Skip to comments.
Judge reluctantly authorizes refund of restitution paid by Jan. 6 rioter
Politico ^
| 08/28/2025 03:53 PM EDT
| Kyle Cheney
Posted on 08/28/2025 4:25:37 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
It is the first time a Jan. 6 rioter who was convicted and then pardoned will get a refund.
A federal judge has authorized a $2,200 refund to a Jan. 6 rioter whose felony conviction was dropped after President Donald Trump issued a blanket pardon to those who breached the Capitol or attacked police.
It is the first time a pardoned Jan. 6 defendant has received a refund of the fines and restitution that many were ordered to pay, even though the Justice Department
endorsed the refunds in April.
U.S. District Judge John Bates approved the return of the $2,000 restitution paid by Yvonne St. Cyr, concluding that because she had appealed her conviction — and the appeal was still pending when Trump’s pardon ended her case altogether — she was no longer guilty in the eyes of the law and was entitled to the return of her funds. She was also refunded a separate $270 penalty applied after her sentencing.
“Sometimes a judge is called upon to do what the law requires, even if it may seem at odds with what justice or one’s initial instincts might warrant,”
Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote. “This is one such occasion.”
Bates presided over a jury trial that resulted in St. Cyr’s conviction in March 2023. She was convicted of two felony counts of impeding police during a civil disorder, egging on rioters as they battered police near the Capitol’s Lower West Terrace tunnel. St. Cyr also remained defiant, telling Bates she “did the right thing” on Jan. 6 just before he sentenced her to 30 months in prison.
Despite his reluctance, Bates became the first judge to approve the return of fines and restitution paid by a Jan. 6 rioter who was subsequently let off the hook by Trump’s...
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: dcdistrict; dubyastooge; enemywithin; insurrectionists; johnbates; johndbates; judgewatch; kylecheney; masterjohnbates; nevergiveupthecon; outofcontrolcourts; smirkingchimpstooge; stayoutdebushs; stoogewatch
The judge is reluctant to give up the con.
To: E. Pluribus Unum
If you think justice is what your individual instincts might warrant, then you are a lousy judge sir.
2
posted on
08/28/2025 4:27:34 PM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(The above is not a statement of fact. It is opinion or satire. Or both.)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
3
posted on
08/28/2025 4:33:21 PM PDT
by
Dr. Franklin
("A republic, if you can keep it." )
To: E. Pluribus Unum
any judge or gov’t official who aided and abetted the stealing of the 2020 election by supporting the hoax of the j6 ‘insurrection,’ should be hanged for treason. just my humble opinion.
4
posted on
08/28/2025 4:36:23 PM PDT
by
dadfly
To: dadfly
Judges should keep their personal opinions to themselves.
5
posted on
08/28/2025 4:38:24 PM PDT
by
abbastanza
(Oh boy. Can't wait. Go nuts kids. )
To: E. Pluribus Unum
“Sometimes a judge is called upon to do what the law requires”.
There it is! The judge came right out and said it!
Sometimes?
Far too many black-robed tyrants are following their political masters, and beliefs. That is not their job, and they should be disciplined for it.
6
posted on
08/28/2025 5:05:02 PM PDT
by
Fireone
(1.Avoid crowds 2.Head on a swivel 3.Be prepared to protect & defend those around you 4.Avoid crowds)
To: Fireone
“Sometimes a judge is called upon to do what the law requires”.
There it is! The judge came right out and said it! Sometimes?
Far too many black-robed tyrants are following their political masters, and beliefs. That is not their job, and they should be disciplined for it.
Which is to say, most of the time judges do whatever they want regardless of the law. Their opinions have become creative writing exercises. They claim to declare the law while not following the law.
7
posted on
08/28/2025 5:44:06 PM PDT
by
Dr. Franklin
("A republic, if you can keep it." )
To: E. Pluribus Unum
“impeding police during a civil disorder, egging on rioters”
Sounds like the feds prosecuted her for exercising her rights to free speech and petitioning her government more than they decided was enough.
To: E. Pluribus Unum
“Sometimes a judge is called upon to do what the law requires, even if it may seem at odds with what justice or one’s initial instincts might warrant,” Bates, a George W. Bush simp and Deep State stooge, wrote. “This is one such occasion.”
9
posted on
08/28/2025 6:01:15 PM PDT
by
kiryandil
(No one in AZ that voted for Trump voted for Gallego )
To: BenLurkin
What about the legal bills? $2000 would not touch it. I hope he sues.
10
posted on
08/29/2025 4:08:07 AM PDT
by
Machavelli
(True God)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson