A federal judge has dismissed two of four counts that a federal jury had convicted Robert Doggart of in connection with a planned militia attack on a Muslim community in New York.
Judge Curtis Collier said, "There was sufficient evidence to sustain defendant’s convictions on Counts One and Two of the Superseding Indictment, solicitation to commit a civil rights violation and solicitation to commit arson of a building.
As to Counts Three and Four, making threats in interstate commerce on March 22 and April 9, 2015 in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 844(e), the Court determines there was not enough evidence for the jury to have found beyond a reasonable doubt Defendant made threats on those dates for the purpose of effecting a change or achieving a goal through intimidation."
Doggart will now face sentencing on only two of the four guilty counts on June 14 at 10 a.m.
Doggart has been in custody since his conviction.
The jury deliberated 16 hours over three days. At one time the jury indicated it was deadlocked, but the judge asked the jury to continue trying.
Judge Collier wrote, "Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the evidence did not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that Defendant intended his words about violence to intimidate anyone. While reprehensible, the evidence instead indicated he was trying to obtain the help, affirmation, and commitment of someone he believed was sympathetic to his beliefs and his plans. There was no evidence he intended to intimidate Mr. (William) Tint. There was no evidence he intended Mr. Tint to repeat or convey his words to the residents of Islamberg to intimidate them. There was no evidence he otherwise intended his words, as opposed to his discussed actions, to reach the residents of Islamberg at all. Finally, there was no evidence he intended his words to reach any person other than the residents of Islamberg for the purpose of intimidating those hearers. Defendant’s words to Mr. Tint may have constituted other crimes—indeed, the jury found Defendant committed two different crimes of solicitation during the period in which the phone calls with Mr. Tint took place—but they do not satisfy all the requirements to be a “true threat” under 18 U.S.C. § 844(e)."