One of the latest trials of people who participated in the January 6 riot on Capitol Hill has resulted in a sentence that should alarm anyone interested in equal justice under the law. Kentucky resident Peter Schwartz was sentenced to fourteen years and two months behind bars for his participation in the riot yesterday. Prosecutors had been asking for more than 24 years, but U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta apparently felt this sentence was a compromise. Schwartz definitely participated in what can rightfully be described as “rioting” but just how serious were his crimes? The underlying details offer little in the way of describing anything that would merit a sentence of this nature and the conduct of the judge during sentencing clearly indicates significant bias. (AP)

A Kentucky man with a long criminal record was sentenced Friday to a record-setting 14 years in prison for attacking police officers with pepper spray and a chair as he stormed the U.S. Capitol with his wife.

Peter Schwartz’s prison sentence is the longest so far among hundreds of Capitol riot cases. The judge who sentenced Schwartz also handed down the previous longest sentence — 10 years — to a retired New York Police Department officer who assaulted a police officer outside the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Prosecutors had recommended a prison sentence of 24 years and 6 months for Schwartz, a welder.

We’ve covered plenty of these January 6 trials here in the past, but Schwartz has set a record for the harshest penalty to be handed down. I have always maintained that the people who arrived late at the Capitol building and did nothing but walk around inside were guilty of little more than trespassing. But those who engaged in property damage, theft, or (most importantly) physical attacks on law enforcement officers engaged in actual rioting and need to be held to account, even if other rioters during the “summer of love” have been ignored.

Mr. Schwartz was accused of “attacking police officers with pepper spray and a chair.” Pepper spray is technically a weapon, though it’s of the non-lethal variety, so that’s a serious accusation. But you need to read much further into the Justice Department’s report to find the phrase, “the stream of liquid did not directly hit any officer.” In other words, Schwartz didn’t pepper-spray any of the police. He deployed pepper spray in the vicinity of the police. He did admit to throwing a folding chair that bounced off of a police officer’s riot shield.

That was the totality of Schwartz’s assault on the Capitol Hill Police. Yes, it definitely qualifies as an attack, and punishment is merited for anyone who assaults law enforcement officers. (Though it rarely if ever happened during the BLM riots.) But fourteen years? That’s more than twice as much time as a Nevada man got in March when he was convicted of literally shooting at police officers.

The conduct of Judge Amit Mehta (who is also a FISA judge) should also be noted here. Rather than simply defining the crimes and pronouncing a sentence, Mehta opted to give a speech. He called Schwartz a “soldier against democracy” (which is not a legal term that I’m aware of). He further declared that Schartz was “not a political prisoner” or someone who was “fighting against an autocratic regime.” These are all talking points straight out of an MSNBC script, not the nation’s legal codes.

Amit Mehta was putting on a show for the cameras and seeking to make an example out of Schwartz. We now live in a country where two lawyers received 15 months behind bars for literally firebombing a police cruiser and handing out explosive devices to a group of BLM rioters. And the guy who threw a folding chair is heading to more than fourteen years in prison. Someone else is doing three years for stealing a gavel. The unequal enforcement of the law based on political preferences on display here is simply shocking. Schwartz’s lawyer needs to appeal this sentencing decision immediately.