Jacob Chansley reading Trump's tweet telling crowd to GO HOME during Jan 6

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Conservatives...


2021: "He's part of a massive deep-state Antifa conspiracy trying to make us all look crazy!!!!!1111!one1!"

2022: "He's being tortured in jail because he doesn't eat meat even though they transferred him to a facility where he could be a vegan!!!1111one!11!"

2023: "He was an innocent conservative all along you idiots!!!!!1111one!1"

2024: "I can't wait to go to his J6 Choir concert on tour with Donald Trump across the country!!!!!111one!11"

 

[blastula]

It should also be noted that the government is letting him go but not admitting they did anything wrong. I guess that's still better than doing nothing at all which is what I expected would happen

He's not free, he's in a halfway house. His conviction was not overturned or anything like that.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

A standard early release for a prisoner that was held in solitary confinement for 11 months? It is interesting how our legal system works.

I am betting not solitary confinement, but protective custody. I bet your sources are biased for that premise. So, now, after some googling, I see it is his lawyer who is sourced on that, and then Chansley himself who said this:

He said he had been in "administrative segregation" for over 300 days, which he described as "basically solitary confinement."

Although told it was for his safety, Chansley said he didn't think this was true as he had been warmly welcomed by other prisoners during a stint in a Colorado jail, who said they recognized him from TV.

Calling it solitary confinement invokes images of historical solitary confinement of going into "The Hole" in a dark room with no exiting, like torture. Administrative segregation in Chansley's case is protective custody...so he's kept to himself for his protection...not in a dark room, but did get limited time out, like 1 hour per day.

For right now, anyway, he's mentally ill, he's been taking medication, and behaving. So, now he's in a mental halfway house with very limited freedom. He's not allowed visitors. He can't even visit his family. If he has a legitimate reason to leave the guarded halfway house, he needs special signed-off approval and a pass. If he screws up over the next couple of months, he goes from the restrictive halfway house back to prison. On the other hand, if his mental condition continues to show improvement and he continues to be peaceful and on good behavior, in that time (end of May or so), he can get paroled...which might mean a less restrictive halfway house or living with a relative who can supervise him, and more freedoms, but continued supervision through a parole officer and mental health professionals.

 

[robnisch]

A standard early release for a prisoner that was held in solitary confinement for 11 months? It is interesting how our legal system works.

I am betting not solitary confinement, but protective custody. I bet your sources are biased for that premise. So, now, after some googling, I see it is his lawyer who is sourced on that, and then Chansley himself who said this:

He said he had been in "administrative segregation" for over 300 days, which he described as "basically solitary confinement."

Although told it was for his safety, Chansley said he didn't think this was true as he had been warmly welcomed by other prisoners during a stint in a Colorado jail, who said they recognized him from TV.

Calling it solitary confinement invokes images of historical solitary confinement of going into "The Hole" in a dark room with no exiting, like torture. Administrative segregation in Chansley's case is protective custody...so he's kept to himself for his protection...not in a dark room, but did get limited time out, like 1 hour per day.

For right now, anyway, he's mentally ill, he's been taking medication, and behaving. So, now he's in a mental halfway house with very limited freedom. He's not allowed visitors. He can't even visit his family. If he has a legitimate reason to leave the guarded halfway house, he needs special signed-off approval and a pass. If he screws up over the next couple of months, he goes from the restrictive halfway house back to prison. On the other hand, if his mental condition continues to show improvement and he continues to be peaceful and on good behavior, in that time (end of May or so), he can get paroled...which might mean a less restrictive halfway house or living with a relative who can supervise him, and more freedoms, but continued supervision through a parole officer and mental health professionals.

I'm not defending him, but protective custody is an euphemism for solitary confinement in the correction business. On any given day 90,000 prisoners are in some form of solitary confinement in the US.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

A standard early release for a prisoner that was held in solitary confinement for 11 months? It is interesting how our legal system works.

Yes, that's how it works. You get a certain % off your sentence for good behavior, he didn't misbehave in prison.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

A standard early release for a prisoner that was held in solitary confinement for 11 months? It is interesting how our legal system works.

