Bad Legal Takes

She did find black guilty of entering restricted Capitol grounds with a deadly weapon and disorderly/disruptive conduct in Capitol w a dangerous weapon (a knife).

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) January 13, 2023

So here’s the very lucid explanation of what Judge Jackson did, and why.

ABJ has spent the last hour delivering a detailed explanation for why knife blades should be measured from the tip of the blade through the unsharpened tang, a definition that makes Black’s knife fit the definition of “dangerous weapon.”

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) January 13, 2023

This was a bench trial, so ABJ held herself to a reasonable doubt standard. Defense argued that Black believed the certification of the election had ended by the time he got into the Capitol. Prosecutors didn’t present evidence otherwise, she said.

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) January 13, 2023

But judging by the replies even that much was Tl;Dr. That, or reading comprehension on average really sucks.

I’ll take one of each, thank you.

Granted, Jackson didn’t “acquit” Black so much as find the prosecution hadn’t made its case on the most serious charges (obstruction of a proceeding), because they didn’t prove he intended to obstruct. You know, what “intent” means to most of us: you meant to do the bad thing, or you didn’t. Intent, or no intent. The prosecution didn’t show Black had the mens rea for the crime. EOD.

But Black was convicted of other crimes, so it’s not like she patted him on the head and said “You’re a good boy.” But almost 9 out of 10 replies seemed to miss that subtlety and declared the judge a miscreant. When in fact that’s just the kind of judge you want if you get hauled into court on criminal charges.

But then, you’d be innocent, so you’d have nothing to worry about, right? 🤷🏻‍♂️