Datasets:

johnearlesullivan

/

capitol

like 0

conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and

c. 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2) (D), which makes it a crime for an individual or group

of individuals to willfully and knowingly (A) enter or remain on the floor of either

House of Congress or in any cloakroom or lobby adjacent to that floor, in the Case 1:21-cr-00078-EGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/13/21 Page 16 of 1817

Rayburn Room of the House of Representatives, or in the Marble Room of the

Senate, unless authorized to do so pursuant to rules adopted, or an authorization

given, by that House; (B) enter or remain in the gallery of either House of Congress in violation of rules governing admission to the gallery adopted by that House or pursuant to an authorization given by that House; (C) with the intent t o disrupt the

orderly conduct of official business, enter or remain in a room in any of the Capitol Buildings set aside or designated for the use of — (i) either House of Congress or a

Member, committee, officer, or employee of Congress, or either House of Congress; or (ii) the Library of Congress; (D) utter loud, threatening, or abusive language, or engage in disorderly or disruptive conduct, at any place in the Grounds or in any of the Capitol Buildings with the intent to impede, disrupt, or disturb the orderly

conduct of a session of Congress or either House of Congress, or the orderly cond uct

in that building of a hearing before, or any deliberations of, a committee of Congress or either House of Congress; (E) obstruct, or impede passage through or within, the Grounds or any of the Capitol Buildings ; (F) engage in an act of physical violence

in the Grounds or any of the Capitol Buildings; or (G) parade, demonstrate, or picket

in any of the Capitol Buildings ; and

25. As such, I respectfully request that the court issue an arrest warrant for SULLIVAN .

The statements above are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.

_________________________________ SPECIAL AGENT MATTHEW B. FOULGER

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Case 1:21-cr-00078-EGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/13/21 Page 17 of 1818 Attested to by the applicant in accordance with the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 4.1 by

telephone, this 13th day of January, 2021.

___________________________________

HON. ROBIN M. MERIWEATHER

UNITED STATES MAGISTR ATE JUDGE Case 1:21-cr-00078-EGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/13/21 Page 18 of 18

