Finally: The first Proud Boy on trial for seditious conspiracy testifies

From emptywheel: Thanks to the generosity of emptywheel readers we have funded Brandi’s coverage for the rest of the trial. If you’d like to show your further appreciation for Brandi’s great work, here’s her PayPal tip jar.

It took more than three months but this week at the Proud Boys seditious conspiracy trial, the first defendant to step forward and testify was the group’s Philadelphia chapter leader Zachary Rehl. 

Rehl took the stand over two days and emphatically denied that there was a plan to stop Congress from certifying the 2020 election on Jan. 6, an argument that shouldn’t surprise any juror that has patiently heard evidence over these last 53 days. 

The violence that consumed the U.S. Capitol was never part of the objective— if there even was an objective Rehl would say, because, after all, there was no plan. He wasn’t in a position to direct what happened, he testified, and at the end of the day, he asked jurors to believe he was just a man who liked to protest and party afterward. 

Rehl has sat at the back of U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly’s courtroom now for months as the evidence in the case against him and his co-defendants Henry “Enrique” Tarrio, Joseph Biggs, Ethan Nordean, and Dominic Pezzola, has stacked up at a punishingly slow pace. 

When Rehl finally sat in the witness box, with a U.S. Marshal seated behind him barely visible to the jury, his speech was often muddled, his hands rarely still. 

The 37-year-old former U.S. Marine at times seemed overeager to get his side of the story out, occasionally speaking over his attorney, Carmen Hernandez as she conducted her direct examination.

After Donald Trump told them to stand back and stand by at the presidential debates—”let’s be real, the biggest platform in the world mentioned the Proud Boys,” Rehl testified on Tuesday—the influx of new recruits had exploded. This was one of the precursors to Henry Tarrio’s creation of the group’s exclusive Ministry of Self Defense, or MOSD, he said. 

At trial, the defense has worked to throw off the allegation that MOSD was a hub for Proud Boy leaders to coordinate a plot for Jan. 6.

Instead, they argue it was a division for chapter leaders to discuss their “marketing” and “operations” for rallies or other events they would attend, and moreover, to establish protocols for self-defense after the stabbing of North Carolina chapter leader Jeremy Bertino on the night of the “Stop the Steal” rally in December 2020. Bertino has since pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy. 

Tarrio, Biggs, and Nordean, Rehl testified, led the MOSD “marketing team.”’ Rehl ran “operations” with fellow Proud Boy John Stewart, also known as Johnny Blackbeard. Stewart has pleaded guilty, Tarrio’s attorney Sabino Jauregui let slip in court in October 2022. The only other member of the operations team was a third man that Rehl said he could not recall the name of in court. 

The Seattle Times reported that the third member was Proud Boy Robert Fussell aka Rex Fergus from Washington State. Notably, a web archive shows Fussell’s Parler profile photo was once a selfie with Roger Stone, a key player in Trump’s push to overturn the 2020 election results. There is no public record that Fussell has been charged with any crimes.

It was “clear as day,” Rehl told the jury this week that the Ministry was only about protecting Proud Boys and nothing further. Yet during proceedings this February, prosecutors showed jurors clips from a Dec. 30, 2020 video conference for the Ministry where Rehl, Tarrio, Nordean, Biggs, and other members discussed the 6th.

Conversation did involve concerns over how they would respond to potential threats from “antifa” or leftists at the looming event. But tucked into the roughly 90-minute meeting (which was one of only two pieces of evidence that Joseph Biggs entered before waiving his right to testify; the other was a mostly biographical stipulation heavy on his military service) were several moments where information about the 6th seemed to be gatekept.

In one segment, Tarrio tells someone who asked for details about Jan. 6 that it would be discussed in a separate chat later and on what would amount to a need-to-know basis for people who would “be on the ground.”

Some of the people who would end up on the ground were the men Rehl brought into MOSD himself including Isaiah Giddings, Brian Healion, and Freedom Vy. Rehl told the jury he agreed to bring a “10-man team” to D.C., and that this was an expectation set by Tarrio for other chapter leaders during the Dec. 30 MOSD meeting.

Prosecutors said this was a “fighting force.” Rehl’s attorney has recoiled at the suggestion during trial. Last month before bringing West Virginia Proud Boy Jeff Finley in for testimony on Rehl’s behalf, she argued unsuccessfully that Finley’s charging decision should be entered into evidence to deflect the government’s claims that Rehl brought a “fighting force” into the Capitol. 

Since Finley pleaded guilty to a single misdemeanor charge of entering restricted grounds, and Finley and Rehl had spent time together in and out of the Capitol, this, she argued, should go toward supporting Rehl’s claims of his own peaceful and lawful conduct on Jan. 6. 

On his own time before jurors, Rehl recounted how he drove to D.C. with Healion, Giddings, and Vy. They shared a room at the upscale Darcy hotel on the 5th, “protested” on the 6th, marched and, yes, he admitted, went inside the Capitol. On the stand, Rehl’s attorney didn’t spend much time at all asking Rehl to explain his time inside Senator Jeff Merkley’s office where Proud Boys and rioters congregated and at least one individual smoked marijuana. After he left the Capitol, he said he got drunk with his friends. And when it was all over on Jan. 7, he returned to Pennsylvania, drove his friends home, and spent the afternoon “hungover,” “stressed” and “hungry” he said. 

Rehl’s delivery on this sequence of events sounded confident as he moved through the details rapidly. When they left, the men had purchased beers, a 30-case for each, he said. 

But once off the stand, a source reached out to Empty Wheel to “clarify” that record: the beers were purchased on the way to Washington. So, in effect, it was a pre-game instead of a post-game celebration, a detail that in the grand scheme of the charges he faces wouldn’t seem to matter so much. The “clarification” however, did make Rehl’s testimony seem all the more rehearsed. 

Though Rehl, whose father was a policeman and his grandfather too before him, said he thought the violence of Jan. 6 was a “disgrace” and he testified that he did not and could not have impeded or assaulted officers nor would he condone those who did, a day after the attack on the Capitol, Rehl seemed nonetheless pleased with the role he ultimately played in the greater events of the day. 

“Bad ass pic in DC,” Rehl wrote in a text message sharing this photo on Jan. 7:

His reverential attitude toward law enforcement in court also breaks with what his one-ztime brother in black and yellow, Isaiah Giddings, told authorities about Rehl after Giddings pleaded  guilty to disorderly conduct. Rehl, like Tarrio, Nordean, Biggs, and hundreds of other Proud Boys by mid-December 2020, had turned on police, he said. 

