Source: Politics<\/p>\n
Joseph Biggs, a member of the Proud Boys charged with seditious conspiracy for his role in the breach of the Capitol last year, is urging a federal judge to relocate his trial to South Florida after becoming a main character in the first hearing of the Jan. 6 select committee.<\/p>\n
In a seven-page filing late Tuesday, Biggs contended that \u201cmedia-attentive\u201d Washingtonians will accept the select committee\u2019s presentation about Biggs, which cast him as a central figure in igniting the breach. The panel took testimony from Capitol Police officer Caroline Edwards, who was injured in the initial breach of police lines and recalled seeing Biggs lead a crowd to her position and huddle with rioter Ryan Samsel, who was among the first to charge the barricades.<\/p>\n
In the filing, Biggs\u2019 attorney John Hull derided Edwards’ testimony as \u201ccanned, cagey and morally superior\u201d and accused her of making up details about what she witnessed.<\/p>\n
\u201cApart from risk of prejudice that comes with Joseph Biggs\u2019 name being mentioned four times in rapid succession up front on opening night of the House Select Committee\u2019s hearings, Biggs and his counsel respectfully submit that the above testimony alone by Officer Edwards in its totality is more than enough to justify a transfer of venue to Miami, Florida, as defendant [Enrique] Tarrio has urged,\u201d Hull writes.<\/p>\n
The filing, which is now on the docket of U.S. District Court Judge Tim Kelly, underscores the degree to which high-profile Jan. 6 defendants are likely to use the select committee\u2019s June hearings to benefit their defense. The panel\u2019s introductory June 9 hearing cast the Proud Boys as key instigators of the Jan. 6 violence in Washington, taking cues from former President Donald Trump, who called on supporters to join a \u201cwild\u201d protest against his defeat in the 2020 election.<\/p>\n
Biggs is charged along with Tarrio, the group\u2019s national leader, and Proud Boys Ethan Nordean, Zach Rehl and Dominic Pezzola with seditious conspiracy. Prosecutors have described them as chief organizers of the mob that attacked the Capitol and presented evidence of a plan Tarrio espoused to occupy federal government buildings \u2014 which they say he referenced in messages with a fellow group member on Jan. 6.<\/p>\n
Judges have looked skeptically at motions by Jan. 6 defendants to transfer their trial venue out of Washington, D.C. They\u2019ve suggested that it is possible to select a fair-minded jury with thorough questioning by the court and attorneys, and that although many D.C. residents in the Capitol Hill area experienced effects of the Capitol breach, many in Washington had only passing knowledge of the attack, let alone bias toward specific defendants.<\/p>\n
Five jury trials have been held in Jan. 6 cases so far, with jurors returning guilty verdicts on all counts \u2014 a statistic that defendants say is evidence of bias but that some judges have noted may reflect the strength and overwhelming nature of the evidence prosecutors presented in those cases. Few have generated the pretrial publicity that the Proud Boys have, but judges have also emphasized that the Jan. 6 attack is a national story that has generated intense media coverage across the country.<\/p>\n
The Proud Boys leaders are slated to go on trial Aug. 8.<\/p>\n
Prosecutors, too, are contending with the impact of the Jan. 6 select committee. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jason McCullough has described unsuccessful efforts so far to obtain the committee\u2019s transcripts from interviews connected to the case and agreed he would provide it to defense counsel as part of the discovery process if the Justice Department ultimately receives them before trial. McCullough also raised concerns that the select committee could release a final report, hundreds of transcripts and hold additional hearings in September, several weeks after the trial is slated to commence.<\/p>\n
Kelly noted the concern and emphasized there\u2019s little the court can do to influence or control the decisions of the committee and Congress.<\/p>\n
Proud Boys attorneys also accused prosecutors of coordinating actions in the case with the select committee, contending that the decision by the Justice Department to level seditious conspiracy charges against the group\u2019s leaders earlier this month \u2014 escalating the year-old case against them \u2014 appeared timed to the committee hearings. DOJ has sharply denied the allegations.<\/p>\n
Edwards\u2019 testimony was among the most potent moments of the first night of hearings, which drew more than 20 million viewers. She described the ominous approach of the mob and her initial injury after a group that included Samsel pushed a barricade into her, before she fell backward and hit her head on a small set of stairs. She later described a \u201dwar scene\u201d among officers fending off violent rioters.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere were officers on the ground. They were bleeding. They were throwing up,\u201d she recalled. \u201dI saw friends with blood all over their faces. I was slipping in people\u2019s blood. I was catching people as they fell. It was carnage. It was chaos.\u201d<\/p>\n
She also repeatedly mentioned seeing Biggs and hearing taunts from him, describing the initial approach of \u201cthe crowd led by Joseph Biggs.\u201c<\/p>\n
\u201cJoseph Biggs started, he had a micro, or a megaphone, and he started talking about, first it was things kind of relating to Congress,\u201d she recalled. After the crowd grew, she said \u201cThen the table started turning\u2026Joseph Biggs\u2019 rhetoric turned to the Capitol Police. He started asking us questions like, \u2018You didn’t miss a paycheck during the pandemic?\u2019 \u2026 I know when I’m being turned into a villain. That’s when I turned to my sergeant and I stated the understatement of the century. I said, \u2018Sarge, I think we’re going to need a few more people down here.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n
Hull contended that Edwards\u2019 description of Biggs\u2019 involvement in the mob was false and that his conversation with Samsel was one-sided (Samsel did all the talking) and innocuous. Their exchange has become a focal point for investigators examining the initial breach. Hull also attacked the select committee\u2019s case against Biggs as \u201ccomprised of misrepresentations, outright lies and high tabloid noise.\u201d But he said \u201cwell-meaning\u201d and \u201clovably dorky\u201d Washington D.C. residents would accept the committee\u2019s presentation \u201cas packaged.\u201d<\/p>\n