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V. No. 21-cr-78 (RCL) JOHN EARLE SULLIVAN OPPOSITION TO MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE IMPROPER STATEMENTS OF DEFENDANT AND TO PRECLUDE FIRST AMENDMENT DEFENSE Defendant, by and through undersigned counsel, does hereby oppose the Government’s Motion In Limine related to First Amendment arguments. In support thereof, defendant respectfully sets forth as follows: 1. The admission of defendant’s statements. The United States argues, “it intends to introduce several statements, made by defendant, that will aid the jury’s determination as to whether the United States has met the elements of the conspiracy statutes to issue to show motive and intent. Government’s Motion in Limine, PACE 88, 7. Defendant notes as follows: Case 1:21-cr-00078-RCL Document 98 Filed 07/07/23 Page 1 of 6 2 a. Defendant is not charged with violating any conspiracy statutes. Rather, he is charged with violating 18 U.S.C. 1512 (c)(2), Obstruction of an Official Proceeding; 18 U.S.C. Section 231 (a)(3), Civil Disorder; 18 U.S.C. Sections 1752 (a)(1q), Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building or Grounds with a Dangerous Weapon; 18 U.S.C Sections 1752 (a)(2) Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building or Grounds with a Dangerous Weapon; 40 U.S.C. Section 5104 (e)(1)(A)(i), Unlawful Possession of a Dangerous Weapon on Capitol Grounds or Buildings; 40 U.S.C. Section 5104 (e)(2)(D), Disorderly Conduct in a Capitol Building; 40 U.S.C. Section 5104(e)(2)(G), Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in a Capitol Building; 18 U.S.C. Section 1001 (a)(2), False Statement or Representation to an Agency of the United States; and 18 U.S.C, Section 2 (Aiding and Abetting). Superseding Indictment, PACER 26. b. The indicted charges exclusively relate to alleged conduct occurring on January 6, 2021 and January 11, 2021. There is a pending Motion to Sever the charge related to conduct on January 11, 2021. c. The United States has not identified any specific non-custodial statements it intends to introduce at trial. Thus, defendant cannot respond to what it is the Government is seeking to introduce at trial. Case 1:21-cr-00078-RCL Document 98 Filed 07/07/23 Page 2 of 6 3 d. Defendant notes there is a pending 404(b) Notice filed by the United States and defendant has filed an opposition to the Notice. It appears through this Motion in Limine, the United States is also attempting to seek introduce other crimes evidence. To the extent defendant is correct in his assessment, he incorporates by reference his opposition to the 404(b) Notice. e. In Bradenburg v. Ohio, the Supreme Court held that, “the First Amendment does not permit [the government] to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of a law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless actions and is likely to incite or produce such action.” 395 U.S. 444,447 (1969). The Bradenburg Court added, “[F]or the speech at issue in this case to fall outside the purview of the First Amendment, this Court must determine that the speech (1) invited imminent lawlessness and (2) that the imminent lawlessness was likely to occur.” Id. (emphasis in opinion). f. Defendant reiterates it is not known what specific speech the United States is addressing or when the speech actually occurred. Thus, the Court cannot consider the Bradenburg standard as it is not known if the speech invited lawlessness and whether the lawlessness was likely to occur. Case 1:21-cr-00078-RCL Document 98 Filed 07/07/23 Page 3 of 6 4 g. The requirement of imminent lawlessness mandated by Bradenburg was recently reiterated by the 4th Circuit, United States Court of Appeals. “ Thus, in the world of Bradenburg, “incite” most sensibly refers to speech that is directed and likely to produce an imminent lawlessness.” United States v. Miselis, 972 F.3d 518, 536 (4th Cir. 2020). Because the United States has not provided the substance of any such statements, and has not provided temporal context of the statements, the Motion in Limine regarding any such statements must be denied. 2. Preclusion of First Amendment Defense. The United States argues that defendant should not be permitted to argue to the jury that “ The government anticipates the Defendant may argue he was simply a journalist documenting January 6, 2021, and therefore cannot be found guilty.” PACER, 9. The Government adds, “Even if part of the Defendant’s motive was to record events for later dissemination and public consumption, it does not provide an excuse for the criminal conduct he engaged in on January 6, 2021.” Id. In support of the argument, the United States relies on one case, United States v. Rivers, 607 F. Supp. 3d 2 (D.D.C. 2022). Reliance on Rivera is misplaced. Rivera involved a January 6 defendant and the United States introduced into evidence a podcast in which the defendant tells the Case 1:21-cr-00078-RCL Document 98 Filed 07/07/23 Page 4 of 6 5 interviewer “that he is, in no uncertain terms, not a journalist and did not go into the Capitol as such…that he is a photographer, a cinematographer, and a videographer by trade.” Id. 7, internal quotations omitted. Judge Kollar-Kotelly found the defendant guilty but not because she rejected a member of the media defense. Rather, Judge Kollar-Kotelly found defendant guilty because “the evidence shows beyond a reasonable doubt that Jesus Rivera was not a mere observer on January 6, 2021. He took a side, and it was the side of the insurrection. By his own conduct, the Court finds Jesus Rivera guilty….” Id. 11. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees as follows: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Govern- ment for a redress of grievances. The trial record in this matter is clear. John Sullivan was at the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021. This highly publicized event may be deemed offensive by many members of the community and jury panel. However, any claims he may make concerning his attendance at the United States Capitol regarding his journalistic credentials are protected speech. There simply are no grounds for overriding his assertion regardless of Case 1:21-cr-00078-RCL Document 98 Filed 07/07/23 Page 5 of 6 6 whether or not he was a “credentialed” journalist. His right to be on the premises of the Capitol is a matter to be left for the jury to decide Respectfully submitted, _______/s/_______________ Steven R.Kiersh#323329 5335 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W. Suite 440 Washington, D.,C. 20015 (202) 347-0200 skiersh@aol.com Attorney for John Sullivan CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and accurate copy of the foregoing was served, via the Court’s electronic filing system, upon all counsel of record on this the ___7th__day of July, 2023. ___________/s/_____________ Steven R. Kiersh Case 1:21-cr-00078-RCL Document 98 Filed 07/07/23 Page 6 of 6

