Jury Finds Man Who Put Feet on Pelosi’s Desk on Jan 6 Guilty on All Counts
Richard was located by a jury from the federal District of Columbia in under two hours “Bigo” Barnett guilty of four felonies and four misdemeanors for his time in the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021—including the now-famous photograph with his feet on a desk in the office of Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
The Jury resumed deliberations at 9 a.m. ET. After brief deliberations on Jan. 20, the jury resumed deliberations on Jan. 23. Christopher Cooper, U.S. District Court Judge, was informed by the jury that they had reached verdicts on all of the charges at approximately 10:30 AM.
Barnett, aged 62, was convicted in Arkansas of obstruction of an official proceeding and civil disorder. He also received a conviction for entering and remaining on restricted grounds or buildings with a deadly weapon or disruptive conduct, entering certain rooms of the Capitol Building, disorderly behavior in a Capitol Building, parading, demonstration or picketing inside a Capitol Building, and theft government property.
This was the latest in a string of lightning-quick verdicts by District of Columbia juries in Jan.6 cases. A D.C. jury has acquitted no Jan. 6 defendant. Few acquittals occurred during bench trials.
Every D.C. federal judge that has ever heard them have rejected numerous motions for a change in venue in Jan.6 cases.
Barnett is expected in appeal
Cooper rejected the motion of defense attorneys Jan. 20, to declare a mistrial. Cooper was charged with obstruction of a proceeding that is not occurring because Congress does not have a role under the law. “certify” The results of a presidential vote.
‘Non-Existent Proceeding’
In a filing with Judge Cooper, Barnett’s lawyers argued that federal prosecutors misled the jury about how the Twelfth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Chapter 3 of U.S. Code apply to the case against Barnett.
“The indictment charged, and the government prosecuted, obstruction of a non-existent proceeding,” The motion was approved. “No crime can have occurred.”
Barnett was indicted on Dec. 22, 2022 by the prosecutors for obstruction. “Congress’s certification of the Electoral College vote as set out in the Twelfth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and 3 U.S.C. §§ 15-18.”
The motion for mistrial says neither the Constitution nor applicable federal law mentions certification as part of Congress’s role.
“…All Congress does is watch the vice president open certificates and tally the vote — where states already certified the vote count,” The motion was approved. “There may be an objection and debate, where unless both House and Senate agree on the objection, the votes are counted. There is no written or oral certification by Congress as part of the law.”
According to trial testimony Barnett entered Capitol at 2.43 p.m. Jan. 6. A crowd surged through the huge Columbus Doors on the east.
Barnett stated that he did not intend to go inside the Capitol, but was forced in by crowd momentum. As members were being evacuated, both houses of Congress had already halted work.
Barnett ended up in the House Speaker’s office, where he leaned back in a chair and put his foot up on the desk belonging to Pelosi aide Emily Berret.
He was willing to pose for journalists. He took an envelope from Berret’s desk and got blood on it from a cut on his hand. He took the envelope and hid it, leading to a charge against him for theft of government property. He claimed that the quarter he left on the desk was to cover the cost of the envelope.
On his way out of the Capitol, Barnett realized he left his U.S. flag in Pelosi’s office and got into a verbal confrontation with a Capitol Police officer when he wanted to go retrieve it. Barnett’s language ranged from threatening the officer to bargaining. Barnett threatened the officer according to the prosecution, but the defense claimed it was only a temporary threat. “temper tantrum” In which “he’s behaving like an idiot, like a fool.”
The statute used to prosecute Barnett and many other Jan. 6 defendants for obstruction of Congress—18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2)—is controversial. Two District of Columbia judges dismissed the same count, declaring that the law could not apply to Congress’ deliberations. Other D.C. judges supported its use in Jan. 6 cases.
The cases of dismissed obstruction-of-Congress charges were combined into one case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The appeals case hearings were held in December 2022.
Before the start of Barnett’s trial, Judge Cooper denied a motion to dismiss the Section 1512(c)(2) obstruction charge, ruling that “a count of electoral votes is the same as ‘Congress’s certification of the electoral vote count,’” The motion was approved.
