‘Monitoring and Inspection’
The judge said Mr. Goodwyn should be monitored during his supervised release to determine if he is spreading disinformation on social media.
“…Since he has used social media in order to provide what I consider to be disinformation about this situation,” the judge said, “I would require that he permit his computer use to be subject to monitoring and inspection by the probation department to see if he is, in fact, disseminating information of the nature that relates to the events that resulted in what occurred on January 6th of 2021.”
Ms. Stewart filed an appeal of the computer-monitoring provision on June 30, 2023. In her appeal brief, Ms. Stewart said there is no law related to “disinformation” and Mr. Goodwyn’s computer use is unrelated to his single-count trespassing conviction.
The government monitoring is “without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of criminal activity,” she wrote, “where computer searches for undefined ‘disinformation’ are not reasonably related to any crime.”
The U.S. Court of Appeals agreed, writing that Judge Walton “plainly erred in imposing the computer-monitoring condition without considering whether it was ‘reasonably related’ to the relevant sentencing factors and involved ‘no greater deprivation of liberty than is reasonably necessary’ to achieve the purposes behind sentencing.”
The mandate, which sent the issue back to Judge Walton, said if he still wants to impose computer monitoring he must explain his legal reasoning, develop a record to support the provision and ensure what he orders follows federal supervised-release law, and ensure it accords with constitutional protections.
[clip]
https://img.theepochtimes.com/assets/uploads/2024/04/05/id5623015-3.jpg
While the Court of Appeals order could open the door for Judge Walton to try imposing the monitoring again, Ms. Stewart said she views the order more “as a check and balance that he can’t just make himself the ‘Ministry of Truth’ again.”
Judge Walton criticized Mr. Goodwyn for other statements he made about Jan. 6 regarding police use of force, including the case of
Rosanne Boyland, who was beaten in the head and body with a walking stick by a Metropolitan Police Department officer less than two hours before her death.
After Mr. Goodwyn finished his statement to the court, Judge Walton scolded him, claiming that he did not seem to care about the law enforcement officers who were injured on Jan. 6.
“And, you know, the police officers—you say you are not anti-police and I hope that is the case,” the judge said. “But, you know, to suggest that the only people who died that day were Trump supporters, that is just not true.”
Mr. Goodwyn attempted to correct the judge’s misstatement, without success. Four people died at the Capitol on Jan. 6: Ashli Babbitt, Ms. Boyland, Kevin Greeson, and
Benjamin Philips. All were Trump supporters. No police officers died at the Capitol that day.
The judge was having none of it.
“You are digging a hole for yourself,” Judge Walton said. “Keep on digging.”
Mr. Goodwyn said the judge “argued with me about whether I had remorse or not about officers on January 6, yet he was apparently unaware of the deaths of protesters Benjamin Philips, Kevin Greeson, and Rosanne Boyland, and his belief is that the murder of Ashli Babbitt was justified.”
Judge Walton should be REMOVED from the courts Clearly the judge believes in the discredited narrative