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V. No. 21-cr-78 (RCL) JOHN EARLE SULLIVAN REPLY TO MOTION IN LIMINE (Security Related Topics) Defendant, by and through undersigned counsel, does hereby file the following reply to the Government’s Motion in Limine related to security related topics. Defendant does not oppose the Government’s Motion in Limine related to the following topics: 1. The exact locations of USCP CCTV cameras;; 2. Protocols of the U.S. Secret Service; 3. Exact locations of USCP cameras; Case 1:21-cr-00078-RCL Document 99 Filed 07/07/23 Page 1 of 2 2 Respectfully submitted, _______/s/_______________ Steven R.Kiersh#323329 5335 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W. Suite 440 Washington, D.,C. 20015 (202) 347-0200 skiersh@aol.com Attorney for John Sullivan CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and accurate copy of the foregoing was served, via the Court’s electronic filing system, upon all counsel of record on this the ___7th__day of July, 2023. ___________/s/_____________ Steven R. Kiersh Case 1:21-cr-00078-RCL Document 99 Filed 07/07/23 Page 2 of 2

although government obviously n eed make st atutory showing obstruction overall concept obstruction instructive in case government made atte mpt argue serious risk sullivan would threaten injure intimidate prospective witness attempt thing instead th e government focused risk obstruction in support claim government pointed sullivan lleged behavior riot utah wherein allegedly threatened harm another person whil e kicking car door incited others block public roadway sullivan charged participating riot state system utah july event char ged federal case the government claimed sullivan attempt obstruct justice could shown fact appeared case document filed page case document filed page hearing utah state case via internet vi deo conference washington day conduct alleged federal case th e government argued act showed reckless disregard the government also argued sullivan incited others resist police officer order disperse entirely separate unrelat ed incident oregon the government offered da te oregon event asse rting occurred facing char ge utah the government indi cated stil l attempting obtain footage related th alleged event the government proffer simp ly fails establish serious risk sullivan obstruct justice attempt obstruct justice th e future the fact sullivan allegedly appeared utah state cour proceeding via internet vide washington becoming involved fede ral offense stand evidence attempt willingness obstruct justice a sullivan counsel pointed recent hearing state court system utah held via ternet video conference due coronavirus pandemic the allegation sullivan might incited others resist police officer separate oregon event add little inquiry these alle gations insufficient meet government burden establishing f b pplies case even preponderance evidence let alone clea r convincing evidence and proffer made support th threshold question after court declined continue detention hearing ground government failed first e tablish case even qualified detention hearing government asked court de lay threshold determination detain sullivan delay the court vited government provide legal authority allowing case document filed page case document filed page temporary detention defendant th reshold holding detention hearing met the government declined the government also asked court stay release order the court declin ed finding government failed even meet threshold dete ntion hearing could de tain sullivan pending government appeal conclusion where government failed establish threshold matter case meet precondition f holding detention hearing court must release sullivan the release condition found separate der a stated th e hearing government invited file detention moti attempt meet burden establish threshold detention hearing in addition defense c ounsel invited fi le motion amend condition release needed dated th day january by the court daphne oberg united state magistrate judge case document filed page case document filed page exhibit b case document filed page john sullivan sent monday february am to insurgence usa member event list subject pack the courtroom caution this email originated outside email system do click link open attachment unless recognize sender know content safe hey all i appreciate continued support month today feb they trying imprison crime i commit united state capitol i journalist expressing amendment right document historic tragic point history help fight right freedom press congress shall make law respecting establishment religion abridging freedom speech press please show support packing courtroom today join zoomgov meeting http meeting id passcode one tap dial location u san jose u san jose case document filed page u u new york meeting id passcode thanks john sullivan phone email website insurgence usa you received message subscribed google group event list group to unsubscribe group stop receiving email send email case document filed page united state district court for the district of columbia united state of america case no rcl john sulli van defendant notice of attorney appearance the united state america attorney united state attorney district columbia informs court assistant united state attorney ausa rebekah lederer appear captioned case counsel behalf government respectfully submitted matthew graf united state attorney dc bar no by rebekah lederer rebekah lederer pennsylvania bar no assistant united state attorney attorney office district columbia d s washington dc tel no email case document filed page of service on day february copy foregoing served upon party listed electronic case filing ecf system rebekah lederer case document filed page united state district court for the district of columbia united state of america criminal no egs john earle sullivan defendant united state memorandum regarding status of discovery a of february the united state file memorandum purpose describing status implementation capitol global discovery plan plan producing making accessible defense team voluminous data collected government relation capitol siege investigation may identify information deem under the capitol siege refers event january thousand individual entered capitol capitol ground without authority halting joint session entire official proceeding congress hour united state capitol police uscp metropolitan police d epartment mpd law enforcement agency city surrounding region able clear capitol rioter ensure safety elected official by way illustration data subject global discovery plan includes item investigation allegation officer misconduct arising january regardless whether sustained thousand hour surveillance footage uscp mpd u nited state secret service usss senate house floor worn bwc footage multiple law enforcement agency responded january radio transmission multiple law enforcement agency responded january location history data thousand device connected capitol cellular network infrastructure whose presence within restricted perimeter captured record obtained google multiple data aggregation company thousand tip relevant material subject case file including result search digital device stored communication act sca account interview case document filed page global discovery plan data made accessible defendant far exceeds information defendant entitled federal rule criminal procedure jencks act brady we making vast quantity data available due unique circumstance matter literally hundred similar crime committed place contemporaneously this memorandum address status production voluminous amount video federal public defender fpd instance access available since october multiple tool government provided assist def ense locating footage may consider relevant the ability inmate housed department correction doc access material separate doc instance beginning february voluminous document produced since last status memorandum dated november the ability legal defense team obtain access fpd relativity workspace beginning january current content database manner production voluminous document view defense counsel access relativity beginning february plan n room doc access inmate laptop made available doc e program access voluminous discovery pro se defendant challenge overcoming our plan certain trial may proceed discovery plan substantially executed subject witness tipster victim redacted f identifying information appropriate all report exhibit related allegation officer misconduct complicity january brady maryland case document filed page status production video footage fpd instance since last status memorandum describing status discovery dated november following video footage shared defense instance accessible capitol siege defense counsel request license fpd file consisting approximately hour bwc footage recorded mpd officer

