By Richard Sullins | richard@rantnc.com
Public defenders will confer with a federal judge and the U.S. Attorney’s Office next month as the case of a Sanford man charged in the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol prepares to go to trial.
A conference call is set for December 16 to discuss the status of charges against 38-year-old David Joseph Gietzen of Sanford, who was arrested here by the FBI in May and charged with eight counts of violating federal law in connection with the attempt to stop Congress from certifying the 2020 presidential election results.
Gietzen was indicted by a federal grand jury in Washington on charges that stemmed from his participation in the riot, including one count of assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers with a dangerous weapon, which appears to have been a long metal pole that he is seen to be carrying in several photographs contained within the indictment.
Two other charges were levied against him for assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers, one for engaging in physical violence on Capitol grounds while Vice President Mike Pence was there, and four others related to his participation in the mob violence. Two of the charges are felonies.
He was charged in a criminal complaint on March 25, 2021, and indicted by a federal grand jury on April 1 of that year, but the FBI didn’t locate him at the time and he was never arrested in connection with that complaint.
Gietzen was first identified by a tipster who contacted the FBI after seeing his picture posted on the agency’s website collection of unidentified participants in the riot. A second person gave a positive identification from the same photograph and a third believed it might have been him but said that he had not seen Gietzen in a few years.
Meanwhile, investigators continued to assemble a picture of his movements by reviewing the photographic records created that day.
In a picture made on the National Mall just below the Capitol sometime before 2:13 p.m. that day, Gietzen is seen wearing jeans, knee pads, dark shoes, and a distinctive green jacket. He had shoulder-length brown hair, a short beard, and a mustache. It was the jacket and a white helmet that he appeared to have picked up near the Capitol that allowed for him to be easily spotted in both still and moving pictures.
The indictment alleges that Gietzen assaulted several law enforcement officers on the west terrace of the Capitol between 2:13 and 2:31 p.m. that day, using the pole in the last of his attacks. In photographs and video made during the melee, he can be seen punching officers and reaching for the throat of another.
The crimes committed at the Capitol were among the most documented in American history and more positive identifications have been made as agents reviewed the thousands of pictures made at the Capitol and the millions of individual frames of video footage.
It was from these materials that the FBI believes it has found evidence that Gietzen had assaulted more than one officer and used the long pole he was photographed with in carrying out at least one of those attacks.
Returned to Washington for Biden inauguration
The FBI first heard of Gietzen on January 16 – 10 days after the insurrection – when it received a report about text messages in which Gietzen and an unnamed brother said that they wanted to meet up with others at the U.S. Capitol on January 20 as President Biden was being sworn in. His brother remains uncharged to this point.
The U.S. Department of Justice’s statement of facts in the case says that in the reported text messages, “their plan was to force their way in the Capitol building to force Congress to hold another election, and that the Gietzen brothers were also at the U.S. Capitol riot on January 6, 2021.”
An FBI agent was able to reach him by telephone on Tuesday, January 19, and Gietzen said that he and his brother were en route to Washington for the inauguration and had no plans to commit any acts of violence.
He told the agent that the brothers had attended the protest in Washington on January 6 but did not make it to the Capitol because of the large crowd. But multiple photographs contained in his case file show Gietzen, wearing his green jacket, scuffling with police as they attempted to hold the line in defense of the legislators and staff members inside the building.
The pictures also show Gietzen on the exterior terraces on the West Front of the Capitol mere feet from the entrance of a tunnel where officers were making a last stand to prevent the rioters from entering the building. Others show him, pole in hand, appearing to strike the plastic shield being held by an officer on the steps leading to the Capitol’s west front.
Case is pending
Gietzen was arrested in Sanford on May 11 and was advised of the charges against him that day in the federal Middle District Court for North Carolina. FBI agents seized his cell phone as part of their search at the time he was taken into custody. He was assigned a group of public defenders to represent him and was released on his own recognizance while awaiting trial.
He is the first defendant to be publicly identified as being in Washington for the riot at the Capitol and again for the presidential inauguration 14 days later.
At least 928 persons have been charged from nearly all of the 50 states in connection with criminal actions during the insurrection. 417 of the rioters have entered guilty pleas to this point. Because most of those who stormed the Capitol simply walked away in the crowd as they left, it has taken investigators time to track them all down. But the Department of Justice vows that it will find them all.