I am betting not solitary confinement, but protective custody. I bet your sources are biased for that premise. So, now, after some googling, I see it is his lawyer who is sourced on that, and then Chansley himself who said this:

He said he had been in "administrative segregation" for over 300 days, which he described as "basically solitary confinement."

Although told it was for his safety, Chansley said he didn't think this was true as he had been warmly welcomed by other prisoners during a stint in a Colorado jail, who said they recognized him from TV.

Calling it solitary confinement invokes images of historical solitary confinement of going into "The Hole" in a dark room with no exiting, like torture. Administrative segregation in Chansley's case is protective custody...so he's kept to himself for his protection...not in a dark room, but did get limited time out, like 1 hour per day.

For right now, anyway, he's mentally ill, he's been taking medication, and behaving. So, now he's in a mental halfway house with very limited freedom. He's not allowed visitors. He can't even visit his family. If he has a legitimate reason to leave the guarded halfway house, he needs special signed-off approval and a pass. If he screws up over the next couple of months, he goes from the restrictive halfway house back to prison. On the other hand, if his mental condition continues to show improvement and he continues to be peaceful and on good behavior, in that time (end of May or so), he can get paroled...which might mean a less restrictive halfway house or living with a relative who can supervise him, and more freedoms, but continued supervision through a parole officer and mental health professionals.

I'm not defending him, but protective custody is an euphemism for solitary confinement in the correction business. On any given day 90,000 prisoners are in some form of solitary confinement in the US.

I know people who were in pc who don't call it torture. They appreciated the protection in prison. While Chansley was just new there, still showing signs of Q brainwashing he was complaining about it. Later on, after medication, after he realized Trump tricked him, he realized error and took accountability. He said later that he deserved to be in solitary confinement. It is interesting that conservative news sources are still in alignment with Chansley's older narrative from when he was paranoid.

 

[ZiprHead]

I'm not defending him

Bullshit. Do you think we're blind?

 

[Patooka]

I'm not defending him, but protective custody is an euphemism for solitary confinement in the correction business. On any given day 90,000 prisoners are in some form of solitary confinement in the US.

I watch Jon Oliver too. Protective custody can be a euphemism for solitary. It's also a term for housing of at risk prisoners like convicted cops who aren't in isolation. Doesn't also mean solitary and certainly doesn't mean that way for QAnon Shaman, You can't take interviews and be in solitary - they're mutually exclusive.

 

[laughing dog]

It doesn't matter what it is called - solitary confinement/protective custody - as it is usually practiced in the USA is inhumane for periods longer than a couple of days.

 

[Patooka]

I'm not defending him, but protective custody is an euphemism for solitary confinement in the correction business. On any given day 90,000 prisoners are in some form of solitary confinement in the US.

I watch Jon Oliver too. Protective custody can be a euphemism for solitary. It's also a term for housing of at risk prisoners like convicted cops who aren't in isolation. Doesn't also mean solitary and certainly doesn't mean that way for QAnon Shaman, You can't take interviews and be in solitary - they're mutually exclusive.

I need to revise this. I thought that protective custody in the US system doesn't always mean isolation. In NSW, it can mean being sectioned off with a small number of at risk inmates who are then viewed with greater scrutiny. Because I'm a fucking moron who thinks TV is real I honestly believed there were examples of protective custody like what initially happened to Clayton Hughes in OZ. Turns out I was wrong. PC is always solitary in the US. That's fucked. What's even more fucked is using US logic any reasonably competent lawyer can point to solitary, point to 8th Amendment and have a slam dunk argument. And yet it's still going on.

I hate pointing this out, but QAnon shaman was still doing interviews whilst he was inside. He should not be used as an example of a typical inmate in solitary. In fact, obscene as it is, he was given preferential treatment.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

This article is informative:

The January Sixers Have Their Own Unit at the DC Jail. Here’s What Life Is Like Inside. - Washingtonian

There’s a strong chance Jacob Chansley is who you think of when you recall the January 6 riot. Better known as the “QAnon Shaman,” Chansley strode into the Capitol shirtless on that overcast, wintry day, showing off a torso covered in tats. His face was painted with three finely rendered...

www.washingtonian.com

 

[Patooka]

Chansley got 4 years for a non-violent police escorted tour:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1634039108958932995

As far as I know there is no counter narrative to this video, I've not heard anyone claim any of this footage is fake or doctored video. Yes, there are a lot of politicians who did not want FOX to release what actually occurred Jan 6 (Schumer and McConnel) but if anyone knows a source this footage was fiction I would appreciate citing it here.

