Opposing Legal Teams in 2021 PB Riot Label Each Other ‘Liars’ in Antifa Trial

In the legal equivalent of a bare-knuckles brawl, defense lawyers and prosecutors in the January 2021 Pacific Beach violence accused each other at trial of lying.

Closing arguments Monday and Tuesday in downtown Superior Court saw Jeremy White’s defense counsel lash a deputy district attorney for “insinuating” crimes, “reaching” for conclusions and “misrepresenting” videos.

Defendant Brian Lightfoot’s lawyer said: “It’s 100% not Brian” in a video showing a group attack on Ryan Luke, who drew a 12-inch Bowie knife in one “Patriots March” incident.

And Makenzie Harvey, lead litigator for the District Attorney’s Office, told the jury that Bay Area defense lawyers Curtis Briggs and John Hamasaki “lied to you.”

“The defendants lied to you” about not seeing a certain attack and not instigating the violence, she added.

And Harvey told jurors that if they think a witness is lying about something significant, “you got to wonder if can you believe anything” they say.

At midafternoon Tuesday, Judge Daniel Goldstein read the last few instructions to a jury of eight women and four men (including alternates picked at random to replace two sick jurors).

Goldstein told jurors that if they couldn’t find a defendant guilty of assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury, they could opt for “simple assault” (which carries a six-month maximum jail sentence compared with two, three or four years for the more serious kind).

“Stuff is Really Bad’

Hamasaki even urged that lesser count for his Los Angeles client Brian Cortez Lightfoot Jr., 27.

“You don’t have to like what you saw in these videos,” he said Tuesday, conceding that he thought when the trial began April 2: “Geeze, some of the stuff is really bad.”

But he argued that the “wrongful conduct” of Lightfoot, who’s often shown pepper-spraying and trying to “kick someone in the rear,” shouldn’t be held accountable for other people’s actions.

Prosecutors are using “aiding and abetting” language of the law to throw the book at Lightfoot and Jeremy Jonathan White, 41, also of Los Angeles.

Both face an unprecedented charge of conspiracy to riot with fellow antifa adherents. White has an added charge of assault, and Lightfoot faces eight counts of using tear gas, not in self-defense, and six counts of assault.

Self-defense is the linchpin of the defendants’ case in 15 of the 16 charges in the latest indictment (after nine other defendants originally charged cut plea deals).

White dropped his earlier plea of not guilty by reason of insanity.

Fight over Legal Meanings

On one thing, all the litigants agreed: Jurors should take care to understand the precise requirements of the law. Semantics became a battleground.

In Lightfoot’s case, said Hamasaki, it’s realizing that “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” entails an abiding, or long-lasting, conviction that the charge is true.

“It’s not kind of woulda shoulda,” he said, not “I thought they were guilty.”

Briggs displayed a chart with phrases including “guilt highly likely” and “probably guilty.” But only “beyond a reasonable doubt” justifies a conviction.

For her part, prosecutor Harvey said conspiracy didn’t require the accused knowing each other — only that they have a common aim.

• Listen: Pretrial motions discussed before Judge Goldstein on April 22
• Listen: Judge Goldstein reads long list of jury instructions on April 22
• Listen: Prosecutor Makenzie Harvey’s closing argument on April 22
• Listen: Jeremy White lawyer Curtis Briggs’ closing argument on April 23
• Listen: Brian Lightfoot lawyer John Hamasaki’s closing remarks April 23
• Listen: Prosector Makenzie Harvey’s rebuttal to defense on April 23
• Listen: Judge Daniel Goldstein’s final jury instructions on April 23

She gave examples of a “conspiracy” to throw a surprise birthday party for a co-worker’s 75-year-old mother. And even strangers joining her traditional family Thanksgiving football game count as co-conspirators.

“There aren’t plays that are written down and described, but everybody’s wearing the same clothing … some people in cleats, some people in tennis shoes,” Harvey told a rapt jury.

“They’re roughly divided into two teams and everybody knows what the goal is: Prevent the other team from scoring a touchdown and help your own team try to score a touchdown.”

She said the same applied to White and Lightfoot (who car-pooled with a photographer 115 miles to San Diego) — and dozens of other antifascists who arrived at Crystal Pier before the Trump supporters on Jan. 9, 2021.

“These individuals did not come for any other purpose than for violence,” she said. “Look at the way that they showed up all in black clothing, all armed with weapons, like stun guns and tear gas and sticks and baseball bats.”

Jury Gets Gas Mask

White contends he was a street medic equipped for defensive purposes with Bear Mace. His lawyer, Briggs, reminded the jury of his history of justice reform protests and a local congressman honoring White.

Harvey showed the jury a combination flashlight-taser. (White says the flightlight was needed to see wounds he might have to treat.)

Briggs put on a gas mask and helmet that he contends constricted White’s view during several incidents. He invited jurors to try it on as well.

But Briggs ticked off his opposing counsel by asking if prosecutors could “fairly prosecute their ideological opponents.”

(Briggs failed to have the San Diego County District Attorney’s Office disqualified from prosecuting the case because he alleged District Attorney Summer Stephan has historically declined to prosecute members of far-right organizations who commit violence.)

Hamasaki, a onetime candidate for San Francisco district attorney, labeled the prosecution as “political” against antifa.

He said law enforcement hid evidence about what he considered violent right-wing extremists, including Proud Boys, who planned the Patriot March three days after the U.S. Capitol insurrection.

Harvey hammered the defense attorneys for wanting jurors to consider “extraneous information that wasn’t actually evidence,” which she called a distraction from the truth, videos and testimony.

“Your duty is to put those improper arguments … aside to focus on the law to find these defendants guilty — coming here with the intention of rioting, assaulting different people using tear gas.”

She concluded her rebuttal: “Thank you.”

After the jury was sent off to deliberate, lawyers for both sides packed up one last time.

Earlier ire melted away as Briggs, Hamasaki and Harvey exchanged some collegial words and smiled at each other.