At least 33 North Carolina residents have been charged in the case, including two other Sanford men, Jere Brower and Lance Grames, who were cited on the day of the attack for unlawful entry and curfew violations. Brower’s trial is set to begin on March 13, 2023. Grames agreed to perform a period of community service through a deferred prosecution agreement. Once that requirement was satisfied, the government dropped the charges against him.
Gietzen’s case is being prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and the Department of Justice National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section, with investigation conducted by the FBI’s Washington Field Office and the Raleigh Resident Agency of the Charlotte Field Office. The Rant contacted Lisa Costner, a public defender assigned to the case, but she declined to comment, saying the case is still pending.
It’s shameful that the GOP submitted Jere Browser’s name to serve as an election observer with a pending federal charge.
LMAO….a riot? Really? Rioting was what “BLM” (intentional quotation marks) antifa (small a intentional) and other opportunists were doing for 3 years.
Ahhh there you are. Was wondering how long it was gonna take you to get here. Don’t worry, I’m sure Former President Caesar appreciates your support.
Leftist Rant dosen’t even know what an insurrection is, smmfh … way to stick with the narrative, just one reason why November 8th is trending Red, you all will never learn … keep it up 👍🏻
OK, people really need to stop calling the January 6th Riots a, “Insurrection” this is a narrative talking point meant to gin up fear in the population. The FBI has even stated they found little to no evidence to support the legal definition of an Insurrection. We are so politically divided that we will accept crimes and violence if it supports our political alignment while condemning the same crimes committed by those that don’t support it. The events of January 6th are no different than the ANTIFA attacks on federal buildings in Oregon and Washington. For 3-4 years their have been violent riots across the nation that were categorized as “Mostly Peaceful” protests that resulted in billions in property damages, dozens of Police Officers killed, hundreds of people injured and killed. The media and politicians made excuses for it and even raised funds to pay legal fees for the violent rioters that broke the law.Intellectually honest people can look at situations objectively and say it is wrong even if it supports your political beliefs. There is numerous examples of events that have taken place in the past few decades that were exactly the same as Jan 6th, yet they are all but ignored and written off as, “What aboutism”. This is flawed logic. Why is it so hard to to say Chuck Schumer was just as wrong and possibly culpable in the violence directed towards Supreme Court justices as Trump was for stirring up his supporters? If Left wing rioters were being held indefinitely in a federal jail, there would be total outrage from Democrats, but because it is Republican Trump supporters, then it is OK… Why is attacks on Pro Life organizations and clinics all but ignored but if someone has a prayer vigil at a abortion clinic and there is a minor altercation that was dismissed in court, then later the FBI raids the home of the Pastor with full tactical gear and M-4 rifles justified? Wrong is wrong no matter what the political motivation is. There are some things that no matter what your political ideology is, we should stand together and say in one voice, this is wrong, or this is Government tyranny. I can promise all of you regardless of your political beliefs, whatever you allow government to do to one side, government will eventually do to you, and in the end we all suffer because we allowed it. It is very hard to protect and defend those you don’t agree with, but you must defend their right to believe what they want to believe. I condemn the January 6th riots, just as much as I condemn the ANTIFA and BLM Riots, the Oct 18th 2018 protesters stormed the SCOTUS building, the shooting of Rep Steve Scalise, the attempted assassination of SCOTUS Kavenaugh, 1983 bombing of the capitol building, In fact if you look through history the most violent attacks on federal institutions have been committed by Liberal ideologues. There have been numerous riots, bombings, shooting, and storming of federal buildings to disrupt federal government proceedings. Right now, there are Americans sitting in federal jail, many under solitary confinement standards, without bail indefinitely and they have been charged with trespassing offenses, not violent criminals just January 6th rioters. We will let violent, multiple repeat offenders out of jail with no bail, but jail political protesters that killed nobody, just broke some windows or doors and moved through the capitol building yelling screaming. These are things we all should be concerned about because how long before federal agents come after you and indefinitely jail you for what is ultimately misdemeanor offenses? Republicans and Democrats need to stop not just allowing but demanding and using the muscle of the government to go after political opposition and we must all start demanding equal enforcement of law without political consideration or influence. And It all starts by calling things what they are and not creating false narratives and labeling people and events things they just aren’t. January 6th was not an insurrection. It was a violent Riot.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclusive-fbi-finds-scant-evidence-us-capitol-attack-was-coordinated-sources-2021-08-20/
Okay, well, the story you posted from last year talks about coordination. Of course, since then, the evidence coming out of the Jan 6 hearings (which anyone could have watched unless they were watching Fox News) since that story reveals otherwise.
