Enrique Tarrio, Proud Boys leader, sentenced to 22 years in Jan. 6 sedition case.
Florida Proud Boys Leader Sentenced to 22 Years in Prison for Capitol Attack
WASHINGTON—Henry “Enrique” Tarrio Jr., the former chairman of the Proud Boys, has been sentenced to 22 years in federal prison for his role in the seditious conspiracy to attack the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The sentencing, handed down by U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, marks the longest prison term among all Jan. 6 defendants.
Mr. Tarrio, 39, of Miami, received the longest prison term among all Jan. 6 defendants, eclipsing the previous record of 18 years given to Oath Keepers founder Elmer Stewart Rhodes III in May, and Mr. Tarrio’s co-defendant, Ethan Nordean, on Sept. 1.
The prosecution of Mr. Tarrio and his Proud Boys lieutenants was a highly publicized trial that lasted over four months. The trial took place in the E. Barrett Prettyman United States Courthouse in Washington, D.C.
Mr. Tarrio was the last of his trial group to be sentenced by Judge Kelly, an appointee of former President Donald J. Trump. Other defendants, including Ethan Nordean and Joseph Biggs, received significant prison terms as well.
Federal prosecutors sought a 33-year prison term for Mr. Tarrio, describing him as a “naturally charismatic leader, a savvy propagandist, and the celebrity chairman of the national Proud Boys organization.” They argued that his actions exhibited dangerous and violent leadership.
During the sentencing hearing, defense attorneys argued for a 15-year prison term, emphasizing Mr. Tarrio’s remorse and desire to turn away from his past actions.
Mr. Tarrio expressed remorse for his involvement in the Jan. 6 attack, acknowledging the disappointment he caused his family and the lack of respect he showed for law enforcement. He requested leniency from the judge, stating that the trial had humbled him and that he no longer wanted to be involved in rallies or politics.
Judge Kelly, referring to seditious conspiracy as a ”serious offense,” characterized Mr. Tarrio as the “ultimate leader” of the conspiracy, scheming to take over government buildings on Jan. 6. The judge condemned the events of that day as a “disgrace.”
Although Mr. Tarrio was not physically present in Washington on Jan. 6, Judge Kelly applied a sentence enhancement for terrorism due to the actions of other co-defendants. The judge deemed Mr. Tarrio complicit in the destruction of Capitol fencing and deserving of the terrorism enhancement.
In May, Mr. Tarrio was found guilty of seditious conspiracy, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to use force, intimidation, or threat to prevent officers of the United States from discharging their duties, interference with law enforcement during civil disorder, and destruction of government property. He was acquitted of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers, and the jury was unable to reach a verdict on two other counts.
Similar to the Oath Keepers trial, Mr. Tarrio was accused of plotting to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power from President Donald J. Trump to Joseph Biden Jr.
Defense attorney Sabino Jauregui rejected the characterization of his client as a terrorist, instead describing Mr. Tarrio as a “misguided patriot.”
Assistant U.S. Attorney Conor Mulroe disagreed, labeling the events of Jan. 6 as a “calculated act of terrorism.”
While Mr. Tarrio was not physically present in Washington on Jan. 6, prosecutors argued that he communicated with the Proud Boys through social media, using inflammatory language and encouraging their actions. They claimed that Mr. Tarrio had been consumed with the idea of revolution leading up to Jan. 6.
In their sentencing memorandum, defense attorneys Nayib Hassan and Mr. Jauregui criticized the Department of Justice for recommending an “upward departure” in sentencing based on alleged terrorism. They argued that Mr. Tarrio was not present during the events of Jan. 6 and did not plan or direct the actions of the Proud Boys that day.
Prosecutors countered by highlighting Mr. Tarrio’s statements that supported the idea of violence and resistance against the government. They argued that his rhetoric and leadership role within the conspiracy demonstrated a calculated attempt to intimidate and coerce the government.
The sentencing of Mr. Tarrio serves as a significant milestone in the aftermath of the Jan. 6 attack, highlighting the consequences faced by those involved in the assault on the U.S. Capitol.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...