"Duped" and "egged on": Capitol rioters use Trump as excuse in court

[riversedge]

Source: cbs






February 17, 2021 / 7:15 AM / CBS News

The Senate may have acquitted Donald Trump of inciting an insurrection, but the former president still faces accusations of incitement from another source: Capitol rioters themselves.

Attorneys for at least seven accused rioters have referenced Mr. Trump in efforts to explain their clients' actions, according to statements and documents reviewed by CBS News.

The attorney for Matthew Ryan Miller — who was allegedly photographed discharging a fire extinguisher on the steps of the U.S. Capitol — said during a hearing Tuesday that his client was "there at the behest of then-President Trump." He wrote in a February 7 filing arguing for his client's pretrial release, "Mr. Miller concedes he was on the Capitol grounds to protest along with thousands of other protesters and was merely following the directions of then-President Trump, the country's chief law enforcement officer, and other speakers to march to the Capitol."

Similarly, ................

A lawyer for accused Proud Boy Dominic Pezzola wrote ...................


The strategy is similar to an "advice of counsel" defense, says Randy Zelin, a criminal defense attorney at Wilk Auslander LLP and an adjunct professor at Cornell Law School. The tactic argues that a defendant couldn't have had criminal intent if they were acting on advice from their attorney. Although Mr. Trump isn't an attorney, Zelin says there is a notion that if someone who makes the laws tells you what to do, someone could argue they had no intention to break the law............................

Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/capitol-riot-suspects-trump-blame-court/?ftag=CNM-00-10aac3a

---

Well, this is interesting to say the least------- "advice of counsel" defense!!

Link to tweet

?s=20

[redstatebluegirl]

1. But after they get off, they will go right back to MAGAT Crazy Land.

[sfstaxprep]

2. Not My Fault, Charlie Made Me Do It nt

[CTyankee]

3. Whatta bunch of crybabies!

[sakabatou]

4. The "Party of Personal Responsibility," everybody

[OldBaldy1701E]

15. Yep! (n/t)

[tanyev]

5. Think of it as an all expenses paid 'degree' from Trump University.

[FakeNoose]

8. So right

And now they're having to pay lawyers to keep their asses out of jail.
Insurrections have consequences.

[Mad Lib]

6. The Nuremberg Defense

It didn't work for the Nazis in Germany and it shouldn't work for the American Nazis either.

[Vogon_Glory]

7. My, my, my. All that "rugged individualism" and "personal responsibility"

Groove on it!




I’m old enough to remember when the meme of some conservatives was to think for themselves. That was a very long time ago, and that stripe of right-winger has either aged out or has long since been picked off by the RINO hunters.

[cstanleytech]

9. The "I was ordered to do it" defense did not work to well for many German soldiers after WWII.

[LiberalLovinLug]

10. Except this time is different. The instigator was found not guilty by a Senate trial

I wonder how much that not guilty vote has also screwed these poor idiots. How can they now argue that President Trump made them do it, if it was determined by the lands highest lawmakers that he had no affect on their decisions.

[cstanleytech]

12. I think the excuse Mitch and many Republicans made for their vote was not that he was not guilty

but the bogus one of having no jurisdiction because he was now out of office when in fact they had jurisdiction as he was impeached while he was in office still.

[LiberalLovinLug]

13. But that is just a technicality. Politicians can twist that any way they like

Think of Trump and the GOP crowing how the Mueller Report totally exonerated him. Eric was already tweeting out "2 - 0" implying his father had won both impeachment cases against him. In the eyes of his cult followers, they will believe what they are told to believe, and they see it that Trump has been found "innocent" of EVERYTHING that the dastardly Democrats have thrown at him.

But anyways, I wasn't arguing on that level, but just in terms of pure legality. Why couldn't the prosecutors use that Senate ruling to quash any defence based on blaming Trump? Judges and juries jobs are not to weigh in on contesting past judgments, they base their own rulings on the precedents of those past rulings.

[weissmam]

11. I wish them luck with that

the next question is

so if Trump told them to jump off a cliff would they?

[torius]

17. Yes. nt

[dianaredwing]

18. Then why don't we just tell them

that Trump said to jump off a cliff and they can all do the lemming thing and save time and expense, burial at sea, perhaps?

[Lock him up.]

14. IOWs "we were just following orders"

Lock 'em up with him.

[Brainfodder]

16. How does the too stupid to know right from wrong excuse hold up?

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

19. I believe it will go to the Supreme Court.

Would you think that if a justice favored Trump, the justice would say it is not an excuse, so as not to give Trump the blame?