Of course, the government calls it sedition, at least that’s what many of the insurrectionists are in trial for right now. And, how you can equate any of this with BLM is laughable; it’s obvious to any objective observer that the riots started after the peaceful protests ended, and the riots were denounced by all sides. By contrast, right wingers of all stripes carry water for these insurrectionists, who injured and killed police officers in an effort to halt the official proceeding of Congress while wearing Trump gear, carrying Trump flags, and broadcasting the Trump tweet in real time criticizing Pence, who many came to hang. It is insurrection, however you define it, but maybe we should take your point and call them seditionists instead.
The Jan 6th hearings did reveal a lot of disturbing information. However, I am critical of any process under the guise of a trial type format that is overtly biased. The Jan 6th hearings were clearly biased and their only motivation was to provide evidence that supports their theory and not seek or reveal contradictory evidence that may refute their theory. This is flawed research and investigations. Let’s be clear, everything the Jan 6th committee revealed may be 100% factually accurate. The problem is because there was so much bias in the investigation and the delivery that the credibility of the investigation is in question. If they sought evidence to refute their findings they didn’t present that. So the hearings looked more like a prosecution proving their case without ever having any witnesses or evidence to refute their findings. There are people like me that will listen to what they say and what they present but always have a scrutinizing eye because they didn’t conduct an unbiased approach. A True investigation looks for ALL evidence and then assesses. It is up to the prosecution to prove guilt and then there is a defense to refute the evidence presented. There was never any attempt by the members of the Jan 6th committee to seek or allow any evidence or testimony to refute. Their only goal was to prove guilt. I don’t think they achieved their goal in the grand scheme of things because too many people are critical thinkers and know that biased investigations produce biased results therefore since the data is flawed, the results are flawed. I think they need to go further and dig deeper to make their case more credible.
Jay, as a point of correction. Not one police officer died at the hands of the rioters on Jan 6th. 5 officers died after the riots. One died of natural causes from a stroke and four others committed suicide. So no, the rioters did not kill any officers. Many try to blame the rioters but the medical examiner has already stated that the officers died of natural causes and suicide. We can’t even claim the officers committed suicide as a result of their emotional trauma from Jan 6th because nobody knows why they did it. There is no suicide notes saying anything about being emotionally devastated by the riots, so we can’t make that assumption. This is a perfect example of what I am talking about in my original statement. The media and politicians are making claims that their political followers believe and want to believe so bad that they will ignore facts and logic. There was only one person that died on Jan 6th as a result of the riots and that is Ashley Babbit and there are quantifiable arguments to support shooting her and against shooting her. Ultimately had I been the officer that shot her, I wouldn’t have taken the shot so I think personally the officer was wrong. Having said that, if he legitimately felt his life and the lives of the members of congress was in danger and he had been given authority to use deadly force then he was justified. I don’t like it, but that is the way it is and we can’t second guess someone in the heat of the moment with armchair quarterbacking.
Yes, Dale, you are right that the officer died after the fact, but as many as 140 police officers were injured during the riot. Of course, one officer did not die of “natural causes,” but according to the Capitol Police, “passed away due to injuries sustained while on-duty.” The wife of one of the officers who committed suicide told her that he was in constant pain from his injuries sustained that day, and lived in fear of death. The fact that cuts through the spin here is that Trump supporters violently barged their way into the Capitol building, injuring dozens of police officers and killing one. That is a fact.
My friend, you really need to use paragraph breaks if you’re going to post long replies. It’s really hard to follow your argument.
You say that you wouldn’t have shot the protester trying to break into the last known secure room where your protectees were hiding out in gas masks. How. Do. You. Know?? You’re a combat veteran, right? How would you feel about some know-nothing sitting at home, never had your job, says he wouldn’t do what *you* did in any combat situation you’ve ever been in? I’d be pretty mad at such a breathtaking display of Monday morning quarterbacking. Put another way, you weren’t there, and it’s impossible for you to say what you would have done, and when you do, you sound like a man who doesn’t think critically about himself or the world around him.