Text messages and videos in evidence have indicated steady animosity from Proud Boys toward police in the run-up to the 6th. And on that morning, video footage shows Nordean, with Rehl and Biggs just nearby, repeatedly stoking fury and zeroing in on law enforcement and their treatment of the group’s head honcho.

“Enrique shows up and gets detained before he gets to D.C. and he’s charged with two felonies, multiple felonies for what?” Nordean shouted through a megaphone to a group gathered around him on Jan. 6. 

Tarrio was arrested in D.C. on Jan. 4 for burning a Black Lives Matter banner that he stole from a historic Black church on Dec. 12. When arrested, he was also charged with possessing two high-capacity firearm magazines. Jurors have seen dozens of text messages where Tarrio’s arrest appeared to throw the defendants and other members, including Rehl, into a tailspin as they worried about whether Tarrio had the wherewithal to delete Proud Boy communications from his phone. 

Later, when Proud Boys in a large marching group passed police on the street who were gearing up, one Proud Boy, Chris Worrell, was heard yelling at officers to “pick a side” and to “honor your oath.” Worrell allegedly attacked police at the Capitol with pepper spray. He’s pleaded not guilty and waived his right to a trial by jury. 

As for Rehl, he wasn’t seen or heard attempting to dissuade Worrell, if he heard him at all, and he wasn’t seen or heard ever attempting to dissuade any Proud Boys from their ugly and often violent rhetoric in their chats. 

When Hernandez asked Rehl about this in court, his tone was particularly pointed and he tapped the desk before him with a single finger to punctuate his words. If he didn’t say anything to someone it didn’t mean anything. He wasn’t there to police the chats, he said. 

“I’m my own person,” the Proud Boy chapter president said. 

Their members were “grown ass men,” he added.

When Hernandez asked him what that meant, he offered testimony that would seem almost too perfect for prosecutors to pass up once they get Rehl under cross-examination next week. 

“It’s someone who takes responsibility for their own actions, conduct, and statements. If a man goes into a chat and says something stupid, that’s on him. Unless a guy is in a chat sitting there and saying he’s going to go attack someone, if he’s got plans—well, it’s just probably bluster anyway.”

Rehl hung a lot of his testimony’s weight on blustering. But prosecutors argue it wasn’t just empty talk but proof of motive and intent. 

That would include a Jan. 7 text stream found in the new MOSD channel that was set up after the old MOSD chat was nuked following Tarrio’s arrest. 

In a stream of those messages shown to jurors this week, one Proud Boy, “E-Geezy” urged members to “have faith… we did our part yesterday.” Another Proud Boy “Joshua Maxstud” responded but his message is missing, something that digital forensic experts have testified indicates they were deleted. 

Rehl replied after the blank text: “I find this hard to believe now. I’m proud as fuck of what we accomplished yesterday. But we need to start planning we are starting planning for a Biden presidency.” 

Rehl told jurors when he said he was proud he was referring to the protest on Jan. 6 generally speaking. 

“What I saw was huge crowds of people waving flags protesting and I was proud to be part of something like that. Like I said, it was a historical moment,” he said. 

And as for his remarks about “planning” for a Biden presidency, Rehl said it was about telling people to “stop with the conspiracies” of a stolen election. 

Just a few weeks before, Rehl seemed more than happy to endorse those conspiracies. And to the point of bloodshed. 

In a Nov. 16 text message, Tarrio voiced his concerns that if Biden “stole” the election, Proud Boys would be “political prisoners.” Nordean, in a text the next day, said the “Spirit of 1776 has resurfaced… good luck to all the traitors…you’re gonna need it.” 

Rehl replied: “Hopefully the firing squads are for the traitors trying to steal this election from the American people.” 

Rehl told the jury he never intended to go inside the Capitol on Jan. 6 but when he finally decided on it, he testified that he had no idea anyone was inside but Capitol Police officers. At one point he said he thought lawmakers had left and Pence had been evacuated. 

At another point, he told the jury: “Well there was a proceeding going inside, I didn’t want to affect anything going on inside. I wanted the legal process to play… this is the process our country was founded on. That’s what was playing out on Jan. 6 and I had no intention to go into that building if members of Congress were going to be in that building and I didn’t go in there until after I knew they weren’t going to be in there,” he said. 

Police officers weren’t barring any door to his entry when he got inside either, he claimed. 

“At the time, they seemed welcoming to people coming in at that time [sic],” Rehl said. 

The scenes were reminiscent of a crowded “baseball game” or a “concert” with so many people crowded into a single area and heading in a single direction. 

He told the jury it was other Trump supporters who were “rowdy” instigators that knocked over barriers and plowed through police lines. It wasn’t him or the Proud Boys.

“I seen some people shaking some gates over there. Honestly, when that was going down, I knew of protests going on at Capitol grounds. I thought people were trying to get there earlier, some of the protests were being advertised to go on at 1 p.m. It was 12:53… when we collided with that crowd of people, that crowd was really rowdy and when they started shaking the gate, I heard it and I went over there to investigate the scene and see what’s going on,” Rehl said.  “The people shaking barriers must have been just trying to get to a stage, he said. 

“You’re giving me this look,” he then remarked to his attorney, “But it’s the honest God’s truth.”

At 2:49 p.m. on Jan. 6, as some of the worst violence exploded inside the Capitol, records show Rehl sent a text to Proud Boys: “They just broke all the doors and windows open. People pouring in.” 

On his first day testifying, Rehl told the jury he didn’t see any violence toward anyone. He told the jury he didn’t see any Proud Boy engaged in any violence.

“I didn’t think anyone had done anything at all,” he said. 

That included his co-defendant Dominic Pezzola, the New York Proud Boy and member of the Ministry of Self Defense who was seen in video footage bashing open a window with a police riot shield he allegedly stole from an officer during an intense scuffle. Prosecutors allege Pezzola’s actions allowed rioters to stream inside the Capitol, ultimately setting off the first major breach of the day. 

On his second day of testimony, Rehl left Pezzola to swing in the wind. 

“He went off on his own,” Rehl said. 

Pezzola, also a former Marine, had discredited MOSD with his actions.

This was what MOSD was “supposed to prevent,” he testified.

“I guess it made us all look bad,” he added. 

This January, when Proud Boy Matthew Greene testified on behalf of the government, he said he and Pezzola were “openly expecting a civil war” and that this was the commonly held belief among the group. 

