(FiveNation.com)- On Monday, acting US Attorney for the District of Columbia, Channing Phillips, told a Federal Court that the Justice Department is still processing massive amounts of possible exculpatory evidence from the January 6 melee at the Capitol.
Phillips filed a motion requesting a sixty-day delay in the trial of Couy Griffin, founder of Cowboys for Trump. Griffin is charged with “Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building” and “Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building.” Problem is, so far the government has failed to produce a single shred of evidence that Couy Griffin ever entered the Capitol itself – only that he spoke from a restricted area outside of the building.
Griffin was initially detained for several days then released on his own recognizance in February. His defense is demanding that the DOJ turn over all potentially exculpatory evidence in accordance with Brady v Maryland (1963).
Exculpatory evidence is evidence in possession of the prosecution that supports the idea that the defendant is not guilty of the crime for which he is charged. Brady v. Maryland determined that pursuant to the Due Process clause of the Constitution, this exculpatory evidence in the prosecution’s possession must be disclosed to the defense.
Initially, the DOJ had told the court that it would have all exculpatory evidence prepared by June. But in Monday’s hearing, Phillips told the court that the DOJ had only just gotten around to transferring the data in June. This data is being transferred to analysts from Deloitte Financial Advisory Services which won the contract to organize all of the video evidence and other data collected on the January 6 riot.
Phillips acknowledged to the court that the DOJ is aware that they possess “some information” that Griffin’s defense “may view as supportive of arguments” that police allowed the defendant to enter the restricted area. But, Phillips added, the DOJ is “not in a position to state whether we have identified all such information.”
Phillips also claimed the request for a 60-day delay is to “honor the Defendant’s constitutional rights.” But not his constitutional right to a speedy trial.
As Julie Kelly reported recently at American Greatness, judges overseeing these cases are beginning to lose patience with the DOJ dragging its feet in the discovery process.
On Wednesday, Judge Emmett Sullivan told the DOJ that he will “seriously consider some sanctions” against the government if they do not set up a system for defendants to search and analyze all the evidence within thirty days.