Inner City Press

In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYTAzerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

These reports are usually available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis

Share |   

Follow on TWITTER

Home -

These reports are usually available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis


(FP Twitterati 100, 2013)

ICP on YouTube

More: InnerCityPro
Sept 24, 2013

UN: Sri Lanka


FOIA Finds  

Google, Asked at UN About Censorship, Moved to Censor the Questioner, Sources Say, Blaming UN - Update - Editorial

Support this work by buying this book

Click on cover for secure site orders

also includes "Toxic Credit in the Global Inner City"




Bank Beat

Freedom of Information

How to Contact Us

In Jan 6 Oath Keepers Case Shifting Tales When Deloitte Database Ready, Harrelson Video Withheld

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Podcast Song Filing
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - ESPN

FEDERAL COURT, August 10 -- After the DC Circuit's decision in US v. Munchel, DDC Judge Amit P. Mehta had before him on August 10 Capitol breach defendant Kenneth Harrelson and others in the Oath Keepers case. He also had video exhibits submitted by DOJ - exhibit Inner City Press has been denied access to, as recently as August 5, see below.

But the issue on August 10 was what seems to be double-talk by DOJ on Speedy Trail Act clocks, and when the Deloitte data base will be ready. Not before November 9, more likely January 2022, it had been said - then denied or dodged on August 10. Inner City Press live tweeted, here and below (podcast here)

Judge Mehta: Counsel should be aware there is a fifth superseding indictment, with new charges in US v. Steele and US v. Dolan. Let's talk discovery 1st. Assistant US Attorney: We are starting to provide 1 TB hard drives with additional electronic evidence, iCloud Inner City Press @innercitypress · 2h AUSA: We're waiting for the defendants to send new drives to load the discovery onto. We have arranged an additional tour of the Capitol, there's one this Saturday and we've disclosed info that's arguably relevant to potential defenses

 AUSA: When we seize the cell phones we extract everything. Then we go through it all and ID what is relevant under Attachment D to the search warrant. Judge Mehta: What happens to the beyond the scope data? AUSA: It gets sealed up. The FBI keeps the data of course

AUSA: ... we would only go back to that data with a new search warrant. Now as to uncharged co-conspirators, that's different. As to these, we hope to wind it up by Labor Day, with grand jury material. There is an ongoing investigation into additional subjects

Judge Mehta: What's the status of the non-case-specific material, under Chief Judge Howell's order? AUSA: The Chief Judge's ruling did require additional work, we have to remove grand jury material before the contractor gets it. But it's not a huge piece. 

AUSA: As to all the video, body warn and radio run, I understand there's a six to eight week window. When we come back in September we may have a clearer picture. Judge Mehta: By our next date, we are going to need some more info on that issue...Trial date January

 Judge Mehta: I do not want the trial date impacted by the larger data set. AUSA: We provided 100 gigabytes of Capitol surveillance video...There will be more in the larger scheme.  Judge Mehta: One last question, any plea offers? By what date would you say, trial?

 AUSA: We never want to close the door entirely. But I'd say October, we'll show who should go in which trial group. Plus, they may want to see how the motions hearing on September 8 go. We are in discussion with a number of defense counsel.

Counsel for Caldwell: I heard the AUSA mention reverse proffer, we'll be taking up that offer. Also, the discovery in this case is like that in a death penalty case. We had a group meeting the other day and agreed this is a massive undertaking.

 Judge Mehta: Ms Hernandez, are you back on? [She repeatedly said she couldn't hear Caldwell's counsel] Hernandez: I'd like to move from the April trial to the January trial date, because of a case I have been Judge Boasberg.

 Ms. Hernandez: They have identified 20 co-conspirators, but my client doesn't know 15 of them. Can my client be responsible for "co-conspirator" statements by 15 people he doesn't know? I am concerned.

 Judge Mehta does not grant Ms. Hernandez' request to move her client's trial from April to January. Defense counsel 2: There were amateur videos that we are not getting.

Judge Mehta: My expectation, as for all judge on this court, is for that to be made available.

Showdown: Judge Mehta is told of DOJ saying Deloitte database not ready until early 2022. Judge is concerned. AUSA dodges or denies.

Even before story: Here's Inner City Press July 30 article, already cited to DDC, about "early 2022" - here

On August 5, Inner City Press filed a letter and motion with Judge Mehta, now on its DocumentCloud here. An excerpt:

"Re: PUBLIC Access to videos (judicial documents) in US v. Harrelson, 21-cr-00028-APM-10 Dear Judge Mehta:    This is a request for access to videos used as judicial documents in the above captioned case, which I have been reporting on for Inner City Press. Before this submission I asked DOJ for access to the videos, citing your July 13 minute order.... I have today been told that DOJ interprets your Order as ONLY requiring or even allowing them to release these judicial documents to some, and not others. This seems absurd, given the case law about the availability of judicial documents to the public, not to a subset thereof.    I understand that DOJ has interpreted a number of DDC orders in the January 6 cases in this restrictive way - this should be addressed more broadly, but in this Harrelson case, this is a request that you address the issue of whether the judicial documents should be made available to the public, or only a subset (and if so, why). I have also written to you on USA v. Schwartz, 21-cr-178 (APM), on June 24 (no response). If necessary, to expedite things (Inner City Press is reporting on this case today) APPLICATION FOR ACCESS TO VIDEO EXHIBITS."

Similarly, Inner City Press asked DOJ and then Judge Timothy Kelly for access to the videos that DOJ had shown to the court in the case: judicial documents that, under case law, must be made available to the public. But it was denied access, on the theory that Judge Kelly's order earlier in the month limited access to these judicial documents to a particular sub-set of the public.

 Inner City Press on July 27 wrote to Judge Kelly, including in the form of a motion, now on DocumentCloud, here. By noon the next day, July 28, nothing - no responses, no response. We'll have more on this. For now, podcast here; music video here.

Inner City Press live tweeted Riley June Williams on January 25, here. 

  From January 22, song here: Thread here.

 Inner City Press' John Earle Sullivan song on SoundCloud here. 


Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at]
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA

Mail: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2021 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at]