Rehl wasn’t standing very far from where Pezzola allegedly stole the riot shield from police in a bitter tug-of-war but Rehl testified he couldn’t see anything. Video footage shows Rehl facing in the overall direction of the episode with Pezzola and he can be seen his hands up, gripping a cell phone as he films. Rehl said he couldn’t see anything too far ahead of him in the crowd. 

Rehl denied as well that it was his voice captured by his phone in a video he shot where a man’s voice is heard screaming “fuck them, storm the Capitol!” before an initial breach of police barriers around 10:17 a.m. 

At trial, his wife Amanda testified that she didn’t recognize the voice as Rehl’s. Through a rushed and rambling explanation in court, Rehl said the voice wasn’t his but was from a man just nearby. Prosecutors have tried to draw comparisons for the jury by sharing that footage and another video where Rehl is heard clearly exclaiming that he thinks he can see Trump’s motorcade in the road before he and other Proud Boys finally make it to the Capitol.

Separately, in yet more footage, Rehl can be seen and heard perfectly clearly urging Proud Boys that members of the press or media should be shooed off as they first gather at the Washington Monument on the morning of the 6th. 

He told the jury he didn’t want the press around because he feared being doxxed. Ironically the footage of Rehl saying this is shot by Proud Boy videographer Eddie Block who was live-streaming. 

The defense has argued often that a conspiracy wouldn’t be filmed and conspirators wouldn’t ask media of any kind to follow them or document their activities. 

Jan. 6 was essentially a “photo op,” Tarrio’s attorney Sabino Jauregui has argued.

 Other witnesses for the defense have called it a “meet-and-greet” and that’s what Rehl has chalked it up to as well. 

And yet when Block is filming the Proud Boys on multiple occasions on Jan. 6, trying to capture every moment he can while asking for “likes” and “subscribes” on the live stream, he can be heard remarking at various points that he should give Nordean, Biggs, Rehl and others like Charles Donohoe, space or privacy when they would stop along the route to the Capitol and huddle only with each other. 

Donohoe has pleaded guilty to conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding as well as assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers. 

Further potentially hampering Rehl’s credibility, text messages extracted from the defendants’ phones show Rehl telling members of MOSD they have to delete their messages person by person after Tarrio was arrested just before the insurrection. 

Donohoe, who originally gave the instruction about deleting messages to MOSD members after Tarrio’s arrest, replied to Rehl: “Well at least they won’t get our boots on ground plans because we are one step ahead of them.”

In that same vein, Rehl’s co-defendant Joe Biggs on Jan. 5 told members in the newly stood-up MOSD chat he had just talked to Tarrio and “we just had a meeting woth [sic] a lot of guys. Info should be coming out.”

“We have a plan. I’m with Rufio,” Biggs wrote, using Nordean’s handle in their chat, Rufio Panman. 

“What’s the plan so I can pass it to the MOSD guys?” Donohoe asked. 

“I gave Enrique a plan. The one I told the guys and he said he has one,” Biggs replied. 

Outside of the presence of jurors this week, Rehl’s attorney let her anxiety about the Justice Department’s impending cross air out. 

They would “savage” her client once given the chance, she told Judge Kelly. 

It was expected that Rehl would finish his testimony early this week and that prosecutors would be crossed by Wednesday with defendant Dominic Pezzola in the wings to testify right afterward. A scheduling issue with a juror abbreviated the week precluding the jury from sitting on Thursday and Friday. 

Perhaps milking an opportunity to let jurors sit with her client’s testimony over a long break or perhaps trying to avoid the inevitable cross of her client, Hernandez spent the bulk of her direct examination of Rehl asking questions at a grindingly slow pace on Wednesday afternoon. Oftentimes, she would flip through her notes at the podium as the court sat in silence for a minute or two at a time. For at least a half hour, she went down the list, charge by charge, even breaking the sentences apart to elicit a yes or no answer from Rehl. 

“Did you aid and abet anyone with throwing a watter bottle at a law enforcement officer?” Hernandez asked. 

“No,” Rehl testified. 

“Did you aid anyone with throwing a water bottle at a law enforcement officer?” she asked.

“No,” Rehl testified. 

“Did you abet anyone with throwing a water bottle at a law enforcement officer?” she asked. 

“No,” Rehl testified. 

It went on and on like this. 

Jurors in this trial have already been subjected to long and near-daily delays due usually to internecine fights over evidence sparked by the defense (with a lot of the issues already litigated pre-trial). Adding to this, late last month CNN reported that several jurors had been approached by members of the public outside of the courthouse. One juror said she felt she was being followed. 

On Thursday, while the jury was out, a hearing that was meant to be sealed from the public and press was not, and in the process, reporters who had gathered in the media room briefly heard proceedings. CNN reported it was during this time that they learned Judge Kelly would deny a motion for mistrial from all of the defendants sparked by the episode with the jury. 

The defense suggested since the jurors had talked to each other about the confrontations, they couldn’t be impartial. Kelly disagreed. 

Next week, Pezzola is on course to testify. 

Though things came yet again to a grinding halt this week, the parties and judge generally seem optimistic that they could finally get into closing arguments within the next week to week and a half. And then it will be left to the jury to deliberate.

 

CORRECTION: The initial report stated that Finley cooperated with the government. He did not. He had a plea agreement but he was subpoenaed for his appearance by Rehl’s attorney.

image_print
68 replies
  1. Seashell says:

    Thanks, Brandi. Yesterday you wrote “Jauregui smiling, laughing.
    Jauregui really seems tickled with himself when he asks a question, draws an objection, reframes it, draws another objection from Kenerson.”

    It seems so obvious that Hernandez and Jauregui are trying to delay the trial that even jurors who don’t know about Hernandez’s anxieties must smell the rat. How can Hernandez think any of this will stop the prosecutors from “savaging” her client on cross?

    https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/04/10/time-is-almost-up-for-proud-boys-on-trial-for-seditious-conspiracy-another-week-gone-and-another-week-begins-in-historic-jan-6-case/#comment-988625

    • Ginevra diBenci says:

      “Savaging” would seem to mean “cross examination,” which Rehl does not seem ideally constituted to withstand.

      Hernandez wants a personal exemption where her witness doesn’t have to submit to DOJ’s questions, but she still gets to put him on the stand to tell his version of the story.

  2. Spencer Dawkins says:

    “Did you aid and abet anyone with throwing a watter bottle at a law enforcement officer?” Hernandez asked.

    “No,” Rehl testified.

