Lead prosecutor on former FBI Director Comey's 'seashells' case withdraws without explanation

[LetMyPeopleVote]

This attorney does not want to be disbarred

https://abcnews.com/Politics/lead-prosecutor-former-fbi-director-comeys-seashells-case/story

The lead prosecutor tasked with overseeing former FBI Director James Comey's prosecution stemming from his post of seashells that the Justice Department claims amounted to a threat against President Donald Trump has withdrawn from the case, according to a court filing.

Matthew Petracca was the lone prosecutor from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina assigned to the case when it was unsealed late last month.

On Friday evening, however, the Justice Department filed a notice with the court indicating that Petracca has been replaced by assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy Severo.

The department did not include any explanation for the move in the high-profile case.

Comey's attorneys are expected to make a vigorous push to have the case dismissed before it can go to trial through a variety of legal challenges.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

1. trump's DOJ is having a hard time finding prosecutors who are willing to risk their bar licenses

Link to tweet

[Jersey Devil]

2. I don't see how this protects Petracca's license to practice law

He's the prosecutor who sought the indictment before the grand jury. So if he is disciplined for a vindictive prosecution, how does bowing out as the trial prosecutor absolve him? If his conscience really was bothering him he should have moved to dismiss the indictment. He gave birth to this baby so he should be forced to live with it.

[SWBTATTReg]

3. I hope Comey and/or someone else sues the prosecutor(s) and/or tRUMP lackeys who authorized this obviously

fake lawsuit to deliberately hurt Comey.

[wnylib]

5. Maybe he didn't withdraw. MaybeTrump did not like

his handling of the case and told him to drop out.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

4. Deadline Legal Blog-Ruling in '8647' civil protest case signals strength of James Comey's criminal defense

In a case unrelated to James Comey’s, a judge said it’s “difficult to fathom” how a flag bearing those numbers could be seen as a “true threat.”

Ruling in ‘8647’ civil protest case signals strength of James Comey’s criminal defense
"In a case unrelated to James Comey’s, a judge said it’s “difficult to fathom” how a flag bearing those numbers could be seen as a “true threat.”"
www.ms.now/deadline-whi...

— Karen (Harris/Walz Alaskan Democrat) (@danceswithseagulls.bsky.social) 2026-06-02T20:19:32.221Z

https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/james-comey-seashells-post-instagram-8647-ruling-civil-case

The Trump Justice Department has alleged that when James Comey posted an image of seashells arranged as “86 47” last year, a reasonable observer familiar with the circumstances would have interpreted the former FBI director’s social media post as a serious expression of intent to harm the 47th president.

The indictment looked weak when the DOJ brought it in April. More than anything, it looked like the latest attempt to prosecute one of the president’s political targets, after a previous indictment against Comey was dismissed in Virginia.

Regardless of the administration’s motivations, a new ruling in an unrelated case shows the difficulty the DOJ faces in its latest Comey prosecution.

That ruling came Monday, when a federal judge in Washington sided with a group that wanted to protest the administration with a flag displaying “8647.” U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss wrote that it was “difficult to fathom” how the government “could have concluded that a reasonable observer would view the flag as a true threat.” The Obama-appointed judge noted that the “term ‘86’ is used far more often to mean ‘throw out’ than ‘kill.’”.....

He noted that the “86” term “comes from 1930s soda-counter slang meaning that an item was sold out” and that it “may have been used because it rhymes with ‘nix.’”

The judge emphasized that context is key when evaluating whether the numbers can amount to a “true threat.” Analyzing the case before him, he wrote that “the relevant context makes clear that no reasonable observer could have viewed Plaintiff’s display of the flag as a threat to the President’s life or physical safety.”....

Viewed through that lens, it’s “difficult to fathom,” to use the judge’s phrase, how an Instagram post of seashells in the sand can clear the high bar of criminal culpability.

This case is not directly binding but will be cited in the Comey case. The Comey case will never make it to a jury. I was amused to see that the lead attorney on this case has resigned from this case.