Prosecutors have rejected Mr. Nauta’s claim of vindictive prosecution as ‘punishment’ for his refusal to appear before the grand jury.
In a filing on Friday, Special counsel Jack Smith argued that Trump codefendant Walt Nauta did not provide evidence to support his allegations of selective and vindictive prosecution in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case.
Judge Aileen Cannon has already dismissed motions based on unconstitutional vagueness and the Presidential Records Act in response to several motions to dismiss filed by Mr. Nauta in the case. His motion to dismiss based on selective and vindictive prosecution is one of the two remaining motions.
The prosecution on Friday opposed Mr. Nauta’s motion to dismiss the indictment on these grounds in a historic case related to former President Donald Trump’s handling of presidential documents.
Mr. Nauta, who pleaded not guilty, sought dismissal of the indictment or requested discovery, citing claims of selective and vindictive prosecution. He argued that he was treated differently from other employees of President Trump.
In their response to Mr. Nauta’s motion to dismiss, the prosecution argued in a filing on Friday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida that his claims of selective and vindictive prosecution lack merit.
Related Stories
Furthermore, prosecutors have rebutted Mr. Nauta’s claim of vindictive prosecution as a form of “punishment” for his refusal to accept an invitation to appear before the grand jury, stating that this does not exempt him from charges.
“This unique and unsupported claim would essentially make any recipient of a target letter immune from charges simply by declining the offer. Nauta’s arguments are baseless and should be rejected,” prosecutors stated.
The prosecution clarified that the letter sent to Mr. Nauta clearly indicated that he was not obligated to accept the invitation to testify. It was explicitly stated that if he chose to appear before the grand jury, he could refuse to answer any question that might incriminate him truthfully.
According to the filing, Mr. Nauta’s alleged actions, including providing false statements to investigators, justified the indictment.
Court documents reveal that Mr. Nauta, who worked as a valet for President Trump during his presidency and later as his “body man,” was involved in the transfer of boxes of documents from the White House to a storage room at President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida at the end of his presidency in January 2021.
These documents were later requested by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
The prosecution alleges that Mr. Nauta played a crucial role in this process, including transporting boxes for President Trump’s review before handing over 15 boxes to NARA.
Additionally, Mr. Nauta is accused of removing some boxes from storage without authorization after a grand jury issued subpoenas related to the documents, but before President Trump’s lawyer reviewed the boxes in the room and certified them in response to the subpoena, as shown in surveillance footage.
An indictment was returned on June 8, 2023, and a superseding indictment on July 27, 2023, containing additional charges against Mr. Nauta. FBI agents discovered over 100 additional documents with classification markings during a raid in August 2022, according to court documents.
“Nauta has not presented sufficient evidence to warrant discovery or a hearing, let alone dismissal, on his claims of selective and vindictive prosecution. His motion should be denied,” prosecutors wrote.
Mr. Nauta has filed multiple motions seeking dismissal of the indictment or further clarification on specific allegations. However, Judge Aileen Cannon rejected previous motions on April 18, leaving two motions outstanding.
Please rewrite this sentence.
Source link