    “Did you aid anyone with throwing a water bottle at a law enforcement officer?” she asked.

    “No,” Rehl testified.

    “Did you abet anyone with throwing a water bottle at a law enforcement officer?” she asked.

    “No,” Rehl testified.

    It went on and on like this.

    Good Lord. Brandi, I don’t know how you can do it!

    Isn’t there a children’s game where questioning goes like this?

      • pdaly says:

        I agree. I’ve remained hopeful that Eureka might make a reappearance (I recall Eureka was caring for a family member with a chronic medical condition as the COVID19 pandemic surged), but is there reason to believe this is not a possibility?

        • bmaz says:

          Short answer is I do not know with any reasonable certainty. But very much join in hope for a return.

    • Savage Librarian says:

      I visit Eureka almost every day in my mind. I say, “Hey, Eureka, what’s up? What do you think of this? Or what do you think of that? I miss you, Eureka, and I am grateful for all the gifts you shared with us. I hope you know that.”

  3. harpie says:

    Roger Parloff describing how the unsealing happened:
    10:10 AM https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/04/10/time-is-almost-up-for-proud-boys-on-trial-for-seditious-conspiracy-another-week-gone-and-another-week-begins-in-historic-jan-6-case/#comment-988780

    So here’s what happened. This morning, at about 8:50am, the the screens in the media room were still off, as they often are. So I called the media tech guy, as I often do, to remind him to turn them on. …/5 [THREAD]

    … The defense attys, accompanied by a prosecutor, then came to the media room to, basically, beg us not to use the material until after the case is over. (The prosecutor did not speak, since that might create 1st amendment issues.) … /8

    Here’s the piece CNN did after the [dis]closed part of the proceedings:

    Judge in Proud Boys case denies mistrial motion after jurors report being followed http://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/13/politics/proud-boys-mistrial-motion-denied/index.html Hannah Rabinowitz, CNN Published 12:13 PM EDT, Thu April 13, 2023

    […] Kelly described the interactions in detail during the under-seal proceeding, bringing to light additional information about the incidents. A coalition of media outlets, including CNN, previously fought for access to the sealed arguments, but Kelly denied that request. […]

      • SonofaWW2Marine says:

        It’s rare enough that anonymous or sequestered juries are pretty rare themselves. Fwiw, in about fifteen years as a state & federal line prosecutor, I never saw it. Witness intimidation was a problem, but defendants & their pals didn’t mess with jurors. They may have figured, rightly I suspect, that it was counterproductive.

        • bmaz says:

          No. And neither side really wants that. Serving as a juror is one thing, not going home at night to your family is quite a different thing.

        • Seashell says:

          When I served as a juror in a Florida murder trial, we went home every night. Before the closing arguments, we were instructed to bring an overnight bag the next day in case deliberations went past 5 pm without a verdict. Is this true in all state/federal criminal trials?

  4. Sloth Sloman says:

    I think my favorite moment was this:

    “Jauregui says he doesn’t know how long it will take because he isn’t sure if govt will give him the same courtesy they gave Hernandez and not object to every question. (This is a rich statement coming from anyone on this defense team – let’s be real)”

    Literally the next update:

    “Sabino Jauregui now conducting direct of Zachary Rehl
    Have you ever testified at a trial before?
    R: Yes I have – it was a bench- –
    Objection relevance. Sustained.
    Jauregui: Ever take moot court —
    Objection relevance. Sustained.”

    Thank you for your hard work and your vivid and clear descriptions of what takes place. I can’t imagine how difficult it is to keep up with everything in real time as well as you do.

  5. chesterfield says:

    Your accounting reminds me of an ancient Walter Cronkite radio and then TV show titled “You Are There.”
    Thanks for the real time enactment. Rather gripping.
    For those of us disinclined to utilize PayPal for any purpose, is there an alternative donation route available?

    • Dave_McC says:

      Mostly to Rayne, I suppose:
      If the site also supported ApplePay, you’d get a lot more support from me. I understand it’s a lot of effort to do that, but just my two cents. Loads of people have it, it’s secure and painless (on my part) and that makes it more of an impulse buy to contribute. Checks are a pain.

      P.S.: Just a funny anecdote – I once met Marcy at the Farmer’s Market in Ann Arbor decades ago. When I recognized and greeted her, she was totally taken aback. The price of (early) fame.

  6. tinao says:

    Brandy…https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVx8L7a3MuE
    Thanks!
    So in my own tradition, I’ll post some of the stuff I wrote today…

    What Peace Really Smells Like
    As for me
    I will see Justice for all
    as a guiding light.
    Can you say the same?
    How can the clarion call
    for the real Love of God
    be with us all,
    all but be forgotten?
    The loss of innocence
    for my country
    is excruciating.

  7. harpie says:

    Kyle Cheney:
    Twitter: https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1647779394293833734
    Wayback [includes all screenshots]:
    https://web.archive.org/web/20230417113853/https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1647779394293833734
    9:49 PM · Apr 16, 2023

    JUST IN: Judge Kelly has tossed two motions by Dominic Pezzola to dismiss the Proud Boys case or have a mistrial declared — and he’s not mincing words. [screenshots] /

    Pezzola is represented by Roger Roots and Stephen Metcalf, though Roots has led on most of these factually challenged motions, which have ginned up lots of sensational headlines but have not withstood even gentle scrutiny. [THREAD]

    • harpie says:

      Brandi discusses this beginning here:
      https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1647937920605511682
      8:19 AM · Apr 17, 2023

      […] The ruling knocks down Pezzola’s thin claims of government misconduct. I’ll unpack that here but begin w/Kelly’s summation: “At bottom, not one of Pezzola’s contentions withstands scrutiny. His factual premises lack support and his legal premises cannot be squared with caselaw.” [THREAD]

  8. harpie says:

    Good Morning. Brandi and Roger Parloff’s THREADs for today begin here:

    https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1647898865918435331
    5:44 AM · Apr 17, 2023

    Hello and welcome from Washington D.C. for Day 55 of the Proud Boys seditious conspiracy trial. We are in the home stretch and the government is poised to cross examine Proud Boy Zachary Rehl. My live coverage for @emptywheel starts at 9 am ET. [THREAD]

    https://twitter.com/rparloff/status/1647930822723264517
    7:51 AM · Apr 17, 2023

    It’s Apr 17 and Day 56 of the Proud Boys trial. I’ll be live-tweeting here and on @Lawfareblog: https://bit.ly/3QKlKii. We are expecting to get to the AUSA Erik Kenerson’s cross examination of defendant Zachary Rehl today. [THREAD]

    • harpie says:

      https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1647950523457323008
      9:09 AM · Apr 17, 2023

      HAPPENING NOW: Just Kelly has blocked the media’s realtime access to Proud Boys trial proceedings bc of court staff’s own error last week when they streamed a sealed hearing into the press room.

