Jan. 6th defendant files pro se Reply Brief & review

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/what-is-real-ja ... 0c39&ei=26

6th Jan defendant goes all pro se ^


https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscou ... .220.0.pdf

Some of the vids the guy links in his pleadings, linked ^:

He does link some youtube vids of capitol police who are apparently little crybabies (<5 min)


Cops that apparently don't know how to deal with folks (< 5 min)


A "documentary" on Bitchute on the 6 jan. (22 min)


And the best vid ... rooftop Koreans back during King's cops trial verdict
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bv5qkmuBC4o

The defendant notes that the government did not follow the court's scheduling order but fails to not how it prejudiced him. Whenever your opponent misses a court ordered date for the opposing party to do something always include why it prejudices you~simply missing an ordered time to do something does not mean it requires any corrective action by a court. see pg 11-12

He does make some good points on admissibility of evidence, pg11-13, and it will be interesting to see if the court rules on his pro se reply brief being a motion in limine as well. Likely not. He can re-file (or file) a motion in limine before trial.

One should note that when a party involved in a case is a governmental body, the government is known to punish lawyers who fully represent defendants. The gov't does this by treating the lawyer badly with his other cases. I have heard lawyers talk about such retaliation.

The guy's basic premise is that there was no "insurrection". I tend to agree.

And youtube vids ? Unless its something showing what a gov't official or group does , analysis of random youtubers is not going to be given any consideration by a court for obvious reasons.

And his last "Dawn is breaking" sentence is not helping him.