Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Molotov Cocktail Lawyers Headed to Trial After Plea Negotiations Break Down

Molotov Cocktail Lawyers Headed to Trial After Plea Negotiations Break Down

“will stand trial in March 2022 for allegedly firebombing a police cruiser and distributing Molotov cocktails during the George Floyd riots last summer”

EDNY photos okay to use

In June of 2020, during the George Floyd riots in New York, two Ivy League-educated lawyers allegedly firebombed a police car with a Molotov Cocktail.

Unlike the January 6th rioters, authorities released them on bail and home confinement.

Their lawyers have been trying to work out a plea deal with prosecutors. The talks have broken down, and now they are headed for trial.

Kevin Daley reports at the Washington Free Beacon:

Ivy League Lawyers Head to Trial for Firebombing Cop Car

Two New York City Ivy League lawyers will stand trial in March 2022 for allegedly firebombing a police cruiser and distributing Molotov cocktails during the George Floyd riots last summer.

Defense lawyers for Colinford Mattis and Urooj Rahman have been in plea negotiations with federal prosecutors since February but have not come to terms, prompting U.S. District Judge Brian Cogan to set a trial schedule for both defendants. Pretrial motions are due on Sept. 17 and jury selection will begin on March 14, 2022.

The accused enjoy widespread support and sympathy from New York’s legal and media elites. Rahman is represented by one of the city’s best defense attorneys, and a former Obama administration official guaranteed her bail in the amount of $250,000. Both have been the subject of favorable profiles in New York magazine and NPR, among other venues.

Cogan has delayed proceedings three times while the parties discussed a prospective plea. Those talks can continue as the case heads to trial. Mattis and Rahman are under house arrest with electronic monitoring, though they’ve each sought relaxed release conditions. Cogan allowed Rahman to attend a bridal shower and a wedding in May, though he denied a bail modification that would have authorized her to move freely about four city boroughs during daylight hours. Mattis obtained permission to celebrate Christmas at a relative’s home.

Jazz Shaw of Hot Air suggests the possibility that these two will never see the inside of a courtroom:

It’s still not a sure thing that these two will ever stand before a jury. I don’t know how they’ve managed to stonewall the process for this long, but there’s still plenty of time to cut a deal. Setting a trial date may have been a way for the judge to spur the defense along, in case they wanted to avoid a worst-case outcome. The pair were offered a plea deal in February, but have apparently turned it down.

If this case does go to trial, it will almost certainly turn into a media circus. You’ll recall that some of the most high-profile newspapers and cable news outlets described these two as “young and idealistic lawyers.” That really says a lot more about the state of our news media than the two firebombers themselves.

The Biden administration keeps talking about the dangers of domestic terrorism. Is there a better recent example than these two lawyers?


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Meganinvegas | July 21, 2021 at 9:17 am

I really hope that by the time they have to go to court public sentiment has changed and they see some actual jail time . They are not Martyr’s they are criminals and it’s disgusting how the media has portrayed them

A plea deal for fucking what?!?!

I suspect these two domestic terrorists will NOT get 8 months in jail for their part in attempting to overthrow the Government of the United States of America.

That justice is only reserved for those with the wrong political thoughts.

    2smartforlibs in reply to mailman. | July 21, 2021 at 9:42 am

    Things like this use to violate Titel 18 and I guess they still do but only if you were in DC on Jan 6.

    Think38 in reply to mailman. | July 21, 2021 at 4:48 pm

    There is a reasonable chance a New York jury will refuse to convict them. In such circumstances, a plea deal may be better than a prosecution and the risk of a not guilty verdict.

      Subotai Bahadur in reply to Think38. | July 21, 2021 at 7:17 pm

      Better for whom? I suspect that the plan is to have them found not guilty by jury nullification and thus be able to claim innocence for the rest of their lives. The fix is in.

      Subotai Bahadur

        JOBBOSS in reply to Subotai Bahadur. | July 24, 2021 at 6:51 pm

        Absolutely, just like the Biden DOJ has refused to investigate Cuomo for civil rights violations related to the Covid deaths at nursing homes.

2smartforlibs | July 21, 2021 at 9:41 am

the attempted to murder others. There should never have been a plea deal attempt.