      That will significantly impede coverage of the two defendants who are testifying. [THREAD]

      Courts have consistently agreed that public access to the proceedings that stemmed from the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol is urgent and necessary. But here, a judge has acted to limit that access in what might be the most important Jan. 6 trial of all.

    • harpie says:

      4:35 PM Brandi:
      https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1648062622103928835

      GOOD NEWS: The media room has been reopened and the feed is running again.

      For the last 20 minutes or so, Kenerson has been grilling Rehl about his posting of a violent video as an alleged recruitment tool for the Proud Boys.
      I don’t have time to unwind it right this moment but will later. For now we’re picking up where we are. Bear with me please.

      https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1648062845391872001
      4:36 PM · Apr 17, 2023

      The media room has reopened this afternoon. I’m now live-tweeting again. At end of day, Ill provide a recap from earlier when feed was cut.

    • harpie says:

      4:43 PM Brandi:

      Rehl writes in this [11/15/20] post, If you want to join (PBs) then shares his email.
      Kenerson asks if Rehl chose to put that email address and website in your Parler post.
      Rehl today doesn’t give yes or no answers. Most of his answers are an explanation first.

      And today Rehl says he put this request for people to join PBs up all the time; it wasn’t just this one msg (paraphrase)

      AUSA Erik Kenerson brings up a msg for Rehl to view and asks him if the first msg in the series is from nov 18 2020and if it his him.
      Rehl: Yeah like i said …. (he doesn’t finish the sentence)
      Hernandez (for Rehl) objects, Pattis (for Biggs) objects. Overruled

      .

    • harpie says:

      4:53 PM Brandi:

      Rehl said on direct last week that every president in history has challenged the results of the election.
      K: Youre aware Hillary Clinton conceded on election night?
      Rehl: My understanding is she challenged certain aspects. She may have officially conceded but-
      His lawyer objects

      Rehl, confidently from stands says Clinton may have conceded but “she challenged, she challenged.”
      Kenerson: Are you aware Mitt Romney conceded on election night?
      Hernandez (Rehl’s atty) objects and now there’s a sidebar with husher on.

      Tonight when I get in, I’ll roll through my notes from inside the courthouse for you and post them all here. My big takeaways so far today, while the flow of cross is disrupted by many objections from defense, Rehl’s testimony is often conflicting against evidence. Again.

      4:59 PM

      Husher off, sidebar over.
      Kenerson: John McCain conceded on election night?
      Objection. Overruled.
      Rehl: Not too sure.

      5:02 PM

      Kenerson elicits from Rehl in sum, Rehl didnt think police had responded to violence against PB by antifas properly. Its anodyne when Rehl describes it court but Kenerson brings up a text.

      Did Rehl call DC police “fucking f-ggots”

      Rehl: correct, in anger i may have said that

    • harpie says:

      5:11 PM Brandi:

      Rehl is very assertive with side remarks to govt about the integrity of the govt’s evidence or how its been manipulated, in his eyes.

      “You know how you guys did with the software” was his last remark as Kenerson begins to review a MOSD chat

      Now after a minutes-long sidebar, a Dec 27 MOSD Main chat is pulled up and shown to Rehl only before being admitted into evidence for the jury.
      “President Leo Kuznetsov” is first in this chat.

      On direct last week, Rehl said PB Philly chapter didn’t have outsiders from other states. But here today, Kenerson elicits that Kuznetsov lived in TN but attended Philly rallies and in chat, tells Rehl: “lets turn it into a philly chat with some extras.”

      In same chat with Kuznetsov, the video of the woman being hit over the head with the helmet is shared, jurors see.
      Rehl in this series of texts under the shared video replies “lmao”

      I could have been laughing at anything, Rehl says

      5:21 PM Brandi:

      Now Kelly ends the trial day and AUSA Erik Kenerson stops his cross-examination for the day. We should pick up with it on Tuesday.

      Jurors are now excused and as soon as they leave, Carmen Hernandez moves for a mistrial, saying the government has unfairly prejudiced Rehl by sharing this video of the woman getting cracked over the head with a helmet by a PB.

      • harpie says:

        “Its just not a fair way… I guess they’re going to play it until they inflame the jury…” Hernandez says.

        Every defendant joins her motion.

        Kenerson: Govt played the video in accordance with courts rulings this morning. IDK how many times played today but a # of them were played because Rehl said ‘I dont know if that’s the same video or not’ to force us to kind of live with that ambiguity and not be able to prove up, esp. where every opportunity Rhel takes whether there’s a question pending or not to say ‘IDK what your powerpoint shows… ‘ that’s not on the govt. When we play video to establish hes sending to his mom, that’s on Mr. Rehl…

        Kenerson: We have the ability and the right to put it to him and see if he recognizes it or not. I hoped to bring up video briefly and have him confirm it was same thing, he didn’t. We cant be hamstrung by what witnesses answers are. Thats not grounds for a mistrial.

        Judge Kelly agrees, saying its not grounds for a mistrial. He tells Hernandez, yes, the govt is right – this video was already admitted into evidence and the questions around it this morning were resolved.

        Now discussing scheduling issues.

    • harpie says:

      5:37 PM Brandi:

      Judge Kelly says we will begin at 9:30 am ET on Tuesday.

      Kenerson says it would be hard to give an estimate for how much longer he has on cross, especially since they don’t know where the objections may lie or how the witness will answer the questions.

      Still sounds like Dominic Pezzola will testify….

      5:39 PM All right, now I’m leaving for real.
      Thread unpacking today a bit later.

      Thank you, Brandi!

