Oath Keeper Jessica Watkins with tactical vest with medical supplies. DOJ is using this as evidence.
On Jan. 6, unknown voices on the publicly accessible Zello walkie-talkie app directed defendant Jessica Watkins to enter the Capitol and arrest members of Congress.
“Get it Jess. Do your ****,” said screenname FreedomDoz3r91.
“This is what we ******* lived up for. Everything we ******* trained for.”
“This is pretty freakin’ radical to me,” states screenname Jim Fitzgerald repeatedly.
Remarks like this continue in a 69 page transcript, featuring individuals who are not defendants.
The government insists on using this as evidence against Watkins on the basis she “was a listener.”
Can a judge step in and say this is not admissible unless Watkins is the one speaking up?
Is it possible for a judge and jury to identify this as entrapment?
“No defendant in this case, much less none of the indicted or unindicted co-conspirators sent a message or responded on this chain of communications that the government has highlighted-or anywhere in the 69 page transcript,” stated defense attorneys Juli Haller and Stan Woodward, Jr.
A courtroom observer said it is unusual most of the speakers on the Zello chat had noises like televisions playing in the background. There was one particular voice heard clearly amidst all of the others.
The government expressed little interest in identifying those behind the screennames on this chat-including 1% Watchdog, General Mark Davis CFA, and iWatchDirectorLaureen.
“We are not able to confirm these individuals’ true identifies for you,’ stated prosecutor Jeffrey Nestler before trial.
It is likely these voices are federal operatives.
Defendants have the right to confront their accusers. It’s relevant for the jury and public to understand whether these voices are paid government sources.
Confidential legal sources told The Gateway Pundit the DOJ prosecutor Nestler could be disbarred.
The Gateway Pundit wrote about these recordings earlier. The only people on thee Oath Keepers walkie-talkie app calling for violence were NOT EVEN AT THE CAPITOL!
Courtroom observers noticed prosecutors using broad evidence to inflame the jury. They showed weapons taken from Watkins’ Ohio apartment. Watkins is a registered gun owner. There was no evidence showing these weapons were in DC.
The government highlighted a helmet with a medic cross and tactical vest with medical supplies. Watkins was trained to serve as a medic and prepared to assist in the event of an emergency at the rally earlier that day.
While the government used electronic communications to lump defendants together as conspirators, it hasn’t clarified that at least 4 defendants never had contact with Stewart Rhodes, the Oathkeepers founder accused of leading a seditious conspiracy. This is similar to the case of Peter Schwartz. Schwartz is listed on an indictment with Jeffrey Scott Brown, a man he never met.