Judicial Watch Sues DOJ for All FBI Records on Jan. 6 Shooting Victim Ashli Babbitt

Moments before being fatally shot, Ashli Babbitt confronts three police officers for not stopping the vandalism outside the U.S. House. Tayler Hansen/Screenshot via The Epoch Times

A federal lawsuit filed in San Diego against the U.S. Department of Justice alleges the FBI violated the law by withholding non-exempt records about Jan. 6 shooting victim Ashli Babbitt and her husband, Aaron.

Judicial Watch Inc., which on Jan. 5 filed a $30 million lawsuit against the United States government for what it called the “ambush murder” of Ms. Babbitt by U.S. Capitol Police on Jan. 6, 2021, asked the federal court to compel the FBI to release all documents related to the Babbitts.

On Feb. 27, 2023, the estate of Ms. Babbitt filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the FBI for “all files for Ashli Elizabeth Babbitt,” also referencing her previously used surnames, Pamatian and McEntee.

The same day, Mr. Babbitt filed a separate FOIA request for FBI files related to him.

Both requests included Mr. Babbitt’s written authorization to release the records to Judicial Watch, which represents Mr. Babbitt and the estate of Ms. Babbitt.

The FBI denied both requests by letter on March 28, 2023, the lawsuit stated. The denials were appealed the next day to the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Office of Information Policy (OIP). The FBI is part of the DOJ.

On June 12, OIP remanded both requests to the FBI for “further consideration.” While the FBI acknowledged receiving the OIP’s appeal remand, it has not produced the records or responded further to Judicial Watch or Mr. Babbitt, the suit states.

“Plaintiffs are being irreparably harmed by defendant’s violation of FOIA and will continue to be irreparably harmed unless defendant is compelled to comply with it,” the lawsuit reads.

The FBI’s National Press Office declined comment on the Judicial Watch lawsuit.

The Judicial Watch wrongful-death suit accuses Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd of negligence in his fatal shooting of Ms. Babbitt at 2:44 p.m. on Jan. 6, 2021.

Stationed in a hidden position inside the House Speaker’s Lobby at the U.S. Capitol, Mr. Byrd fired a single shot from his Glock service pistol just as Ms. Babbitt climbed into a broken window from the adjacent hallway.

Mr. Byrd “shot Ashli on sight” as she hoisted herself into the “opening of the right door sidelight,” the lawsuit stated.

“Lt. Byrd later confessed that he shot Ashli before seeing her hands or assessing her intentions or even identifying her as female,” the lawsuit says. “Ashli was unarmed. Her hands were up in the air, empty, and in plain view of Lt. Byrd and other officers in the lobby. Ashli posed no threat to the safety of anyone.”

The lawsuit said Mr. Byrd did not follow Capitol Police use-of-force guidelines in the fatal shooting, was mistaken in his belief that he was the last line of defense protecting the House of Representatives, and was negligent in the handling of his service weapon.

False Radio Report

The lawsuit said that up to a minute after he shot Ms. Babbitt, Mr. Byrd made a false report on police radio claiming he was under fire and was “prepared to fire back at them.”

“405B, we got shots fired in the lobby. We got fot (sic) shots fired in the lobby of the House Chamber,” Mr. Byrd broadcast, according to audio files obtained by The Epoch Times. “Shots are being fired at us and we’re prepared to fire back at them. We have guns drawn. [Unintelligible] don’t leave that end! Don’t leave that end!

“We got a injured person,” Mr. Byrd continued seconds later. “I believe that person was shot. It was—” The broadcast was interrupted by either an agent of the House Sergeant at Arms or one of the Capitol Police SWAT team members who were in the hallway when Ms. Babbitt fell mortally wounded.

“Shot, we got one down, civilian. We need EMTs ... come through on the west side of the building to the House lobby,” the unidentified officer broadcast.

The false radio dispatch, which was never corrected over the air, endangered the lives and safety of protesters and police, and delayed first responders getting to Ms. Babbitt to offer medical aid, the lawsuit stated.

Paramedics from the D.C. Fire and EMS Department perform CPR on protester Ashli Babbitt, who was shot by police near the Speaker's Lobby on Jan. 6, 2021. Steve Baker/Special to The Epoch Times

“In fact, no shots were fired at Lt. Byrd or his fellow officers,” the suit reads. “The only shot fired was the single shot Lt. Byrd fired at Ashli. He heard the loud noise of the gunshot. He saw her fall backwards from the window frame.

“The shooting was not privileged, without legal justification, and non-consensual,” the document said, citing the litmus test in the 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case Graham v. Connor and two other precedential rulings.

Mr. Byrd was the designated incident commander for the U.S. House of Representatives on Jan. 6, a role that governs the standards of care he should have used that afternoon, the suit said.

He “breached multiple applicable standards” governing the safe use of a firearm, the perception and assessment of imminent threats, the use of force levels and escalation/de-escalation of force, perception and assessment of relevant facts, use of warnings, firing backdrop, and “obtaining timely, appropriate medical aid,” the suit says.

“Had Lt. Byrd adhered to these standards, he would not have fired and Ashli would be alive today,” the suit says.

Mr. Byrd is now a captain with U.S. Capitol Police, which did not respond to inquiries from The Epoch Times about the wrongful-death lawsuit.

On Oct. 30, 2023, The Epoch Times filed a federal FOIA request with the FBI for all records related to Mr. Byrd. Four days later, the FBI denied the request, claiming the release of any records on Mr. Byrd would constitute an invasion of his privacy.

In its denial letter, the FBI cited exemptions under 5 U.S. Code §552 (b)(6) and (b)(7)(c), which cite “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy,” and “could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

The denial letter was dated 26 days before a letter from the FBI was issued officially acknowledging receipt of the original Epoch Times request for records on Mr. Byrd.