Regardless of how you view what happened on Jan 6 it is obvious at least one innocent person is in jail for being at the wrong political event. It also proves Trump who lies most of the time was actually not lying about directing a peaceful protest. But most telling to all it should be gravely obvious at this point whether (liberal or conservative) our government can not even be trusted to be impartial with even the simplest task of releasing an innocent person wrongly convicted as shown on video. The guy might be nuts wearing that outfit but he was clearly not violent in the slightest way.

I just gotta say, the OP of this thread has aged just fine with zero awkwardness whatsoever.

 

[blastula]

When Chansley was sentenced he made this big elaborate apology and admission to the court which impressed the judge enough to give him a lighter sentence than merited. Yet even before his sentence was over, Chansley filed a motion to vacate the sentence,, because he believes whatever any random idiot liar like Tucker Carlson tells him.

Judge Shoots Down Tucker Carlson’s ‘Cherry-Picked Videos’ of January 6 in Scathing Ruling Tossing QAnon Shaman’s Bid to Dismiss Conviction

Jacob Chansley aka the QAnon Shaman was rejected in his bid to have his January 6 conviction dismissed based on Tucker Carlson's "cherry-picked videos."

www.mediaite.com

ruling

Mr. Chansley' s motion concocts a Brady claim, and a derivative ineffective assistance of counsel claim, based on videos aired devoid of context and supposedly inconsistent disclosure dates provided by government counsel in two separate cases. These videos are decidedly not exculpatory, especially when viewed in context with the "miles and miles and miles of footage" recorded of Mr. Chansley on January 6, 2021. ECF No. 28, at 7:5--6. Such footage, conveniently omitted by the March 6, 2023 program, shows nearly all of Mr. Chansley's actions that day, including: carrying a six-foot-long pole armed with a spearhead, unlawfully entering the Capitol through a broken door, disobeying orders from law enforcement on more than a half-dozen occasions, screaming obscenities, entering the Senate chamber, climbing onto the Senate dais, sitting in the Vice President's chair, and leaving a threatening message for the Vice President. Moreover, the precise date that the particular videos appearing in the program were disclosed is immaterial because Mr. Chansley and plea counsel were aware of the videos' content-Mr. Chansley interacting with law enforcement officers who did not visibly impede his progress-by May 20, 2021. In other words, Mr. Chansley possessed the facts in the videos well in advance of his plea agreement, yet still determined, quite sensibly, to accept responsibility for his role in the criminal events of January 6, 2021. What is more, the record shows that the government disclosed virtually all of the videos at issue weeks before Mr. Chansley' s sentencing. These facts and the underlying law conclusively demonstrate that Mr. Chansley is not entitled to relief under§ 2255.

Finally, the Court would be remiss if it did not address the ill-advised television program of March 6, 2023. Not only was the broadcast replete with misstatements and misrepresentations regarding the events of January 6, 2021 too numerous to count, the host explicitly questioned the integrity of this Court-not to mention the legitimacy of the entire U.S. criminal justice system with inflammatory characterizations of cherry-picked videos stripped of their proper context. In so doing, he called on his followers to "reject the evidence of [their] eyes and ears," language resembling the destructive, misguided rhetoric that fueled the events of January 6 in the first place. 16 The Court finds it alarming that the host's viewers throughout the nation so readily heeded his command. But this Court cannot and will not reject the evidence before it. Nor should the public. Members of the public who are concerned about the evidence presented in Mr. Chansley's case and others like may view the public docket and even attend court proceedings in these cases. Those of us who have presided over dozens of cases arising from, listened to hundreds of hours of testimony describing, and reviewed thousands of pages of briefing about the attack on our democracy of January 6 know all too well that neither the events of that day nor any particular defendant's involvement can be fully captured in a seconds-long video carelessly, or perhaps even cynically, aired in a television segment or attached to a tweet.

You are a willing idiot if you believe Carlson.