In citing a U.S. Court of Appeals decision for the Ninth Circuit, this motion stated that the statute’s plain language was shown. “an offense under § 1512(c) does not prohibit the obstruction of every governmental function; it only prohibits the obstruction of proceedings such as a hearing that takes place before a tribunal.”
Barnett’s attorneys said Judge Cooper was legislating from the bench, arguing he “rewrote the U.S. Constitution and 3 U.S.C. §§ 15-18 by saying counting equals certifying when it comes to a Congressional proceeding.
How do you write law from the bench?
“The argument that a ceremony equals a proceeding is already deficient, but that provides no excuse to write law from the bench or in the offices of the Department of Justice,” The motion was approved. “There is no dictionary that makes ‘counting’ a synonym with ‘certifying.’”
The next round of deliberations will be held on January 23rd.
Barnett was called to the stand on the final day. He was pressed repeatedly on cross-examination by Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Gordon, who suggested he wasn’t being truthful in his answers. Barnett’s retort was spirited.
“You want to keep pressing me and break me down,” Barnett said. “I ain’t breaking down. Sir, I stand behind what I have to say.
“I’ve made mistakes. I have made mistakes. And I regret those mistakes,” He said. ‘I’I’ve become confused in my testimony. It was hell up there. The officers were also subject to hell up there. It was a horrible, horrible day.”
Barnett repeatedly spoke out about brain injuries that he sustained as a firefighter, and beatings he claimed he received at the hands of guards while in District of Columbia prison. He stated that his memory has been affected by the injuries. Barnett shared his story about physical abuse during pretrial detention. “Patriot Purge” documentary. “I’ve been slammed face first into the concrete,” Barnett spoke at the time.
“I do the best I can. You can see how confused I get sometimes,” Barnett told Gordon. “I am struggling with this. However, I won’t change what I believe.
“…But I’m not going to let you put words in my mouth that I thought I was breaking the law or this, that, or the other,” He said. “That’s what your job is. I understand that. But I’m getting quite tired of it. I’m doing the best I can.”
During closing arguments, Gordon ridiculed Barnett’s testimony and explanations for his actions on Jan. 6. He said the defendant impeded the business that should have been conducted by Emily Berret and others that day in the speaker’s office.
“She couldn’t do any of that,” Gordon said. “His presence sitting at her desk with his feet up, bleeding on and stealing her stuff, impeded government business, Emily Berret’s work, and the work of everybody in Speaker Pelosi’s office.”
It’s not about a photograph
Gordon said the prosecution of Barnett had nothing to do with the now-famous photograph of him with his feet on Berret’s desk.
“We’re not here for the photograph. We’re here because the defendant committed eight crimes on January 6th, and the evidence has proven each of them beyond a reasonable doubt.
“…He thinks it’s all going to be okay because he’s Bigo. He’s going to escape consequences,” Gordon said. “He will not because you, the jury, I expect will go back, and you will come to the only conclusion supported by the law and evidence, and that is that this defendant is guilty of everything.”
Joseph McBride, defense attorney, slammed prosecutors for overcharging Barnett. He also blew up Barnett’s behavior way beyond what was reasonable. He asked the jury to forget any feelings about Barnett the person.
“You don’t have to like what he did,” McBride claimed. “You can even hate what he did. But you cannot convict him because you don’t like what he did, what he looks like or what he stands for.”
McBride said the government’s classification of Barnett as a “Tier 1 terrorist” It is clear how far the prosecution has gotten. “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this is the government that our forefathers warned us about,” He said.
McBride wondered aloud about what it was about his client that caused Department of Justice to be so focused on him.
“Well, whatever it is, there is something about Mr. Barnett that renders him suspicious,” McBride claimed. “He’s so loathsome, so repugnant to the United States government that it has indicted him on eight charges.
“They have literally made a federal case out of an act of stupidity that could have been dispensed with a ticket and a fine,” McBride claimed.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
