up to January 6. A man suggested getting a boat to carry weapons across the Potomac River to their “waiting arms,” authorities say.
In December, Kelly Meggs, who officials say was the leader of the Oath Keepers’ Florida branch, wrote in a message that he had “organized an alliance” with the Proud Boys.Days before January 6, Meggs ordered someone to tell their friend that “this is not a meeting,” authorities say.
Many came dressed for battle in tactical vests and helmets on January 6. The leader of the Oath Keepers, who has not been charged, communicated with some of the defendants through a Signal chat called “DC OP: January 6 21,” which prosecutors say the group has “a plan to use force on January started. 6. ”
Authorities wrote in court documents that the group not only conspired to “storm the Capitol by force on January 6, 2021 – they also planned their attack in advance.” The evidence is “incontrovertible,” prosecutors wrote in another document, that Watkins “recruited others to join, train for, plan, and participate in a coordinated effort to, as she put it,” forc. e) gain access to the Capitol. ”
US District Judge Amit Mehta agreed in February to keep Thomas Caldwell, portrayed by authorities as a conspiracy leader, incarcerated while awaiting trial. possible military raid on the Capitol on January 6. ”
But after Caldwell’s attorney challenged that assessment, the judge reversed his decision and had Caldwell imprisoned home. Mehta said there is no evidence that he entered or planned to enter the Capitol on January 6.
“The last time we were here 30 days ago, I was convinced it was a plan to raid the Capitol,” the judge told Caldwell’s attorney. “You have provided some evidence that, I think, disproves that idea.”
The judge has since released other defendants, noting that there is no evidence that they attacked anyone in the Capitol or, in some cases, do not appear to be as involved in planning before January 6.
But Mehta ordered Meggs to remain incarcerated on Friday, calling him a danger to the community. The judge said his communications in the weeks leading up to the attack show that he intended to commit violence in the streets of Washington, even though no one specifically mentions a plot to storm the Capitol.
Prosecutors have also apparently been unable to agree on what to say to the press.
A judge recently scolded the Justice Department during a “60-minute” interview in which the prosecutor conducting the investigation suggested that some of the rioters would be charged with sedition. Former acting District of Columbia US Attorney Michael Sherwin’s interview appeared to violate Justice Department rules and Sherwin is now under internal investigation, a prosecutor told the judge.