As my clients were robbed on January 6

After close Pardons from the blanket issued by President Donald Trump 20. January for all persons prosecuted about the events of January 6, 2021, the loudest criticism always goes like this:

“President Trump released hundreds of dangerous criminals from prison even though they acknowledged the guilt or were condemned by jury or judges, including some named Trump himself.”

But is it fair to characterize all caught in the process of criminal judiciary in Columbia district as “criminals” – dangerous or otherwise – if there was not a fair process that would have reached their guilt?

William Shipley: The Constitutional reason why Trump’s swallowed Jan. 6 pardons were justified

Of course, there were trials. The defendant could put their destiny in the hands of the jurors selected from perhaps the highest jury pool in the country or could choose a second option. They could ask for a “bench trial”, where the referee – including some of the Republican presidents – would listen to evidence and make judgments. This had to give the opportunity for a fair trial even when the jury trial would never be fair, right?

In my 21 years as a federal prosecutor, with dozens of criminal trials involving countless federal drugs from drug trade to tax fraud, I never had a single case where the defendant decided to trial on a bench during the jury trial. In the 12 years that followed as a lawyer for criminal defense – all in the federal court – I never recommended the trial of the bench to the client.

When the judges heard the evidence of what had happened so many times that day to tell the prosecutors to skip, you lost the benefit of a completely impartial, neutral factor.

But when it comes to the representation of clients on January 6th, I advised everything except one to give up their sixth amendment to the jury trial and that their cases had decided on a federal judge – no matter what the president he appointed them. One exception was the case in which the defendant acknowledged guilt and recognized under the oath of a judge who would decide his case. After withdrawing guilt, it seemed better option to shoot with the jury, not to try to defeat the judge to whom he had already admitted his guilt.

In cases 6 January, I did not try to determine the total number of trials on the bench. The fact that there were anomalies at all. But I was far from myself among the veterans who, by knowing Washington, DC, jury, recommended trials on a client bench. And in five trials where I was involved in 2024, each judge told federal prosecutors to skip evidence of “events of the day”. Their reason? They heard it all before. Instead, the plaintiffs were told that they were rapidly progressing evidence specific to the defendant.

And that’s why the trials on the bench were a double sword. When the judges heard the evidence of what had happened so many times that day to tell the prosecutors to skip, you lost the benefit of a completely impartial, neutral factor.

This leads me to a prominent and bumpy commentary on several US District Court District Court of District of Columbia after the great pardons issued by President Trump. See if any of them sound neutral or objectively:

District Judge Beryl Howell: “The “national injustice” did not happen here, as did not occur to the fraud of elections that were de-suo on the outcome in the 2020 presidential election…. No “national reconciliation process” can start when the poor losers, whose preferred candidate loses the election, is celebrated due to disorder of constitutional mandate procedures in Congress and thus unpunished.”

District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly: “What happened that day is kept for the future through thousands of contemporary videos, trial transcripts, jury verdicts and judicial opinions that analyze and recount evidence through neutral lens…. These records are immutable and represent the truth, regardless of how the events 6. January was described by those who were charged or their allies.”

District Judge Tanya Chutenken: “No pardon can change the tragic truth of what happened on January 6, 2021…. Rejection of this case cannot undo ‘Dimpage [that] He left more people of the dead, injured more than 140 people and caused millions of dollars of damage. “… and cannot repair a serrated violation in the American holy tradition of peaceful transitional power. “

District Judge Amy Berman Jackson: “[Dismissals are] Contrary to the public interest of the public interest in supporting the rule of law…. [Police Officers] are patriots. Patriotism is a loyalty to the earth and loyalty to the Constitution – not the loyalty to one boss of the state…. No stroke of the pen and no proclamation can change the facts of what happened on January 6, 2021. When others in the public eye are not ready to risk their own power or popularity by calling lies when they hear them, the record of the Proceedings in this court will be available to those who seek the truth. “

District Judge Paul Friedman: “The proclamation claim is actually incorrect. There was no serious national injustice…. “Although the court approved the rejection request, nor this dismissal, the dismissal orders issued by other judges of this court or the pardon issued by the President to cancel the damage done by the rebels on 6 January 2021. What happened[ed] That day infamous….“

Click here for more Fox News opinions

Not all district judges have seen the need to offer their own views on Trump’s pards. But everyone has condemned the “events of the day” in the most terrible language that can be imagined on pre -prevailing hearing, executing judgments and the extradition of sentences. Judge Emmet Sullivan even called one defendant a “terrorist” and commented on his “bad character” before the defendant ever had the opportunity to present any defense.

The attitudes of all columbia judges were well understood. Still, confronted with the same question, whether you will give up the right to a jury trial or take advantage of our chances with the judges who expressed the above views, I would give the same advice I started to give today three years ago – to bear the bench on the bench with the trial and let the referee decide . So the biased jury pool in Washington.

Click here to get the Fox News app

When the critics of Trump’s pardon misunderstand the righteousness of fundamental beliefs, the real absence of such honesty deals with the fatal blow to the legitimacy of their claims.