Guy Wesley Reffitt was convicted in March on five counts in a case viewed as a test for the Justice Department.
-
Send any friend a story
As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month. Anyone can read what you share.
Give this article
- Read in app
Guy Wesley Reffitt during the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Footage from the camera on his helmet was played at the trial.
WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Monday sentenced Guy Wesley Reffitt, the first defendant to go on trial in the Justice Department’s sprawling criminal inquiry into the Jan. 6 attack, to more than seven years in prison, the longest sentence to date in a case stemming from the Capitol riot.
After a six-hour hearing, Judge Dabney L. Friedrich handed down a sentence at the low end of the guideline range. She noted that was still significantly longer than any given so far to any of the more than 800 people arrested in connection with the riot, many of whom have struck plea bargains.
Prosecutors had asked that Mr. Reffitt be given 15 years after adding a sentencing enhancement used in cases of domestic terrorism. But Judge Friedrich rejected those terms, sentencing him to seven years and three months in prison with three years of probation, and ordering him to pay $2,000 in restitution and receive mental health treatment.
A jury found Mr. Reffitt guilty on five felony charges in March, including obstructing Congress’s certification of the 2020 presidential election, carrying a .40-caliber pistol during the riot and two counts of civil disorder. Unlike others who breached the building, Mr. Reffitt did not go inside.
The sentencing capped a trial that was seen as an important test for the Justice Department, which is only beginning the marathon process of trying what could be scores of rioters. In particular, prosecutors and defense lawyers had been watching to see how the obstruction charge, a rarely used count central to many of the cases yet to reach trial, would hold up in court.
Key Revelations From the Jan. 6 Hearings
Card 1 of 9
Making a case against Trump. The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack is laying out a comprehensive narrative of President Donald J. Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Here are the main themes that have emerged so far from eight public hearings:
An unsettling narrative. During the first hearing, the committee described in vivid detail what it characterized as an attempted coup orchestrated by the former president that culminated in the assault on the Capitol. At the heart of the gripping story were three main players: Mr. Trump, the Proud Boys and a Capitol Police officer.
Creating election lies. In its second hearing, the panel showed how Mr. Trump ignored aides and advisers as he declared victory prematurely and relentlessly pressed claims of fraud he was told were wrong. “He’s become detached from reality if he really believes this stuff,” William P. Barr, the former attorney general, said of Mr. Trump during a videotaped interview.
Pressuring Pence. Mr. Trump continued pressuring Vice President Mike Pence to go along with a plan to overturn his loss even after he was told it was illegal, according to testimony laid out by the panel during the third hearing. The committee showed how Mr. Trump’s actions led his supporters to storm the Capitol, sending Mr. Pence fleeing for his life.
Fake elector plan. The committee used its fourth hearing to detail how Mr. Trump was personally involved in a scheme to put forward fake electors. The panel also presented fresh details on how the former president leaned on state officials to invalidate his defeat, opening them up to violent threats when they refused.
Strong arming the Justice Dept. During the fifth hearing, the panel explored Mr. Trump’s wide-ranging and relentless scheme to misuse the Justice Department to keep himself in power. The panel also presented evidence that at least half a dozen Republican members of Congress sought pre-emptive pardons.
The surprise hearing. Cassidy Hutchinson, a former White House aide, delivered explosive testimony during the panel’s sixth session, saying that the president knew the crowd on Jan. 6 was armed, but wanted to loosen security. She also painted Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff, as disengaged and unwilling to act as rioters approached the Capitol.
Planning a march. Mr. Trump planned to lead a march to the Capitol on Jan. 6 but wanted it to look spontaneous, the committee revealed during its seventh hearing. Representative Liz Cheney also said that Mr. Trump had reached out to a witness in the panel’s investigation, and that the committee had informed the Justice Department of the approach.
A “complete dereliction” of duty. In the final public hearing of the summer, the panel accused the former president of dereliction of duty for failing to act to stop the Capitol assault. The committee documented how, over 187 minutes, Mr. Trump had ignored pleas to call off the mob and then refused to say the election was over even a day after the attack.
But Judge Friedrich described Mr. Reffitt’s case as unusual on account of threats of violence he made against his children when he discovered he might be swept up in the federal investigation following the riot. In March, Mr. Reffitt’s son, Jackson Reffitt, took the stand to testify that his father had become radicalized in the months leading up to the attack, and had threatened both him and his sister in an attempt to dissuade them from speaking to authorities, telling them that “traitors get shot.”
Before Monday, the longest sentence in a case related to the attack on the Capitol was just over five years, given last year to a man who had pleaded guilty to assaulting an officer with a fire extinguisher. But because Mr. Reffitt did not plead guilty like hundreds of others arrested in connection with the attack and went to trial, Judge Friedrich said, the sentencing guidelines for his case were two years more than if he had reached a plea deal.
The sentence comes as a parallel investigation being carried out by the House Jan. 6 committee has been gaining momentum. As courts slowly process the hundreds of cases related to the riot, speculation has grown as to how the Justice Department will respond to the committee’s findings about former President Donald J. Trump and those in his inner circle who helped instigate it, and whether the committee will formally recommend criminal charges.
After briefly appearing hesitant to address the court on Monday, Mr. Reffitt, dressed in an orange jumpsuit with his hair pulled back into a thin ponytail, offered an apology for his actions.
“I did want to definitely make an apology,” he said. “In 2020, I was a little crazy, everything went a little stupid.”
But Judge Friedrich said that although she appreciated his sentiment, she doubted his sincerity, given that while in jail awaiting sentencing, he apparently had raised funds off his incarceration, releasing politically charged statements “doubling down” on his claims and a “manifesto” he had dictated to his family by phone.
Mr. Reffitt conceded that he had often resorted to “hyperbole,” but said that any inflammatory claims he had made were intended to draw donations to support his family financially.
In the months before and after the 2020 election, Mr. Reffitt got involved with the Texas Three Percenters, a loosely organized militia movement, and sent messages recruiting others in the group to accompany him to Washington on Jan. 6.
As part of his sentence, Judge Friedrich instructed him not to contact any members of the Three Percenters or other militia groups while on probation.
In final remarks, Judge Friedrich made a point to stress that while Mr. Reffitt’s actions were not as violent as many others who had attacked police officers on Jan. 6, they nonetheless put hundreds of people in danger.
While Mr. Reffitt repeatedly described himself and other rioters who stormed the capitol as “patriots” in statements from jail, Judge Friedrich called their behavior the “antithesis of patriotism.”
“Not only are they not patriots, they are a direct threat to our democracy and will be prosecuted as such,” she said.
Source: nytimes.com
