The North Carolina man claims to be an independent journalist “on the front lines of the attack on” [C]apitol” will be allowed to carry a concealed weapon while awaiting trial on misdemeanor charges.
Stephen Ethan Horn24 years old, seen in a photo posted by New York Times Magazine in the crowd inside the Capitol building after Donald Trump Supporters overwhelmingly police in an attempt to prevent Congress from certifying Joe Bidenvictory in the 2020 presidential race. Horn was wearing a helmet and what appeared to be other tactical gear, and he appeared to have climbed to the top of a statue so he could look down on the crowd.
He also told investigators that he entered the Speaker’s office Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).
Horn says he is an independent journalist, though prosecutors say an FBI tip identified Horn was “not aware of any media information Horn was in possession of.”
“I was on the front lines of the attack on [C]Horn said in a Facebook post, according to prosecutors.
“I did not enter the capital building as part of a protest, or for cheap thrills, but to accurately capture and document an important event taking place,” he allegedly posted.
Horn was charged with what is collectively known as a “standard misdemeanor” on January 6: entering and staying in a restricted building, disruptive and disorderly conduct in a restricted building, trespassing. entering violence and disorderly conduct in the Capitol building, and marching, protesting, or picnicking in a Capitol building.
United States District Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee, accepted Horn’s request on Tuesday to modify the conditions of his pre-trial release. Horn applied for permission to carry a concealed weapon, which he was licensed to do in the state of North Carolina.
Since his arrest in April, Horn has been barred from possessing “firearms, destructive devices or other weapons,” according to court records.
At the hearing, Assistant United States Attorney Michael James argued that Horn should not be allowed to carry a gun because he participated in the 6 January siege that temporarily succeeded in stopping the peaceful transfer of power.
James also said that allowing Horn to carry a firearm could jeopardize the safety of pre-trial service personnel and probation officers, those who supervised Horn before trial and those who made sure he we comply with the conditions of release.
James noted that Horn did not say in his paperwork that his request for a gun in self-defense stemmed from specific threats related to his participation in the January 6 riots.
“The defendant made no argument that ‘I need this to defend myself because since January 6, I have been threatened by individuals,’” James said.
According to a review of Horn’s court filings, Horn did not indicate any specific threats other than saying that “his personal circumstances have changed to the extent that he now has a desire to possess a firearm.” concealed handguns for self-defense purposes, as permitted in North Carolina law.”
At Tuesday’s hearing, Horn .’s attorney Marshall Ellis implied – but did not state it directly – that Horn was facing threats for his role in the January 6 attack on the Capitol.
“Mr. Horn recently received threats that prompted him to report it to the police,” Ellis said. Ellis noted, “He was trying to get a copy of that report for the meeting. hearing today,” Ellis noted, but the report was still unprepared.
“That led to us filing a claim,” Ellis added.
Ellis also said that Horn was not a “typical offender” and should have been stripped of the right to carry a gun.
“[Horn has] no criminal record, [he’s a] Ellis said. “That’s what makes this case different and why a gun ban isn’t necessary here.”
Kelly indicated at the outset of the hearing that he was inclined to accept Horn’s request – and he eventually did.
“This is one of the challenges in these cases, to consider [actions of individual defendants] but did not close my eyes to the broader event that happened that day, and I spent [time] in sentencing and the different contexts describe exactly what I think about what happened that day and how serious it was because of the way it robbed our country and disrupted tradition our peaceful transfer of power,” Kelly said.
“The events of that day were extremely serious,” he added.
However, the fact that Horn has no criminal history — “not even an arrest, that’s pretty important to me,” says Kelly — and has received a “mental fitness certificate.” The need from North Carolina to carry a concealed firearm reassured the assessment that Horn should be allowed to carry a gun.
Kelly posed two conditions to Horn: (1) he had to notify the pre-processing service of any gun purchases he made, and (2) he was not allowed to carry a gun when See pre-test service staff.
At the end of the hearing, both James and Ellis told Kelly that the case looked likely to go to trial. Kelly noted that he has a backlog of cases, so it could be months before the case reaches a jury, if it’s not resolved first, like dozens of misdemeanor cases happened on January 6 had.
[Images via FBI court filings.]
Is there a trick we should know? [email protected]
https://lawandcrime.com/u-s-capitol-breach/man-who-climbed-statue-on-jan-6-makes-vague-reference-to-threats-convinces-judge-to-allow-concealed-carry-for-self-defense-purposes/ January 6 Defendant Stephen Horn may carry concealed firearms: judge