FORT PIERCE, Fla.—The defense team for Ryan Routh, who is suspected of attempting to assassinate President Donald Trump during the 2024 election, said during a hearing on March 7 that it would like to test fire the gun that was found at Routh’s location near Trump’s golf course in West Palm Beach.
Defense attorney Kristy Militello told U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon that the test could help determine whether the gun was operable and could fire at the distance Routh was from Trump at the golf course last year.
The Department of Justice objected to the test, which would involve a defense expert firing the gun after an independent agent transferred it from the government’s custody.
John Shipley Jr., an attorney with DOJ, called such a test “utterly unprecedented” and that it would be both “irregular” and “unsafe.”
He added that there was no factual basis for it.
In that area of the tree line, agents found multiple items, including an SKS-style, 7.62x39 caliber rifle with a scope and obliterated serial number.
The March 7 hearing came amid a months-long pre-trial process that was extended by Cannon after a request from the defense. The trial is now set to start in September of 2025 rather than a previously scheduled date in February.
At a hearing in December, Militello seemed to indicate Routh might raise an insanity defense. She said witnesses had described Routh as hallucinating and delusional, and that it could take months to interview experts to evaluate his mental health.
In court on March 7, Militello acknowledged that the defense hadn’t filed something on an insanity defense by the deadline imposed by the court.
It also stated that the government allowed the defense to inspect the firearm and planned to produce additional discovery materials.
They included “photographs and law enforcement reports memorializing a Jan. 30, 2025 search of the Nissan Xterra,” which Routh is thought to have used in fleeing the scene.
Other named materials included Secret Service radio communications and law enforcement reports summarizing third-party interviews.
Part of the government’s brief is critical of the defense’s discovery.
“Nothing has been provided,” DOJ said while noting that the defense discovery deadlines were “some ways away.”
It added that “it defies belief, however, that six months into this case the defense has not identified a single item that it reasonably expects to use in its case-in-chief at trial.”
Describing the defense discovery deadlines as “late,” the DOJ said they made “this court’s timetable for pre-trial motions virtually impossible for the government to meet.”
“The need for yet more large hard drives for discovery is a useful reminder of the extraordinary volume of terabytes of discovery in this case,” it said.
The brief added that the defense was obligated not to produce information that was protected by the Sixth Amendment right to counsel and Fifth Amendment right to due process.
During the March 7 hearing, Militello told Cannon the defense was doing the “best we can” to go through discovery and was interrupted by the judge, who said her team was “fully capable.”
Cannon also admonished continual litigation of the efforts and timing involved with discovery, noting that the defense was working with extended deadlines.
