DOJ Formally Alleges the Proud Boys Committed a Cr
Post# of 122155
![](/assets/46931549/no_avatar_available_thumb.jpg)
In Adding Matthew Greene to a Conspiracy with Dominic Pezzola, DOJ Formally Alleges the Proud Boys Committed a Crime of Terrorism
...........
McCullough also revealed something that was not yet public: the government had rounded up another Proud Boy, Matthew Greene, and indicted him in what I call the Proud Boy “Front Door” conspiracy along with Dominic Pezzola and William Pepe.
In doing so, they did something more important for their larger case. First, they changed the purpose of the conspiracy from what it was originally charged to match all the other militia conspiracies (from busting through the first door to obstructing the vote count). Here’s what the militia conspiracies currently look like as a result:
![Screen-Shot-2021-04-22-at-8.09.49-AM-2048x985.png](https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Screen-Shot-2021-04-22-at-8.09.49-AM-2048x985.png)
The important part of yesterday's superseding Proud Boy indictment wasn't the new defendant. It's that DOJ aligned the indictment with all the other militia conspiracies and charged the other conspirators with Abetting Pezzola in breaking the window of Congress.
![Screen-Shot-2021-04-22-at-8.29.23-AM-2048x675.png](https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Screen-Shot-2021-04-22-at-8.29.23-AM-2048x675.png)
In general, the government is charging Pepe and now Greene with more than they originally charged Pepe with based on a theory that they abetted Pezzola’s alleged crimes.
But the critical change is highlighted. Originally (marked in pink), just Pezzola was charged for breaking the window through which the initial breach of the Capitol happened. But in this indictment (marked in yellow), DOJ charges Pepe and Greene for abetting Pezzola in breaking that window.
The reason they did this is because 18 USC 1361 is the crime for which DOJ is arguing that all key Proud Boy defendants can be detained pre-trial, not just Pezzola, but also Joe Biggs, Ethan Nordean, Zach Rehl, and Charles Donohoe. In detention hearings, the government has argued that it counts not just as a crime of violence that allows the government to argue that a defendant is eligible for detention, but also that, because it was done to coerce the conduct of government, it triggers a terrorism designation for detention purposes.
This is how the argument looks in detention memos:
As it did before, the United States moves for detention pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e)(3)(C), which provides a rebuttable presumption in favor of detention for an enumerated list of crimes, including Destruction of Property in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1361. The United States also seeks detention pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(1)(A), because Destruction of Property, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1361, is a crime of violence. Moreover, when Destruction of Property is “calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion,” it also qualifies as a federal crime of terrorism. See 18 U.S.C. § 2332b(g)(5)(
![B) B)](smileys/cool.gif)
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscou...30.0_4.pdf
https://www.emptywheel.net/2021/04/22/in-addi...terrorism/
![Like This Post](/images/thumb-up.png)
![Dislike This Post](/images/thumb-down.png)