Comment on this storyComment
When analyzing the prosecutions of Jan. 6 rioters at the U.S. Capitol, some defense lawyers have zeroed in on a key word in the law used to charge many defendants: “corruptly.” The law requires proof that the defendants acted corruptly in obstructing the electoral vote certification.
But the exact definition of what it means to be corrupt was at question Thursday as judges for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit weighed whether a law used to secure felony convictions against more than 100 participants in the Capitol attack is being appropriately applied. Another 200 defendants still face the same charge of obstruction of an official proceeding which requires the showing of corrupt intent.
Defense attorneys argued that simply acting to overrun the Capitol wasn’t inherently corrupt and the charges against their clients should be upended.
Defense lawyer Timothy Cone argued that prosecutors had to show that a defendant was “dishonestly…
This article was written by Tom Jackman and originally published on www.washingtonpost.com