additional material provided entry protective order case i recognize government discovery obligation brady maryland progeny rule i provide timely disclosure material come light consistent giglio ruiz u i provide information government witness prior trial compliance court tr ial management order i request reciprocal discovery fullest extent provided rule federal rule criminal procedure including result report physical mental examination scientific test experiment expert witness summary i also request defendant disclose prior statement witness defendant intends call testify hearing trial see fed crim united state noble i request th material provided basis upon government provide defendant material relating government witness additionally pursuant federal rule criminal procedure i request defen dant provide government appropriate written notice defendant plan use one defense referenced rule please provide notice within time period required rule allowed court filing pretrial motion i forward additional discovery becomes available if question case document filed page please feel free contact sincerely candice wong assistant united state attorney case document filed page united state district court for the district of columbia unit ed state of america criminal no g john earle sullivan defendant united state unopposed motion to exclude time under the speedy trial act the party scheduled appear court status hearing captioned proceeding march the united state america ticipates proceeding scheduled status hearing requesting court set next status date approximately day moving exclude time within trial must commence speedy trial act et basis end justice served taking action outweigh best interest public defendant speedy trial pursuant factor described h a b ii nd iv in support unopposed motion government tate follows factual b ackground defendant charged via indictment offense related crime occurred united state capitol january in brief date joint session united s tate house representative united state senate convened certify vote elector al college presidential election member large crowd gathered outside forced entry capitol including breaking window assaulting member law enforcement others crowd encouraged as ted act score individual entered capitol without authority a result j oint case document filed page session entire official proceeding congress halted capitol police metropolitan police department law enforcement agency city surrounding region able clear capitol hundred unlawful occupant ensure safety elected official this event entirety hereinafter referred capitol attack the investigation prosecution capitol attack likely one largest american history term number defendant prosecuted nature volume evidence over individual charged connection capitol attack the investigation continues government expects least one hundr ed additional individual charged while case brought individual defendant government also investigating conspiratorial activity occurred prior january the spectrum crime charged investigation connection capitol attack includes limited trespass engaging disruptive violent conduct capitol capitol ground destruction government property theft government property assa ults federal local police officer firearm offense civil disorder obstruction official proceeding possession use destructive device conspiracy defendant charged investigation come throughout united state combined total search warrant executed almost fifty state district columbia multiple law enforcement agency involved response capitol attack included officer agent capitol police district columbia metropolitan police department federal bureau investigation department homeland security bureau alcohol tobacco firearm explosive united case document filed page state secret service united state park police virginia state police arlington county police department prince william county police department maryland state police montgomery county police department prince george county police department new jersey state police document evidence accumulated capitol attack investigation thus far include hour surveillance body worn camera footage multiple law enforcement agency b approximately electronic device c result hundred search electronic communication provider tip substantial portion include video photo social medium e report attachment related law enforcement interview suspect witness investigative step a capitol attack investigation still number defendant charged volume potentially discoverable material continue grow in short even case involving single defendant volume discoverable material likely significant the united state aware take seriously obligation pursuant federal rule criminal procedure local criminal rule provision brady maryland giglio united state jencks act