  9. harpie says:

    Parloff: https://twitter.com/rparloff/status/1648002329302515713
    12:35 PM · Apr 17, 2023

    So we’re on lunch break now. I’m picking up where i left off from this morning. But the early cross by AUSA Kenerson has already begun, and it’s pretty dramatic, so I’m going to turbo through some things to get to that before court resumes …
    /16 […] [THREAD]

    Brandi: https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1648004788376707085
    12:45 PM · Apr 17, 2023

    We are now on lunch, Zachary Rehl is finally under cross by AUSA Erik Kenerson but jurors didn’t hear much evidence yet. It has started out tense already. […][THREAD]

    • harpie says:

      1:23 PM Brandi:

      I will have more later. Going back in shortly.
      Because I am taking notes by hand and cant write nearly as fast I type, I may have additional details from this morning to share later if I can confirm them. Anything I’m not 100% sure I heard or captured correctly, i wont tweet yet

      1:28 PM Parloff:

      K: wearing camouflage hat?
      R: can’t confirm camouflage hat.
      Hernandez: objection asked & answered
      overruled.
      K: black goggles?
      R: can’t confirm either way. this is far away.
      K: Ms. Rhode, can you zoom in? [she does]
      R: can’t confirm.
      [i have to return to court. more later] /43

  10. harpie says:

    Brandi’s notes from the NON live tweeting portion of 4/17/23 PB trial:

    https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1648104908640468995
    7:23 PM · Apr 17, 2023

    NOTES from the Proud Boys seditious conspiracy trial.

    Re: Rehl’s testimony on direct last week that he could not see police being attacked as the Capitol was breached — […]

    Kenerson then immediately played another clip from one of the initial breaches on 1/6 and Rehl then affirmed from the stand that he “could see one of the officers pulling people past the line.”
    As video played, it highlights where Rehl is standing, closer to police line than not

    In the video Kenerson played for the jury, Rehl could be seen appearing to shout at police before him, his mouth was agape and his head jerked rapidly as he yelled.
    Kenerson: “That you asking the officers where the stages are?”

    This question triggered an objection (argumentative) from Rehl’s lawyer, Carmen Hernandez, and Judge Kelly sustained it.

    • harpie says:

      At trial, witnesses for the PBs and the defendants too (through their attys) have said 4th degree status could be reached through charity work or through defending a fellow PB when they were being attacked by antifa.

      Prosecutors allege that status came by way of assaulting someone or engaging in violence. [LINK > https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1648112099439046657
      11:48 AM · Apr 12, 2023]

      On the stand Monday, Rehl repeated that the bylaws were a rough draft, not voted on by PBS and then he said the draft he wrote was something he copied from another chapter that needed to be refined.

      Kenerson asked Rehl to review the bylaws as he wrote them, they stated, ‘a major conflict related to the cause or something above and beyond…”

      There was an objection here and it was overruled.
      “That’s one of the ways, Rehl said.”

    • harpie says:

      re recruiting:

      Rehl then said their new recruits would “spike” at various times throughout their history as an org based on what was going on at a natl level.

      But last week, Kenerson, said, Rehl testified that they needed a cap.
      Rehl: I said we needed to rein them in..

      So the cap came after the November rally? And Rehl affirms this.

      Kenerson: Because you didn’t want people to join who didn’t realize the club was about more than protesting?

      After the 11/14 rally, prosecutors allege Proud Boys used a video of a woman being knocked over the head with a helmet before crumpling to the ground as a recruitment tool. PBs claimed the woman was antifa. She appeared in vid brandishing knife surrounded by PBs

      Rehl denied the video was used as a recruitment tool and then Kenerson brought up a chat thread from Parler where Rehl responded to the sharing of the video… “PBs start getting hype when they see these about to cross [post or paths, I couldn’t hear him clearly but was 1 of 2)”

      • harpie says:

        [continuing directly]

        Bringing up more Parler posts and video, Kenerson shows jurors footage next of a Philly PB being interviewed on street after the 11/14 clash. The man in clip says “1776 has commenced again” & Rehl responds in chat to “POYMFB we will not stand down we will stand up for America.”

        POYMFB = Proud of Your Motherfucking Boy
        This is also something we heard from Dominic Pezzola when he filmed himself inside the Capitol.

        Ken: Didn’t say ‘we will stand up for ourselves?’
        There was a comment here I missed, but then I caught the next bit.
        Rehl, “Look, the left was agitating that day.”

        K: Didn’t say ‘we will stand up for normies’?
        Rehl, defensive, unclear: We were… Trump tweeted it the same day…

        Kenerson: You wrote, we will stand up for America
        Crosstalk
        Kenerson: Were you ecstatic when the woman —-crosstalk
        Rehl: That scene was horrible. I wanted to protect our reputation so I shared the video…

        Rehl continued but was speaking fast, his testimony sounded scattered. But in short, he said by sharing the video of the woman being cracked over her head, it would help him protect the rep of PBs. He wasn’t clear at all and he prompted Kenerson to ask: “so that’s a no?”
        So, that’s a no, Rehl wasn’t ecstatic at what he saw in the video? (This is Kenerson getting at celebration of violence claim by govt)
        “The way I express myself online… I can’t explain it to you.”
        Kenerson asks Rehl again, if he was ecstatic?
        Rehl doesn’t answer yes or no.

        Quite literally, Kenerson asked Rehl 7 TIMES if he was ecstatic, and each time, above overruled objections from his lawyer, Rehl would give longwinded statements but not answer the question: was he ecstatic about what he saw happen in DC 11/14?

        “I’ve got all day,” Kenerson said after he asked Rehl for the fifth time if he was ecstatic about the violence he saw unfold in DC on 11/14.
        By the seventh time, Rehl answered:
        “Ecstatic? No. Much worse. That’s a hard thing to try and defend to the public.”

      • harpie says:

        [continuing directly]

        Kenerson next asked Rehl if he shared the knockout video with anyone else besides posting it on Parler.
        Rehl couldn’t recall.
        Ken: You sent it to your mother?
        Objection, sidebar.
        Rehl, dryly: Maybe. It’s been quite awhile. It’s been two years.

        • harpie says:

          Kenerson shows the text to Rehl and Rehl affirms, its one he sent to his mom.
          “Yep,” he said.
          Then, Rehl, who called the integrity of the govt evidence into question with side remarks during multiple pts of day, asks if they can play the video in the chat so he can verify it

          There are a lot of different variations of that [knock out] video, Rehl said. He sent it to his mother with the msg, ” This is one of my Philly guys enjoy.”

          In court, he said: “I wanted to show her my side of the story and I didn’t want her to think we were bullies…”

          And that’s where my in-court note-taking ended for the afternoon once the media room reopened. (YAY)

          Not to worry if you feel out of sorts, I’ll have a write up for @emptywheel later this week that will help walk you through it!

          THANKS so much, Brandi!

        • harpie says:

          Just an observation…a bunch of guys aggressively surrounding a lone woman at night sounds to me like it just might be “bully”ing behavior…or worse.