And, really, that’s the problem on the right. All these people watch conspiracy theory porn by D’Souza, and they *know in their hearts* it’s all true. They *know in their hearts* that the 2020 election was stolen by fraud. It doesn’t matter to them that the video (though a wonderful example of how to make propaganda films work) is baseless. It doesn’t matter to them that there isn’t a single piece of evidence supporting the Big Lie (and, if there were, would every American know it right now? Wouldn’t it have been presented in one of the couple dozen-or-so court cases Trump filed after the election?). They don’t need to think critically about their own beliefs, because they know them in their hearts to be true.
Lock him up. Punk Ass Bitch. His proud boy bitch buddies too.
Well said D. Roberts. But it will fall on deaf ears….the red wave will hopefully convince the liberal progressives their policies are an insurrection on American Freedom…always have been.
Right here is the problem with our country right now. You witness with your own eyes, and hear with your own ears, but you deny the evidence. Instead of purging the party of those who blatantly tried to overthrow a valid election (60+ court cases to prove otherwise, yet not a single one did), you embrace the madness.
I get it, you don’t like democrats, but this is not the way if you want our country to survive. I promise you, you may think you would like it, but you won’t like the other side of what the fascists have in store.
True that officer Sicknicks death was ruled to be caused by natural causes (multiple strokes) and died on Jan 7th. People forget the part where the medical examiner also stated that “all that transpired” on January 6 “played a role in his condition.”
Don’t you find it odd that of the four police officers that took their own lives, one, a 16 year veteran on the force, died 3 days after the attack, and another a 12 year veteran, died 9 days later? The other two committed suicide a few months later I think.
According to his wife, one of the officers wouldn’t go outside after the attack, and wouldn’t even walk his dog. Can you prove the attacks resulted in their suicides? Short of a suicide note, I guess not. But you know deep in your heart, that’s what led them there.
As far as I’m concerned, anyone who was climbing through broken windows, and trying to make their way to the chamber, or personal offices, to prevent the election from being completed, deserved what Babbit got. I consider them all traitors to our democratic republic. If you agree with what they did, I consider you a traitor as well.
As always – God Bless America, and screw you Red-Hatters!
RedTraitorHater, I have be honest, I have read many of your comments and you seem very unhinged. I hope, not only for yourself, but for society in general you find some peace and maybe seek some help. You seem like you are one step away from serious acts of violence. When you start finding justice in killing unarmed civilians and consider your fellow citizens traitors which implies you believe they should be killed. You have some serious issues going on and need help. I served our country for 25 years and fought in 3 conflicts, I am about as far from a traitor you can get. For the record, if I killed an unarmed civilian or a combatant that dropped their weapon in the middle of a firefight, I would be sent to prison for war crimes. Just to put things into perspective for you from an expert. And no, I wasn’t a soft skill in the Army, I was a Ranger qualified, Infantry Paratrooper in the 82nd Airborne Division. So yea I know what I am talking about when it comes to threat assessment and the use of deadly force. Hopefully you find peace and calm, and The Rant definitely needs to keep an eye on you because you make a great argument for implementing Red Flag Laws.
RLTW
D. Roberts,
You can consider me potentially violent if you wish, although violence is not in my nature.
I did not serve in the military, so I have not had the training you have. I may not know the intricacies of threat assessment.
I do know that I saw thugs attacking police officers with metal poles, bear spray, throwing metal objects at officer’s heads, and using stun guns on them. I saw them breaking the windows of our nation’s capitol building. I saw a gallows brought to the lawn of the capitol, and these same thugs shouting “Hang Mike Pence!”
I saw an attack on our Democratic Republic. They were trying to prevent the will of the people from being enacted. So yeah, I consider them traitors.
To be clear, I did not call you a traitor. I said that I consider anyone who supports what I just described above, a traitor. I’m not saying the people who were there just to protest were traitors. They had every right to protest all they want.
My family fought the fascists in WWII. I was raised to be a very patriotic citizen, and to be wary of fascism. I was educated in just how it can seep into the minds of average people, little by little. It creeps up on them, and before they know it, they are on the wrong side of history. All the while, they think they are patriots.
Maybe I am unhinged? I don’t know. I just know that I am concerned for the future of our country, and I will not stop trying to protect it in my miniscule way.
If I make ONE person stop and consider their plan to vote for a party that has been hijacked by fascists, then I’ll be able to die knowing I tried.
As always, God Bless America, and screw the red-hatters.