prior p rotests riot sullivan organized multiple protest utah course on june defendant sullivan organized counter protest police event group drove car around provo police station sullivan seek permit hold counter specifically sullivan group blocked police car street traffic instruction sullivan also damaged several car including kicking woman suv threate ning beat during blockade counter standing next sullivan shot driver involved either group sullivan arrested july charged criminal mischief threat violence rioting his case dismissed utah district court due lack jurisdiction could filed state court due statute limitation on july sullivan held solo protest utah state capitol holding legally owned ar on december sullivan tweeted photo one armed protest case document filed page caption an armed revolution way bring change he also used hashtags acab in september defendant sullivan traveled portland oregon attend protest relation defunding police sullivan posted photograph facebook wearing black balaclava caption let start he also posted instagram photo clothing caption battle ready guide how to take down a prior protest sullivan recorded walking around street portland wearing black bullet proof vest la ter engaged protest recorded giving speech support taking drastic step promote cause sullivan also attended protest march august september respectively washington southern california in recorded giving speech saying burn he posted instagram linking follower information purge note spread the message let the electoral purge sullivan also used hashtags including dcprotest b social medium in additional sullivan presence protest vocal protesting revolution social medium a evident post described sullivan several platform account attached either name orga nization facebook in addition post mentioned sullivan insurgence usa hosted fundraiser facebook bullet proof vest sullivan also offered sell tactical gear well youtube video case document filed page ii youtube on december sullivan posted youtube account jayden x share name watermark recording january dressed black donning bullet proof vest balaclava caption here full guide keep safe protest direct at differing point video sullivan brandish legally owned semi handgun rifle knife the day also posted youtube video captioned outstanding job protester paris keep making notice burn on december sullivan posted guide making molotov cocktail iii twitter sullivan twitter account reveal ed similar intent on december sullivan tweeted riot meant bring change purge world on december sullivan tweeted photo holding legally owned firearm one protest caption an armed revolution way bring change he also used hashtags acab on december sullivan tweeted tiktok senate minority leader mitch mcconnel l added caption definitely surround hashta g fuckmcconnel on december sullivan tweeted photo bullet proof fest armed caption i already ready go nazi hunting on january sullivan retweeted tweet president trum p urged counter protester show trump january rally the next day sullivan tweeted fuck the system to burn it all down several hashtags including burn case document filed page abolishcapitalism the tweet accompanied tiktok showing masked figure ominous music iv legal standard rule b crime wrong other act federal rule evidence b a requires government must provide reasonable notice general nature evidence prosecutor intends offer trial b rule b provides evidence crime wrong act admissible prove defendant character admissible propensity purpose including motive intent common scheme plan knowledge absence mistake accident see united state bowie cir citing fed evid b a united state court appeal circuit instructed rule b rule inclusion rather bowie additionally evidence defendant prior crime may also admissible evidence direct substantial proof charged crime closely intertwined evidence charged crime necessary place charged crime understandable context jackson united state specifically lthough first sentence rule b fr amed restrictively rule quite permissive prohibiting admission crime evidence one circumstance purpose proving person action conformed id quoting united state crowder cir en banc crowder ii accord united state cassell cir a ny purpose act evidence introduced proper case document filed page purpose long evidence offered solely prove character quoting united state miller cir emphasis original there two test determining whether evidence prior crime admissible rule b first evidence must probative material issue miller second evidence subject balancing test federal rule evidence render inadmissible prejudicial effect admitting evidence substantially outweighs probative value id furthermore enough evidence simply prejud icial prejudice must cassell quoting dollar long mf g cir proposition v irtually evidence prejudicial material the prejudice must unf united state pettiford cir t rule focus danger unfair prejudice give court discretion exclude evidence danger substantially outweigh evidence probative citation punctuation omitted emphasis original admission rule b evidence permitted government case specifically government entitled anticipate defendant denial intent knowledge introduce similar act evidence part case see united state inserra cir rule b crime evidence admissible