Opinion ID: 149122
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Nature and Circumstances of the Offenses Charged

Text: The charges here are undeniably serious. The seditious-conspiracy and weapons of mass destruction charges arise from the defendants' plot to kill law-enforcement officers in a particularly heinous manner: by first killing a single officer and then placing improvised-explosive devices (IEDs) along the path of his funeral procession. The purpose of the planned attack was apparently to weaken the officers' morale and to spark a revolution against the government. The firearm charges relate to various training sessions, during which defendants allegedly prepared for the upcoming revolution. Thus, these charges, on their face, indicate a strong threat to society. [6] Compare Mercedes, 254 F.3d at 437 (the crime of conspiracy to commit armed robbery of a drug dealer ... weighs heavily against release). In terms of dangerousness, Congress also thought it was especially significant if the charges include a crime of violence,... a Federal crime of terrorism, ... or involve[ ] a ... firearm, explosive, or destructive device. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g)(1). The charges here possess those elements. The seditious-conspiracy and weapons of mass destruction charges are each crimes of violence; the weapons of mass destruction charge involves explosives; and the firearms charges, naturally, involve firearms. The weapons of mass destruction charge also likely qualifies as a Federal crime of terrorism. See 18 U.S.C. § 2332b(g)(5)(A) (defining that phrase as including a violation of the weapons of mass destruction statute, if the violation is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct). As the district court (under)stated, this factor ... weighs in favor of detention. (Dist. Ct. Op. at 12.) [7] As discussed in some detail below, each defendant here has a demonstrated interest in committing actual, physical violence against law enforcement and several have shown a lack of concern about the likelihood of killing civilians, through the use of weapons of mass destruction, firearms, and other means. Thus, the nature and circumstances of the charges against all defendants weigh in favor of detention.