II Video Podcast
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - ESPN
FEDERAL COURT, August 23 -- Months after the DC Circuit's decisions in US v. Munchel and more recently Tanios, on September 23 DDC Judge Trevor N. McFadden had before him Capitol breach defendant Brandon Fellows, who wants to represent himself.
Judge McFadden agreed to it, albeit begrudginly. Inner City Press live tweeted it, here:
Brandon Fellows wants to represent himself. Judge McFadden asking if he's sure. Judge McFadden: I find that the defendant has knowingly waived the right to counsel. I will appoint a stand-by counsel. Mr. Fellows, you wish me to reconsider the bond determination? Fellows: Yes. I have motions and I can make comments on them.
Fellows: If you are trying to put in new evidence, the Government will get to cross-examine. Are you seeking to make just new legal arguments? Or new evidence? Fellows: Both. I wrote out a full response.
Fellows: Will you allow me to read out what I wrote? Judge McFadden: Are you seeking to testify? I'm not sure you need to go through your seven minute speech. AUSA: I'm the stand by. We'd like another day. Judge McFadden: How about October 12 at 2:30 pm?
AUSA: I have a Capitol sentencing at 2. Judge McFadden: Capital? [Like, possible death penalty]. Oh, you mean Capitol, January 6. OK, so 3 pm.
Federal Defender: I am concerned about filing his motions on ECF - putting my name on it creates ethical issues. Judge McFadden: I'll order you do file on ECF. Mr. Fellows, you mail them to the Court and to her. Fellows: May I comment? Or just wait?
Judge McFadden: AUSA, will you respond by October 5? I know you would be out on leave. So, the 6th. Hearing on October 12.
Fellows: I hold here mail from August that I only got on 9/16. DC mail is the opposite of Amazon Prime. I am concerned my motions will not arrive. How about a courier? Judge McFadden: Most people don't represent themselves. I discourage you from doing so.
Judge McFadden: We do not encourage communications between defendants in the DDC jails and the courts. That is done by their lawyers. We are adjourned.
On Kenneth Harrelson on August 5, Inner City Press filed a letter and motion with Judge Mehta, on its DocumentCloud here.
On August 16, this: "Judge Mehta is in receipt of your email requesting access to the videos filed in United States v. Harrelson, No. 21-cr-28-10. Under Standing Order No. 21-28, in order for the court to grant Inner City Press access to the videos filed in Mr. Harrelson’s case, you will need to file an application for access pursuant to D.D.C. Local Criminal Rule 57.6."
That rule provides: "Any news organization or other interested person, other than a party or a subpoenaed witness, who seeks relief relating to any aspect of proceedings in a criminal case... shall file an application for such relief with the Court. The application shall include a statement of the applicant's interest in the matter as to which relief is sought, a statement of facts, and a specific prayer for relief."
So, citing the Rule, Inner City Press filed another letter, one page, docketed here
Podcast here. And Podcast II of August 19 here.
Now on August 19, it's been granted (shouldn't have been necessary): "MINUTE ORDER as to KENNETH HARRELSON (10) granting Inner City Press's 343 Application for Access to Video Exhibits. The United States shall make available to Inner City Press the video exhibits entered into evidence during the detention hearing of KENNETH HARRELSON (10), consistent with the procedures set forth in Standing Order 21-28. Inner City Press is granted permission to record, copy, download, retransmit, and otherwise further publish these video exhibits. Signed by Judge Amit P. Mehta on 8/19/2021."
So now, immediately, put on Inner City Press' YouTube, video here
Similarly, Inner City Press asked DOJ and then Judge Timothy Kelly for access to the videos that DOJ had shown to the court in the case: judicial documents that, under case law, must be made available to the public. But it was denied access, on the theory that Judge Kelly's order earlier in the month limited access to these judicial documents to a particular sub-set of the public.
Inner City Press on July 27 wrote to Judge Kelly, including in the form of a motion, now on DocumentCloud, here. By noon the next day, July 28, nothing - no responses, no response. We'll have more on this. For now, podcast here; music video here.
Inner City Press live tweeted Riley June Williams on January 25, here.
From January 22, song here: Thread here.
Inner City Press' John Earle Sullivan song on SoundCloud here.
***
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.