government case apparent defendant disp ute issue united state lewis cir it necessary government await defendant denial intent knowledge introducing rule b crime evidence instead government ay anticipate defense introduce case document filed page united state bussey cir noting rule b crime evidence prove identity prove prior subsequent offense identical mark handiwork defendant introduced government case chief for prior act probative intent act must usually must involve offense similar kind reasonably close time cha rge thomas united state boyer united state cir t fact intent issue enough let evidence similar act unless connected offense charged point time circumstance throw light upon argument in case evidence defendant prior act provides basis motive absence mistake direct substantial proof charged crime closely intertwined crime charged common scheme plan apparent defendant sullivan conduct capitol january done knowingly willfully purpose based statement claiming journalist defendant sullivan presumably deny intentionally breached capitol engag e wrongdoing defendant sullivan prior statement act probative action january result self journalist inadvertence mistake accident sullivan knowledge capitol open without credential mistake went inside therefore defense simply capitol document protect police questionable directly contradicted prior action word case document filed page the evidence prior act statement close enough time provides direct evidence show continued common plan scheme sullivan go inside document event intention motif made clear fr om prior act statement fuck system burn the government intends introduce video present social medium post investigating witnessing prior act well present post day leading j anuary this done prove intent enter disrupt obstruct done order advance true motive upheaving system last highly probative value government proffered b evidence substantially outweighed potential prejudice defendant sullivan any potential prejudice unique case government shown permissible propensity purpose simply endemic rule b evidence such evidence almost unavoidably raise danger jury improperly conclude defendant committed crime must committed one charged united state douglas cir quoti ng crowder ii prejudice attenuated sense justify per se rule exclusion see crowder ii the defense must instead show compelling unique evidence prejudice mitchell dist inct probative value evidence distinct intrinsic prejudicial potential rule b evidence the circuit consistently minimized residual risk prejudice exclusion instead issuing limiting instruction jury see douglas emphasizing significance district court instruction jury permissible impermissible us evidence pettiford crowder ii stating mitigating jury instruction enter rule case document filed page balancing analysis thus government rule b evidence unduly prejudicial minimal prejudice addressed appropriate limiting instruction t admission appropriate vi conclusion for fore going reason government respectfully request court permit trial introduction proffered act evidence pursuant fed rule evid b respectfully submitted matthew graf united state attorney bar no by rebekah lederer rebekah lederer pennsylvania bar no assistant united state attorney attorney office district columbia d s washington dc tel no case document filed page united state district court for the district of columbia united state of america cr egs john sullivan motion to release seizure order related to defendant s bank account in utah and to forbid seizure of other account defendant undersigned counsel hereby seek order court discharging seizure bank account utah prevent seizure bank account belonging defendant in support thereof defendant respectfully set forth follows defendant arrested connection event january united state capitol defendant indicted following offense obstruction official proceeding sec c civil disorder sec entering remaining restricted building sec disorderly disruptive conduct restricted building ground case document filed page sec disorderly conduct capitol building sec e on april defendant learned personal bank account utah seized united state neither defendant counsel given prior notice seizure account defendant confirmed account seized federal authority pursuant sealed warrant issued united state magistrate the signed warrant due provided undersigned counsel release discoverable item evidence criminal forfeiture proceeding including pretrial seizure property subject forfeiture upon conviction governed sec see sec b well federal rule criminal procedure under sec government may request warrant federal court authorizing pretrial seizure property subject forfeiture manner provided search sec f it well recognized pretrial seizure asset criminal the name defendant bank bank account number provided necessary seal case document filed page case constitutes impairment property triggering due process clause fifth amendment constitution provides deprived life liberty property without due process see connecticut doehr the supreme court characterized pretrial asset restraint nuclear weapon grupo mexicano de deasarrollo alliance bond fund the federal court consistently recognized particular attention must paid dealing severe united state razmilovic cir

