6 protesters acquitted of rioting, related charges stemming from Inauguration Day

WTOP News [Washington DC] ^ | December 21, 2017 2:30 pm | Amanda Iacone and Megan Cloherty

[COBOL2Java]

WASHINGTON — Six protesters cleared of all charges related to riots that broke out on Inauguration Day were jubilant and declared a victory for lawful dissent after a jury found them not guilty Thursday following a monthlong trial.

“People won’t be afraid to show up and go protest and get in the streets and not be worried that they’ll get mass arrested like we did,” said Michelle Macchio, one of the six acquitted defendants. “This sets a really strong precedent that that’s not ok and you can’t criminalize dissent.”

The jury deliberated for a week before delivering its verdict in D.C. Superior Court.

Defendants described their reaction in the courtroom as relief, followed by hugging and sobbing.

“This isn’t just about the six of us. This about the other 188 people that are left to go. … All we can do is hope that these acquittals really set the stage for them to also get acquittals,” Macchio said.

[Thank You Rush]

Hang this judge???????

“”after a jury found them not guilty Thursday following a month long trial.””

[ex91B10]

I was under the impression one could. Thx for the info.

[WayneS]

A judge can nullify a guilty verdict, but once a not guilty verdict then the restriction on double jeopardy (enshrined in the 5th Amendment) prevents the judge from doing anything other than releasing the defendant.

The only exception is the very rare circumstance in which jury tampering or "fixing" of a jury can be proved - and even then it does not guarantee prosecutors a second "bite at the apple".

[WayneS]

Whether he is or is not an Obamabot, the prosecutor failed to make the case against these particular defendants, and in my opinion acquittal was the only just outcome.

In this case, I think the jury did its job.

[mewzilla]

Did the prosecutor fail, or was this the outcome the DA’s office wanted all along?

[Yosemitest]

"... Superior Court Judge Lynn Leibovitz threw out each defendant’s inciting a riot charge — a felony that carried a maximum 10-year sentence.

Leibovitz concluded that “no reasonable juror” could find that the prosecution proved the six defendants encouraged others to riot.

The protesters faced up to six months for the misdemeanor rioting charges and up to 10 years behind bars for each felony destruction of property charge .... "

IMPEACH and REPLACE Superior Court Judge Lynn Leibovitz for PREDUJICE AND INCOMPETENCE !

[WayneS]

As it relates to the verdict, it makes no real difference WHY the case was poorly prosecuted. My point was that the jury did nothing wrong.

Many who have posted about this story have criticized the jury, and I think that criticism is unfair in this case.

[mewzilla]

It relates to the verdict in that if the DA’s office was deteruined to lose the case, the verdict was predictable. And you’re right, no fault of the jury. The jury was used.

[WayneS]

IMPEACH and REPLACE Superior Court Judge Lynn Leibovitz for PREDUJICE AND INCOMPETENCE !

I disagree. It's pretty clear that the prosecutor did not make the case against these particular defendants. That is NOT the judge's fault.

Take a look at Post #36, above for details on the prosecutors failures.

We may agree that these people are [most likely] guilty of rioting, but it is up to the prosecutor to present enough evidence to make the case.

[WayneS]

Stating in closing statements that criminal charges did NOT require "beyond reasonable doubt", no matter what the law said, and being contradicted publicly by the judge on the matter.

Any prosecutor who makes that statement in open court should be disbarred.