          Also, REHL thought his mother might “enjoy” watching the video?

  11. harpie says:

    The beginning of THREADS for today: [I don’t know how long this post will remain open]
    Both begin with reviews of previous action.

    https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1648262465581375494
    5:49 AM · Apr 18, 2023

    Good morning. It is Day 56 of the Proud Boys seditious conspiracy trial. Cross of Zachary Rehl continues at 9:30AM ET. For the opening bid today, we have a lovely scene from the Potomac where a single branch hangs by a thread. (Relatable much?) I will report live for @emptywheel.

    https://twitter.com/rparloff/status/1648295543230144517
    8:00 AM · Apr 18, 2023

    It’s Apr 18 and Day 57 of the Proud Boys trial. I’ll be live-tweeting here and on @Lawfareblog: [link]. AUSA Kenerson is set to resume so-far tense & dramatic cross of def. Zach Rehl. /1

  12. harpie says:

    https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1648321370630107136
    9:43 AM · Apr 18, 2023

    And away we go.

    Judge Tim Kelly begins with a few outstanding issues.
    I’ve already excluded all the Kalamazoo evidence, so that takes care some of things that you raised, Ms. Hernandez. That’s all out. With regard to text messages and North Carolina, I will let govt go into text msgs …To impeach the tesitmony of Rehl to extent he’s presenting his membership in the club and the nature of the Proud Boys, to the extent he has on his direct talked about how they were things other than politics or violence but entrepreneurship et al…

    https://twitter.com/rparloff/status/1648321339642576896
    9:43 AM · Apr 18, 2023

    Judge Kelly is on the bench. /34

    He’s going to address some evidentiary questions.
    1. With regard to text messages relating to the Fayetteville, NC rally in August 2020, he’s going to allow the govt to go into this. He thinks they impeach his testimony that PBs were about entrepreneurship and fraternity …/35

    • harpie says:

      hoo boy…this is again getting contentious…jury not yet in the room.

      10:28 AM Brandi:

      It’s 10:28. Jury has been waiting for an hour.

      Hernandez says what the govt is doing with its case is “grotesque.” Then she stops herself, calls “decorum” on herself.

      Kelly: You’re correct I should enforce the decorum rules so one party doesn’t call what the other party is doing grotesque

      Hernandez says Conor Mulroe laughs in her face, that’s inappropriate.
      Kelly says if that’s happening, that is inappropriate.

      Yesterday, her interruptions were so constant that Judge Kelly threatened to put attys in time out for doing this.
      Literally, he said “time out.”

      Kelly proposes: We will take a 5-minute recess while I’m on the bench so you can watch a 4 minute video.

      Hernandez: Let me explain what is required to view this video….
      Hernandez is still going“its just not fair.” […]

  13. harpie says:

    Cross examination of REHL is done. The next phase will begin here.

    https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1648365955695747073
    12:40 PM · Apr 18, 2023

    We are now on a break for lunch. Rehl’s atty asked for bit of extra time today for lunch to review videos and Kelly gives it to her, tells parties we will return at 1:50 today. (We broke at 12:35pm)

    https://twitter.com/rparloff/status/1648364600667131904
    12:35 PM · Apr 18, 2023

    We’re breaking for lunch /109

    Hernandez asks for extra time for lunch so i can prepare.
    Judge Kelly: i’ll give you an extra 15, so we’ll be back at 1:50pm.
    Recessed. /110

    • harpie says:

      2:10 PM Brandi

      Jauregui: What percentage of questions you’ve been asked had anything to do with Jan. 6 if you could approximate?
      Objection. Sustained.

      Jauregui pulls up DC Street Sweeper chat exhibit. Its got a date at top, Nov. 18. The date of message in chat indicates its from 12/2.
      J: This is yet another mistake in a multitude of exhibits by govt?
      Objection. Argumentative.
      Kelly calls for sidebar.

      Sidebar over.
      Jauregui: Have you noticed other mistakes at trial?
      I’ve noticed a lot, Rehl says.
      Jauregui: Rememebr when Kenerson showed you Cellebrite reports? Do you know if they were correct?
      Objection. Sustained.

      Jauregui: Do you know who did extractions from cell phones in this case?
      Objection. Sustained.
      Kelly asks for another sidebar.

      Seems like a decent time to remind readers that Judge Kelly issued an order denying Rehl’s co-defendant, Dominic Pezzola, motion for mistrial after his attorney Roger Roots made a series of claims about govt impropriety with evidence etc [link]

      [links to: 8:28 AM · Apr 17, 2023
      https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1647939983250948097 ]

      • harpie says:

        [continuing directly]
        12:18 PM Brandi:

        J: There were other msgs from other people in these reports, you can’t say if those msgs were correct?
        Objection. Leading. Sustained

        Do you remember msgs from other people?
        Rehl: I do.
        You can’t say if those msgs were correct?
        Objection. Leading. Sustained.

        Jauregui: What can you tell me about those msgs
        Rehl: The govt had two different software builds —
        Objection. Foundation.
        J: Can you tell this jury 1 way or the other that msgs not sent by you were accurate?
        Objection vague which messages. Overruled

        Rehl: Due to the way —
        Objection move to strike, non responsive.
        Hernandez asks for a sidebar. Husher on.

        2:25 PM Husher off.
        Do your emember all these msgs the govt is asking you about?
        R: I don’t know what you mean
        Jauregui: Msgs from 3rd parties?
        Rehl: From 3d parties? No.

        Jauregui brings up the “knockout” video of the woman knocked out by PBs who was brandishing a knife.
        J: Is a woman as dangerous as a man when they’re swinging it around?
        Hernandez objects. Overruled.
        Rehl: I think anybody could be dangerous with a knife if used properly

        Did Enrique invite George Meza aka Ash Baroziba into MOSD?
        Yes, but I didnt remember that at the time
        Did Ash go into the Capitol?
        Objection. Sustained.

        Remember testimony of Ash in front of jury
        Yes
        Did he go inside the Captiol?
        Objection. Sustained.
        Do you remember if Tarrio invited Fernando Alonso into MOSD
        Rehl; I don’t, like I said, i don’t know who he invited in

      • harpie says:

        2:25 PM Brandi

        Do you know if Alonso went into the Capitol on 1/6?
        Objection.
        Jauregui: He’s on cross, I’m asking who was invited into MOSD
        Kelly: no, i sustained relevance objection to that.
        J: Did Tarrio invite Kenny Lizardo into MOSD?
        R: From my understanding he did
        And he was CHS?
        R: Yes

        Jauregui: Did Mr. Kenerson ever ask you if there was an understanding to storm the Capitol?
        Objection. Sustained.
        Was there an objection [sp: LOL!] to storm the Capitol?
        Rehl: No.

