Guy Reffitt did not take the stand, nor did his attorney put on an affirmative defense, calling no witnesses.
The case goes to the jury tomorrow and I don’t think deliberations will be too terribly long.
The most damning charge against Reffitt is not for January 6th at all, but for Obstruction of Justice for threatening his kids if they turned him in, which the son bravely went and did.
If he is convicted, he will likely eat more jail time for the obstruction charge than for anything actually related to January 6th.
If he is convicted, very likely that other defendants who have chosen to go to trial will have a change of heart and plead out.
In any event, we may know the verdict by the end of the day Tuesday.
His attorney did question and attempt to impeach prosecution witnesses, but that was about it.
Regardless, if convicted, he will find it was a stupid decision, as he will likely eat a far more substantial sentence than that he would likely have received had he taken a plea.
I can not come up with any reason that he wanted this to go to trial. This will do nothing more then costing him a butt load of money. If he thinks this will make him some sort of martyr so be it.
Why is it insane that when a crime is committed that a person who (presumably) participated in a crime and then threatens someone that has knowledge the individual committed the crime, that the person is then charged with obstruction for making the threat?
Fellow Three Percenter Rocky Hardie testified last week that Reffitt said he wanted to physically remove members of Congress from the Capitol and replace them with people who would “follow the Constitution.”
Hardie told the court that he considered Reffitt’s words to be “hyperbole” and didn’t think he would act on them.
Following the riot, authorities say, Reffitt warned his children not to speak to law enforcement about him.
“If you turn me in, you’re a traitor and you know what happens to traitors,” Reffitt said to his son and daughter, according to court papers. “Traitors get shot.”
Reffitt’s 18-year-old son ultimately tipped the FBI off to his father’s role in the attack.
If this is the basis for your prosecution, IMO…it’s because you don’t actually have anything that was the basis for this whole accusation.
What kind of son turns his father in for trespassing in a building? What sort of father threatens to shoot his son?
Basically, they are prosecuting someone for being an ignorant low class redneck, IMO.
Hold my beer. Watch this!
It’s probably quite accurate and without question rings of “hyperbole”, doesn’t it? If this is what our court system is going after, rather than an actual crime from that day, then this is a “nothing burger” that is being turned into something else.
