At the outset of today’s hearing for Pierce Bainbridge attorney John Pierce’s Proud Boy-tied client Christopher Worrell the federal judge asked, “Where is Mr. Pierce?” The former counsel for Rudy Giuliani, fired by the 18-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse, was a no-show and D.C. Federal Court Judge Beryl A. Howell immediately took Pierce’s co-counsel, James Kelly, to task. Judge Howell then characterized the Pierce-led defense, leading up to the hearing, as a “Comedy of Errors.”
Pierce “Had a Bad Day” the Day Before
Just yesterday, Pierce had bigger problems than mere “errors.” A former client accused Pierce of lying. He also referred to Pierce as a “drug addict,” who should be in a “penitentiary.” In addition, Pierce and his former Pierce Bainbridge partner David Hecht of Hecht Partners LLP were exposed as attempting to have a former Pierce Bainbridge client file a sham bar complaint filed against me. Primary source emails from Hecht are enlightening reading. The former Pierce Bainbridge client that Hecht and Pierce sought to have file the complaint said: “they (Pierce and Hecht) lied all in that damn thing.”
The Judge Questions the Parties
Questions to the Defense
The hearing covered a Pierce filed emergency motion requesting Worrell’s release from jail prior to trial. The motion was based on purported health concerns, including Covid-19. The judge expressed displeasure that issues in the emergency motion were not raised in original filings covering Worrell’s detention. In addition, the court did not appreciate receiving an “emergency” motion rather than the Pierce-led defense simply trying to work the issue out with the government. Phrases like “not fruitful” and “not helpful” were used.
Questions to the Government
Judge Howell then shifted the heat to counsel for the government. Based on a recent D.C. Circuit Court decision, the Court asked the U.S. attorney why Worrell is dangerous and should remain detained. “Munchel” is the decision, dated March 26, 2021, and apparently requires the government to show that those involved in January 6 would still be dangerous in the future without a mob to help their actions. The court inquired: Would Mr. Worrell absent the mob and, absent the Proud Boys, present a danger in the future?
More on Munchel
Judge Howell also flagged conflicting language within the Munchel decision, while noting the government did not appeal the ruling or seek en banc review. It was then noted by the Court that the decision perhaps leaves the door open for a flood of appeals by individuals detained for January 6th activity. There was discussion about Munchel perhaps needing clarification, with Judge Howell noting the decision as it currently stands, is a “bit of a puzzle.”
The DVD Submitted by Pierce
Last week Pierce submitted a video in an effort to bolster his client’s case. He was admonished by the court for filing the video in violation of the applicable rules, a mistake Pierce was permitted to remedy. With respect to the content of the video, Judge Howell questioned whether it was “spliced”; and continued that in any event the visuals did not necessarily weigh in Worrell’s favor.
No Mask for Worrell
Judge Howell then dropped the hammer and said that, in photos and videos the Court has reviewed, Worrell was never wearing a mask. The defense tried to pick this up claiming Worrell’s condition has worsened in jail and that is a basis for the “emergency” motion. There was also some discussion from the defense about a “gaiter” around Worrell’s neck, which Kelly said could be pulled up for protection. Judge Howell was unmoved and said there are no images of that ever being done.
The Court’s Decision
Defense lawyer Kelly asked for the Judge’s compassion.
The Court then readied the parties for its decision.
Judge Howell proceeded to deny the Pierce-filed emergency motion. One of several factors mentioned was that Worrell had no mask on January 6, nor did he have one on at any other time the Court has observed the defendant. Judge Howell also reiterated that the Pierce-led defense did not fully cooperate with the government before making the emergency motion.
The tactical vest. The discharge of pepper spray. Coordination with the Proud Boys. Assembling with the Proud Boys. These are certain factors noted by the Court in ruling that Worrell posed sufficient danger to warrant continued incarceration. The judge also noted Worrell’s criminal record.
Worrell remains in jail.
During this critical “emergency” hearing for his client, Pierce was absent from the proceedings.
Where is John Pierce?
***Check out “My David & Goliath Battle With the Corrupt Law Firm Hired by Rudy Giuliani.“ You can also find me at @DonLew87 on Twitter and Don Lewis-2215 @ Medium
