Thread by @ChanelRion

#HappeningNow

J6 John Strand Trial Closing Arguments:

Strand has refused to take a plea deal. Faces a DC jury.

Closing Arguments concluded. Jury has returned to their chamber for lunch break and to deliberate.

Judge Cooper have them the option to not have to deliver verdict today if unanimous verdicts cannot be agreed upon today.

Strand faces 5 Counts…

1) Obstruction of an official proceeding
2) Entering Restricted Grounds
3) Disorderly Conduct
4) Disorderly Conduct in Capitol Building
5) Parading And Picketing in Capitol Building

Here’s a summary of both sides and their approaches…

Government Closing Argument against Strand:

- set up the emotional scene… reminded jury of the terror of j6 for security and officers inside capitol
- “surreal… this happened in our Nation’s capitol. [John Strand]? At the forefront.”

Key needs of the government arg here…

Gov Today chose the ‘John Strand is a cunning monster who, like a general in a civil war, LED THE CHARGE’ approach.

- Strand “has talent for getting in FRONT of the mob.”

True to a prosecuting team that has likely never been caught in a mob or a genuine riot… argued with a bizarre and snarling gusto:

- Strand, once inside Capitol, should have SAT DOWN… in the MIDDLE of a riot

Also relies on Strand’s own text messages after the event

A key approach by the government against John Strand is Strand, a single participant who was on the Capitol grounds as personal security for Dr. Simone Gold, should have seen, heard, and understood exactly everything happening on the entire Capitol grounds that day.

Government also glosses over the fact that if Strand were the civil war General they’re portraying him to be… he “charged” the Capitol completely unfamiliar with the Capitol grounds, and was clearly lost for most of his time on the grounds…

Optically, the Gov. is on shaky ground here.

To argue Strand was the leader, stormed the Capitol, barged in knowing exactly what he was doing… is contradicted by actual images/video of him.

Majority of Strand’s time on grounds he is LITERALLY BEHIND Dr. Gold protecting her.

DEFENSE CLOSING:

-Calls on jury to set aside political beliefs
- not a trial between officers and Strand
- birds eye view of capitol 🚫🟰Strand’s vantage
- judge with own eyes

Strand did not:
assault police, destroy property, shout slogans, spray chemicals, use or bring weapons

Game played here by government is CONFLATION.

Show worst moments of J6, most emotional testimony of those on grounds… and throw Strand (who didn’t witness these moments) into mix.

Gov’s rebuttal: Q of INTENT. Strand had access/opportunity to obstruct congress - and did.

Some trial color:

The words“SNARLING” / “shrill” comes to mind in describing the tone of Gov attorney’s closing.

The Gov used “he should’ve known better” argument.

Gov woman chose “Strand SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER!” *rawr Gnash* tone.

Practicing perhaps for Halloween.

Another series of digs:

Gov refused to address @drsimonegold as DR (MD,JD). Referring as “Ms. Gold, Strand’s girlfriend.”

Reason: To diminish Strand’s role as Dr Gold’s sec guard - his job.

Gov needed to show Strand leading an insurrection not as underling of activist boss.