        Jauregui is doing now what he has done so often at this trial, asking questions that, it would strongly seem, he understands will draw objections so he can get the testimony out anyway.

        This went on like this for a few minutes with Jauregui asking questions in this way. Kelly addressed Jauregui sharply, telling him he had already told him what the objection was. Kenerson asked for him to be admonished.

        Did I ever ask you to lie?
        No –
        Objections, cross talk, sustained.
        Jauregui: I’m done your honor
        Kelly, pointedly: You are done.

    • harpie says:

      2:30 PM Brandi:

      Hernandez now on redirect of Rehl:
      H: You were asked a # of conversations about chats between yourself and Mr. Wolkind?
      Rehl: That’s correct
      H: In fact did you attend a rally in NC
      R: Yes I did
      H: Was Wolkind there?
      R: No, not part of any org of that event

      Was Mr Donohoe (at rally in NC)?
      Rehl: He was yes
      Was there any violence that day?
      R: No there was a threat of it. Its usually one of the things that happen in activism. A lot of time people say they’re going to show up and do this or that and rly they want silence opponent Its bluster, trash talk. The point in activism is to make your opponent uncomfortable. They were saying they were going to send 1k people to shut down that event. We prepared for the worst but we hoped for the best. We prepared & if they were going to assault those women I would protect them any way I could.

      Hernandez elicits from Rehl: the women (who Rehl says were sexual assault survivors) at the NC event wanted to march with Proud Boys.

      2:34 PM We now have a sidebar.

    • harpie says:

      3:03 PM Brandi:

      Hernandez: Just for the record, you indicated during Kenerson’s cross, he didn’t have to show exhibits and what he was referring to was in discovery. This is all coming from Rehl’s phone but I don’t have Rehl’s phone just extractions govt has given the court admitted them for context.
      Kelly: To be clear, Ms. Hernandez, I had them. So I could rule on them. I had the stmts the govt wanted to admit for days and days and days

      H: Your trial order doesnt address redirect
      K: I understand but common sense….

      Hernandez: The thrust of the govt’s cross for 2 days is that Rehl is a violent insurrectionist who had 1 thought in mind was to overturn the election. Here he is, that’s all he wanted no legal process — trails off mic

      3:04 PM Parloff:

      We are apparently going, one by one, through the texts Hernandez wants to introduce. (H comes in and out of microphone range.) Issue is whether these fall within some exception to the hearsay exclusion. /144

      Judge: i know how i’m going to rule. [He begins to explain.] Stop shaking your head Ms. Hernandez, it’s disrespectful. [… ] i’ve ruled. let’s go on to the next one.
      H: this is the most fundamental 6th amendment violation. he has been subjected to harsh cross …/145

      [I think the statement is “I believe the election will not be overturned.”]

      Judge: I’m going to enforce the hearsay rules. give me the next one …
      H: still arguing
      Judge: please stop talking. i understand your argument. i disagree with it. please give me your next …/146

      wow

    • harpie says:

      3:15 PM Brandi:

      Kelly wants to give the court reporter a break, but Hernandez has another msg and Kelly lets her go through it.

      Say or think what you want about Ms. Hernandez but at the end of the day, this is Kelly’s courtroom. He is in control. Not her.

      He has to hear evidence and arguments and he is always willing to within the limits of reason and in the last two weeks, he’s been more aware of the time constraints and pressures, but he still has a habit of saying, i won’t burn time on this… and then he burns time on it.
      […]
      3:19 PM Now we are finally on a break for 10 minutes.

    • harpie says:

      3:41 PM Brandi:

      Kelly is on the bench and going through the msgs. (We seemed to close to ending Rehl’s time on stand today and maybe we will but my hopes arent hight)

      Kelly brings up Rehl’s text “what’s that mean?” and he says: questions cannot be hearsay.

      This has been an element on cross, this has come up on direct re: knowledge of what’s going on inside the Capitol on 1/6.

      Apologies, I didn’t catch Kelly’s explanation on this, but he ultimately did allowed Hernandez to use all three text records, a change of heart from earlier

      Now Rehl is back on the stand and we shall resume shortly.

      3:47 PM Jury is back in and seated and Hernandez continues with redirect of Zachary Rehl.

    • harpie says:

      3:49 PM Brandi:

      H: you were asked questions about Mr. Bertino and what happened on 12/12 and how that might have — sorry – can you explain how you understood what happened with bertino on 12/12?
      Rehl: From my understanding what he told everybody is somebody came into our group and —

      Obj. Foundation.
      Kenerson: Is this something told to him or something he’s hearing secondhand?
      Hernandez doesn’t ask a question, she says, “What I’d like to tell the jury is…” and she goes on re: Bertino.
      Rehl, bursts in: He lied to everybody, to the jury!
      Kenerson objects.

      [ALSO] 3:49 PM Sidebar. Husher on.

      3:57 PM

      Husher off. Kelly says he’ll strike the last stmt from the record (I believe that is the Bertino lied remark by Rehl)
      Hernandez moves on and asks about text where Rehl said people “were out for blood” after that Dec rally.

      Rehl: I made that stmt because we were deceived into thinking he was the victim that day and —
      Kelly tells him (paraphrase) to answer question directly, not qualify it it first

      Rehl: It was my understanding at the time that he (Bertino) was the victim of a crime and I thought someone snuck into our group and started a fight with him and I thought at the time he was defending himself and I later found out that was not true —

      Objection from kenerson to “later …not true.” Sustained.
      Moves to strike last sentence.
      Kelly: It will be stricken

  14. harpie says:

    Next phase: PEZZOLA testifies.
    https://twitter.com/Brandi_Buchman/status/1648425226903101440
    4:36 PM · Apr 18, 2023

    And that ends the cross of Proud Boy Zachary Rehl.

    NOW: Proud Boy defendant Dominic Pezzola affirms with Judge Kelly, he intends to testify

    https://twitter.com/rparloff/status/1648424301807411200
    4:32 PM · Apr 18, 2023

    Hernandez done.

    Jury excused for a break while attys talk. /180

    Judge now instructing Pezzola of his right to remain silent. Judge needs to get his specific waiver. Pezzola intends to testify.

Comments are closed.