WASHINGTON — Attorneys for the Proud Boys placed blame for the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol on Donald Trump during closing arguments in the seditious conspiracy trial on Tuesday.
An attorney for Enrique Tarrio said that federal prosecutors were trying to make the Proud Boys head a “scapegoat for Donald J. Trump and for those in power.” A lawyer for Joe Biggs said that the defendants went to D.C. because their “commander-in-chief” told them it would “be wild,” referencing Trump’s infamous tweet on Dec. 19, 2020, that called on supporters to go to D.C. on Jan. 6.
“‘Be there, it’s going to be wild,’ the commander-in-chief said. And so they did,” Norm Pattis, an attorney for Biggs, told jurors, adding that “their commander-in-chief sold them a lie.”
Tarrio, Biggs and fellow Proud Boys, Ethan Nordean, Dominic Pezzola and Zach Rehl are each facing at least nine counts, including seditious conspiracy, a rarely-used Civil War era law. The trial has been underway for more than three months, and jury selection in the case began in December 2020. The government said during closing arguments on Monday that the Proud Boys wanted to be “Donald Trump’s army” and were “thirsting for violence and organizing for action” ahead of the Jan. 6 attack.
Aug. 30, 202201:12
The defense lawyers wrapped their closing arguments early Tuesday afternoon, and the Justice Department presented their rebuttal argument as the day came to a close. Jurors will begin deliberating on Wednesday.
Two defendants testified during the trial: Rehl and Pezzola. Just before Rehl was set to be cross-examined, online sleuths surfaced videos that appeared to show Rehl deploying a can of pepper spray on officers. Pezzola got heated on the stand, bringing up conspiracy theories about another Jan. 6 participant, Ray Epps, and ranting about the “fake” charges and the “phony” trial.
Biggs’ lawyer, Pattis, told jurors that “Jan. 6 was a perfect storm,” and that Trump played a large role. If “the case of United States v. Donald J. Trump” is ever brought, Pattis said, the “fight like hell” quote would be “exhibit one.” But Trump wasn’t on trial, he said.
Defense attorney Nayib Hassan, representing Tarrio, also pointed the finger at Trump, saying the former president’s anger caused what happened on Jan. 6, and reminding jurors that Trump said “fight like hell” or his supporters weren’t “going to have a country anymore.”
Hassan even partially blamed the membership of the Proud Boys on Trump, saying Trump’s “stand back and stand by” callout to the group brought new attention to the Proud Boys and they grew so quickly that “vetting became difficult.”
Hassan said Tarrio couldn’t have known what was going to happen at the Capitol from a “hotel in Baltimore,” where he was holed up on Jan. 6. (Unlike his codefendants, Tarrio did not go to the Capitol on Jan. 6 after he was banned from Washington, D.C., the day before). Tarrio couldn’t have predicted the future, Hassan said, showing a photo of Nostradamus.
He reminded jurors that Tarrio was in communication with a Metropolitan Police officer in the months leading up to Jan. 6, and even told the MPD official where he would be staying while in D.C. Why, Hassan asked, would Tarrio give an officer that information if he was going to commit sedition, one of the most serious crimes against the United States?
“Enrique was an entertainer, a lover, and a razzle dazzler,” Hassan argued.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Nadia Moore, during the government’s rebuttal, said that this was more than just talk.
“Enrique Tarrio isn’t being ‘scapegoated’ for Jan. 6, he ‘s being held accountable for the crimes he committed,” Moore said after showing a video posted on Parler in which Tarrio stood in front of the Capitol building while masked. “Premonition,” he titled the video.
Source: | This article originally belongs to Nbcnews.com