Dolce Far Niente | July 21, 2021 at 10:05 am

Molotov cocktails are by definition weapons of war. or tools of criminal arson. Their very nature of their use is limited to kinetic action against an enemy.

There is no lawful purpose for them and they are not tools of protest, like signs and chanting.

If these “idealist” wish to use weapons of guerilla warfare they should be prepared to be judged as the insurgents they are.

nice young people /s

By March of 2022 it won’t be DiBlasio’s NYC anymore, there will be a new mayor in charge and a new police commissioner, even though the initial crime didn’t happen under his watch, it would be an ugly stain early in his first term if they walk or get little punishment. It will be an early test on how passionate he really is on putting people away.
The new mayor may not have much direct power here but he can certainly use his behind the scenes influence.

“Unlike the January 6th rioters, authorities”

Not exactly true, 70% of those arrested have been released on bail, that compares to a national average of 25%. If anything the insurrectionists have been treated better than the typical federal indicted person

Can’t tell Ivy League-educated lawyers from your typical street trash these days.

(I’m using the term ‘educated’ rather loosely here.)

The Friendly Grizzly | July 21, 2021 at 12:24 pm

Let’s see: women; darker than white skin, minority status. They will walk.

The fact that they are going to walk is due to skin color. A different color would be prosecuted. Proves CRT is a lie.

    mark311 in reply to UserP. | July 21, 2021 at 4:15 pm

    Sorry one anecdotal story overrides the overwhelming statistics. No, that’s a really dumb argument.

sheldonkatz | July 21, 2021 at 1:28 pm

Compare the comments in the link below to the DOJ’s sentencing memo on the first person convicted for Jan 6.

Bet they get less than 8 months.

henrybowman | July 21, 2021 at 2:43 pm

Compare the treatment of these two scumbags (complete with the guaranteed quarter-mil bail from an Obama official) with the treatment Kyle Rittenhouse got from GoFundMe (and also Fundly). GFM quickly made up a new rule banning funding accounts for anyone “accused of (note: accused, not convicted) a crime involving violence.” Meanwhile, GFM was concurrently running accounts for these scumbags and do you think they were cancelled? Somewhere between fat chance and no f*g way.

Those are lawyers? Can’t tell by looking at their photographs. I think if I were looking for a lawyer I’d keep looking.

    artichoke in reply to UserP. | July 22, 2021 at 12:56 pm

    You know our legal system is described as “adversarial”. Well, they’re lawyers for the enemy.

      henrybowman in reply to artichoke. | July 23, 2021 at 1:12 am

      Would have been a better joke if you had said they were lawyers for The Adversary.
      Advocatus diaboli.

This is more evidence that Ivy League law school faculties allow complete idiots to pass their classes and be accepted into the bar.

In a case in Arkansas today U.S. District Judge Jay Moody questioned why a minor born male should be allowed to receive testosterone while a minor born female should not. “How do you justify giving that to one sex but not the other and not call that sex discrimination?”

So mammograms and Pap smears are now discriminatory? It’s that classic argumentum ex ignorantia (i.e., I don’t know why x is true, therefore x is false): e.g. I can’t justify something so it must not be justifiable. I don’t know why General Relativity is true, therefore it’s false.

    artichoke in reply to ALPAPilot. | July 22, 2021 at 12:59 pm

    Why discriminate on the basis of disease? Why not have doctors giving heart medication for a liver problem, or narcotic painkillers for flu?

    henrybowman in reply to ALPAPilot. | July 23, 2021 at 1:13 am

    Federal government medical plans will cover mammograms and pap smears for my wife, but not for me. “How do you not call that sex discrimination?” Obviously, you don’t, or they wouldn’t do it.

Wow , two Ivy League lawyers may well go to jail for a very long time.

Does this tell us anything about what is going on at some universities?

“Ivy League lawyers”, I wonder what their LSAT scores were?

These two fascist scumbags should get slapped with a felony conviction and long prison terms. Leftists are fascist scumbags and deserve every bad thing to happen to them.

    Temujin in reply to Tom Morrow. | July 22, 2021 at 4:11 pm

    If the legal system had not already been totally corrupted, these two would have never gotten into law school, never mind having passed an honest bar exam As it is, they will get off scott free, and continue to be lionized by the NY Bar