×

Rejection: Judge denies Dresch’s request for release

WASHINGTON — A federal judge Thursday denied a Calumet man’s request to be released on bond while awaiting trial on charges of participating in the Jan. 6 storming of the U.S. Capitol building to disrupt the certification of President Joe Biden’s election.

Karl Dresch has been in custody since his initial court appearance in Marquette in January. In a written ruling issued Thursday, Judge Amy Berman Jackson pointed to Dresch’s previous felonies, guns at his home and social media posts before and after the incident as signs he presents a flight risk and a threat to others in the community.

There were mitigating factors in favor of Dresch, Jackson said: He didn’t assault anyone, he didn’t break down physical barriers to enter the Capitol, and he did not appear to be a ringleader of the attack. Nevertheless, she said, “there are many aspects of his participation that do not bode well for the future, and the record does not support the narrative advanced by many who wrote letters on his behalf who suggested he merely got swept up in what others were doing.”

On Dec. 20, a day after Trump tweeted about a Jan. 6 protest of his “statistically impossible” loss, Dresch posted “7-4-1776 = 1-6-2021.” He repeated the 1776 motif in a Jan. 3 post where he wrote in part “NO EXCUSES! NO RETREAT! NO SURRENDER! TAKE THE STREETS! TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY!”

Jackson addressed the defense’s submission of another communication from Jan. 3 in which Dresch said “(a civil war) may be necessary some day but could be done peacefully I think, I just figured Trump said be there maybe he needs bodies or something . . . . I’m not sure the point but Trump’s the only big shot I trust right now so I’m going, making a trip out of it so even if it’s pointless.” Dresch did not advocate violence, but also did not rule out illegal activity — as even being on Capitol grounds was that day, Jackson wrote.

“The fact that he was willing to be one of the available ‘bodies,’ even if it might turn out to be ‘pointless’ and the civil war would be necessary some other day, is consistent with the evidence that it was his plan to ‘Stop the Steal,’ not to just ‘be present’ and hear a speech about it,” Jackson wrote.

He continued posting on the day, posting “Who’s house? OUR HOUSE” while approaching the Capitol, posting photos of himself in the Capitol Crypt, and messaging a friend “Patriots are in the Capitol.” Posts after he left the capitol included comments such “now those traitors know who’s really in charge” and boasts that they “had the cops booking it.”

“These are not the comments of someone who was overwhelmed by events he did not anticipate,” Jackson wrote.

The aftermath of the Capitol riots also did not appear to chasten Dresch, Jackson said. In a post the day after, Dresch said “we have your back give the word and we will be back even stronger.”

“Defendant’s promise to take action in the future cannot be dismissed as an unlikely occurrence given that his singular source of information (Trump) continues to propagate the lie that inspired the attack on a near daily basis.” Jackson wrote. “And the anger surrounding the false accusation continues to be stoked by multiple media outlets as well as the state and federal party leaders who are intent on censuring those who dare to challenge the former President’s version of events.”

Jackson said she had considered letters from community members in Dresch’s support, who had found him to be “non-violent, friendly, kind, and helpful.” However, in almost all cases, the letters did not grapple with the serious nature of the charges, or his past record, she said.

Dresch had several minor convictions prior to a 2013 incident in which he led police on a chase from Wisconsin to Michigan at more than 145 mph. He subsequently spent eleven months in jail in Wisconsin and one year in jail in Michigan.

“This defendant chose to place the lives of numerous officers, motorists, and bystanders at risk instead, and this is not the only offense on his record that relates to obstructing the police,” Jackson said.

Jackson also took issue with the guns and ammunition found in Dresch’s home, which he would not be allowed to own as a felon. Dresch’s mother had said three of the four weapons had belonged to Dresch’s late father, and that she had not wanted them in her house. In previous court filings, Dresch had argued the guns presented were unremarkable, and not modern weapons; one Russian rifle dates to 1945.

However, the claims of its lack of utility were contradicted by the amount of ammunition found throughout the house, including in the dining room, top of the stairs and in the backpack Dresch took to Washington, Jackson wrote. Other firearms were also found loaded, including a Remington shotgun, ammunition for which was found in the dining room and a laundry basket on the front porch.

“Is this unsecured and scattered collection of firearms and ammunition consistent with the sheriff’s assurances that, in his community, ‘people are trained to respect the weapons for their intended use for sport?” Jackson wrote. “Is this how a responsible sportsman with a thirteen-year-old child in the house stores his equipment?”

Dresch could also be dangerous to the community if released, Jackson wrote. She cited posts such as “look what we can do peacefully, wait til we decide to get pissed,” and a message about someone he believed had sent his posts to federal officials (“I sent her thing to tons of Patriots now it’s gone haha.”).

“… [T]he Court has clear and convincing reasons to believe that the defendant poses a danger to the community that cannot be alleviated by the imposition of any conditions,” Jackson wrote.

His past record and other behavior, Jackson wrote, “has given the Court plenty of reasons to be concerned that he will be resistant to reappearing if released, and that it would not go well if the Court had to send the U.S. Marshals to collect him.”

Dresch faces five charges: a felony charge of obstruction of an official proceeding and misdemeanor charges of entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds; disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds; disorderly conduct in a capitol building; and parading, demonstrating or picketing in a capitol building.

Dresch’s next hearing is scheduled for June 18.

Another Copper Country resident also faces charges connected to Jan. 6. Jeremy Sorvisto of Hancock faces the same four misdemeanor charges as Dresch. He was released on bond. He waived his preliminary hearing in April; no further hearings have been scheduled.

Newsletter

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *
   

Starting at $4.62/week.

Subscribe Today