Judge declines to send Capitol riot suspect back to jail after violating orders

A federal judge declined to send a Utah man charged in the Capitol riot back to jail despite ruling that he violated his release orders. 

U.S. Magistrate Judge Robin Meriweather reported “serious concerns” on Monday that John Sullivan, 26, violated a previous order from a different judge by purchasing a smartphone, trying to access Twitter, attempting to promote his organization, Insurgence USA, on Infowars and calling on Insurgence USA members to attend his court hearing.

But the D.C.-based judge determined that the evidence presented did not show that Sullivan was a danger or that additional release restrictions were needed at this time, BuzzFeed News reported. 

Meriweather cautioned that additional violations could result in Sullivan being jailed again. 

“I don’t believe we are there yet in this case,” she said, according to BuzzFeed News. 

Sullivan, a self-described activist who claims he was at the Capitol on Jan. 6 as a journalist, was charged last month with civil disorder, being in a restricted area and disorderly conduct, according to the Justice Department’s criminal complaint. 

A federal judge in Utah had ordered Sullivan could be released pending trial under conditions of restrictions against going on social media or doing work for Insurgence USA. But prosecutors argued last week that Sullivan “flouted” these conditions, which they called “extremely concerning” in a court hearing.

Sullivan’s attorney Steven Kiersh asserted that there could have been miscommunications about the restrictions on purchasing a phone and his internet use. He also indicated that calling on Insurgence USA members to attend the hearing was his client’s First Amendment right and that an Infowars producer contacted Sullivan asking for information on Insurgence USA, according to BuzzFeed News.

Meriweather concluded Sullivan breached his release conditions through buying a new iPhone and giving the Infowars producer Insurgence USA website links. But the judge decided the evidence was not “clear and convincing” that he violated restrictions on Twitter access.