the supreme court self emphasized first amendment concern misplaced forfeiture statute oblivious expressive nonexpressive nature asset alexander united state case document filed page violation count one in sum court reach issue ample probable cause supporting traceability defendant proceeds crime by targeting defendant gross profit case encapsulates core purpose forfeiture help ensure crime kaley where indicted criminal defendant enriched profit would obtained charged crime strong governmental interest seizing allegedly gotten gain ultimately removing financial incentive behavior seizure defendant profit obstructive act january reflects straightforward attempt remove profit crime conclusion wherefore th e united state respectfully request court deny defendant motion release seizure order forbid seizure account pending trial deny pretrial evidentiary hearing time respectfully submitted channing phillips acting united state attorney candice wong bar no assistant united state attorney street room washington case document filed page certificate of service i hereby certify may i caused copy foregoing motion served counsel record via electronic filing candice wong assistant united state attorney case document filed page united state district court for the district of columbia united state of america egs john sullivan declaration john sullivan i john sullivan penalty perjury hereby provide following summary monthly household need partial listing source income rent water electric automobile automobile insurance food entertainment shopping subscription document filed page saving care total monthly defendant source income sale videotape january event include follows ad sense deposit k deposit severance pay prior employer proofpoint priority logistics payouts i acknowledge asset obtained sale videotape january john sullivan june document filed page united state district court for the district of columbia united state of america egs john sullivan reply to opposition to motion to discharge seizure warrant defendant motion based exclusively fifth amendment right due process sixth amendment right counsel defendant seek discharge seizure order order retain counsel thus motion based upon claim pursuant sixth amendment united state constitution rather argument based upon fifth amendment right due process law the government argument concerning sixth amendment disregarded ii defendant benefit pretrial due process hearing determine whether seized asset released in united state circuit determined n ascertaining requirement due process clause affording hearing whose asset case document filed page subject seizure court must look first supreme court declaration matthew internal citation omitted cited united state involved corporate defendant charged operating unlicensed money transmitting business based upon indictment government obtained ex parte seizure warrant obtaining fund account named defendant a request made discharge seizure order request evidentiary hearing made the ground motion based upon fifth amendment sixth amendment united state constitution the district court denied request an interlocutory appeal filed circuit vacated order district court the court concluded issue one first impression jurisdiction ruled fundamental norm due process clause jurisprudence requires government constitutionally deprive person protected liberty property interest must afford notice citing national council resistance dep state matthew eldridge matthew eldridge held due process flexible call procedural protection particular situation citing morrissey brewer case document filed page defendant acknowledges portion abrogated kaley united state wherein supreme court concluded pretrial hearing necessary within context sixth amendment claim probable cause established indictment however kaley opinion limited one area inquiry probable cause established this case raise question whether indicted individual constitutional tight contest grand jury prior determination id

