Judge Should Ban Jan. 6 Probationer from ‘Extremist Media,’ Feds Argue

Jan. 6 probationer Daniel Goodwyn stands in Burlingame, Calif., on May 18, 2024. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

A Jan. 6 probationer should not only have his computer monitored for “disinformation” but must also be prevented from accessing “extremist media” content in order to protect the public from “dissemination of misinformation,” a federal prosecutor argues in a recent court filing.

The U.S. Department of Justice did not originally ask senior U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton to order a probation agent to monitor Daniel Goodwyn’s computer, but it now fully supports the idea—with the addition of banning so-called “extremist media” propaganda.

Mr. Goodwyn, 35, of San Francisco, “has used and continues to use social media and websites to encourage others to threaten police officers, fund-raise to commit his crimes, view extremist media, and endanger the public,” U.S. Department of Justice trial attorney Brian Brady alleged in a memo that argues for the computer monitoring.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in February vacated the disinformation monitoring requirement imposed by Judge Walton, saying the jurist “plainly erred” when he ordered that Mr. Goodwyn’s computers be monitored for “disinformation” after Mr. Goodwyn appeared on the March 14, 2023, episode of Fox News Channel’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”

The appeals court remanded the issue back to Judge Walton’s court with the warning that if Judge Walton continues to seek to monitor Mr. Goodwyn’s computer, his order must be narrowly tailored and ensure it does not trample on constitutional protections.

In response, Judge Walton ordered Mr. Goodwyn to show cause why he should not face disinformation monitoring once again. The judge scheduled a status conference for June 27 in Washington.

Mr. Brady told Judge Walton it is within his purview to prevent Mr. Goodwyn from accessing or disseminating “disinformation.”

‘Untruthful Statements’

“Throughout the pendency of Goodwyn’s case, he has made untruthful statements regarding his conduct and the events of the day, he has used websites and social media to place targets on police officers who defended the Capitol, and he has used these platforms to continue to publish and view extremist media,” Mr. Brady wrote in a May 23 filing.

“Imposing the requested special conditions would protect the public from further dissemination of misinformation, aid in his rehabilitation, provide specific deterrence from him committing similar crimes, and would be narrowly tailored to accomplish the goals of the sentencing factors,” Mr. Brady wrote.

“Goodwyn’s past and present use of social media to deny responsibility and push false narratives related to Jan. 6 supports the court’s authority to impose this special condition,” Mr. Brady said.

Mr. Goodwyn pleaded guilty on Jan. 31, 2023, to one misdemeanor count of entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority.

The charge could have meant up to a year in prison.

Daniel Goodwyn of San Francisco speaks with live-streamer Baked Alaska inside the Senate Wing Door at just before 3:33 p.m. on Jan. 6, 2021. (U.S. Capitol Police/Screenshot via The Epoch Times)

On June 6, 2023, Judge Walton sentenced Mr. Goodwyn to 60 days in prison, a year of supervised release, a $2,500 fine, and a $500 restitution payment.

Mr. Goodwyn completed his incarceration at the Federal Correctional Institution at Bastrop, Texas, on Aug. 25, 2023.

He entered the U.S. Capitol through the Senate Wing Door at 3:32 p.m. on Jan. 6, 2021, and spent 36 seconds inside the building, security video showed.

Mr. Goodwyn’s March 2023 appearance on “Tucker Carlson Tonight” drew Judge Walton’s ire and prompted the computer-monitoring requirement.

Mr. Brady said the restriction on Mr. Goodwyn’s speech is permissible because it would be “reasonably related” to the goals of sentencing.

“Monitoring Goodwyn’s computer use and preventing him from viewing extremist media would deter Goodwyn from future criminal activity and rehabilitate him by removing the negative influences in his prior life,” he wrote.

“The court may separate Goodwyn from the ‘negative influences in his prior life’ because it is ’reasonably related to the permissible goals of deterrence and rehabilitation.'”

(Left) Jan. 6 probationer Daniel Goodwyn poses on a Capitol Police motorcycle on Jan. 6, 2021. (Right) He appears with the "Lectern Guy," former Jan. 6 defendant Adam Johnson. (U.S. Department of Justice/Screenshots via The Epoch Times)

Under restrictions proposed by Mr. Brady, Mr. Goodwyn would need permission from a probation agent to access the internet.

“You must not access, view, use or possess any extremist media. This includes material, such as literature, video, photos, social media, from groups or individuals who promote the use of violence to further an ideological or religious cause,” Mr. Brady wrote.

“If you inadvertently access, view, use or possess such material you must immediately report this to the probation officer.”

The DOJ filing cited the work of Mr. Goodwyn’s employer, StopHate.com, as an example of prohibited propaganda. As part of his role with StopHate, Mr. Goodwyn has worked on several Jan. 6 documentaries.

Carolyn Stewart, Mr. Goodwyn’s defense attorney, said the DOJ court filing misses the point, because Mr. Goodwyn’s admitted Jan. 6 crime had nothing to do with computers or so-called disinformation.

In her reply to Judge Walton’s show-cause order, Ms. Stewart said the judge needs to simply delete the monitoring provision from the court’s formal judgment issued on June 15, 2023.

Anything less would violate the appeals court ruling and be an “affront to liberty,” she said.

She referred to Judge Walton as the “Ministry of Truth.”

She said Mr. Brady’s filing is “full of lies” and accused the DOJ of setting a standard that “what DOJ doesn’t agree with is now extremist.”

Ms. Stewart warned that cases like Mr. Goodwyn’s are a harbinger.

“Americans are not getting that J6 cases are test cases,” Ms. Stewart told The Epoch Times. “Fictional storytelling by the DOJ equals fact in the biased court. They do not blush when lying through their butts.”