is reason think whether covered previous question could sit fairly attentively impartially juror case case document filed page attachment b list of standard final jury instruction these instruction taken current edition september release criminal jury instruction district columbia red book general instruction function court function jury jury recollection control b final instruction when notetaking permitted burden proof presumption innocence reasonable doubt nature charge not be considered evidence case testimony exhibit stipulation question not evidence statement counsel indictment information not evidence inadmissible stricken evidence evaluation testimony other evidence direct circumstantial evidence credibility witness police officer testimony applicable right defendant not testify applicable defendant witness applicable definition proof offense defense on about proof of proof state mind substantive offense instruction to submitted party closing remark possible punishment not relevant selection foreperson unanimity verdict communication between court jury during jury deliberation exhibit during deliberation furnishing jury copy instruction case document filed page a authenticity i contains inadmissible matter r relevancy h hearsay up unduly probative value outweighed undue prejudice attachment c sample exhibit list united state district court for the district of columbia united state of america defendant case no egs party s exhibit list no def no description admissibility doc date objection use will may marked admitted witness case document filed page a authenticity i contains inadmissible matter r relevancy h hearsay up unduly prejudicial probative value outweighed undue prejudice no def no description admissibility doc date objection use will may marked admitted witness case document filed page united state district court for the district of columbia united state of america no john earle sullivan defendant government s opposition to defendant s motion to suppress the united state america attorney united state attorney district columbia respectfully opposes defendant motion suppress custodial statement the defendant john earle sullivan specifically seek suppress pre statement voluntarily made fbi agent home january day sullivan charged agent asked questi ons visit obtain video footage sullivan previously offered provide fbi specifically sullivan made statement acknowledging knew could heard stating knife publicly posted video himse lf inside capitol building fact knife weapon sullivan alternately claimed responding something person next said joking trying fit crowd stated the defendant seek suppression ground mirandized january statement custodial this contention unsupported fact law the circumstance defendant statement reflected recording entire visit refute defendant claim custodial interrogation factual matter defendant argument run contrary established caselaw no evidentiary hearing case document filed page warranted entire visit captured video hereby proffered court exhibit review the defendant motion suppress denied brief factual background on january defendan john earle sull ivan participated voluntary interview fbi agent washington the defendant stated capitol january followed crowd pushed past capitol police entered capitol building othe r broken window the defendant stated wearing ballistics vest gas mask the defendant stated present shooting woman capitol police officer filmed incident the defenda nt showed interviewing agent footage taken stated uploaded internet at conclusion interview defendant stated willing voluntarily provide copy footage recorded within capitol law enforcement authority on january fbi officer made contact sullivan one phone number sullivan provided interview follow sullivan offer voluntarily provide footage sullivan sent link download single video taken january the video similar video sullivan publicly posted youtube account a recounted greater length charging document previous pleading video captured defendant saying various point there many people let go this shit fuck yeah we accomplished shit we together fuck yeah we part history let burn shit it showed defendant extending hand help pull individua l climbing wall reach plaza outside capitol building entrance saying you guy fucking savage let go t defendant ballistics gear gas mask visible defendant captured climbing broken window enter case document filed page capitol building the video recorded several encounter defendant law enforcement officer inclu ding one defendant told officer putting harm way people spoken many people got ta stand people tried shit got hurt i saw i car ing at later point someone lunge body door defendant heard saying that i sayin break a relevant video showed defendant joining crowd gathered main entrance house chamber capitol there defendant could heard telling individual officer door could heard seen saying hey guy i knife i knife let later video defendant approach doorway speaker lobby hallway connects house chamber there defendant heard seen saying i let i got knife i got kni fe i got on january fbi special agent matt hew foulger salt lake city field office defendant home district sought visit defendant receive remaining footage agent foulger called defendant two number multiple time heading sullivan home case document filed page agent foulger also texted defendant pm text defendant later posted twitter account realjaydenx redacting agent name case document filed page a reflected agent foulger colleague fbi t ask f orce officer knocked defendant door waited open greeting identifying law enforcement official defendant immediately repeatedly invited agent foulger colleague john sullivan j hello agent foulger af john sullivan j yeah af how j good af i matt foulger fbi j well come af this jen j yeah come af do know j probably capitol stuff af yeah so last week spoke colleague right and said additional video j i yeah af do mind come j yeah yeah defendant motion see exh a approx