WASHINGTON – A Kentucky man who was the first rioter to enter the U.S. Capitol during a mob’s attack on the building was sentenced on Tuesday to more than four years in prison.

A police officer who tried to subdue Michael Sparks with pepper spray described him as a catalyst for the Jan. 6 insurrection. The Senate that day recessed less than one minute after Sparks jumped into the building through a broken window. Sparks then joined other rioters in chasing a police officer up flights of stairs.

Before learning his sentencing, Sparks told the judge that he still believes the 2020 presidential election was marred by fraud and “completely taken from the American public."

“I am remorseful that what transpired that day didn’t help anybody,” Sparks said. “I am remorseful that our country is in the state it’s in.”

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, who sentenced Sparks to four years and five months, told him that there was nothing patriotic about his prominent role in what was a “national disgrace.”

“I don’t really think you appreciate the full gravity of what happened that day and, quite frankly, the full seriousness of what you did,” the judge said.

Federal prosecutors recommended a prison sentence of four years and nine months for Sparks, a 47-year-old former factory worker from Cecilia, Kentucky.

  • @Rapidcreek
    link
    504 months ago

    The DOJ asked for 57 months. It’s not a good idea to tell the judge that you’re only remorseful because it didn’t succeed.

    • @DekesEnormous
      link
      524 months ago

      That’s a very light sentence for treason.

      • @CharlesDarwin
        link
        English
        54 months ago

        Indeed. These babies should be happy they weren’t put up against the wall like they probably deserve. Same with the people plotting the attempted coup being run at the same time.

        Instead we hear about how they are “political prisoners” and so on. Well fuck that noise.

      • @Rapidcreek
        link
        -74 months ago

        Except that’s not what he was charged with, but nevermind that.

        • TheHiddenCatboy
          link
          English
          164 months ago

          That’s a mistake on the part of the prosecution, but it may have been made necessary because they couldn’t prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt, but had the insurrectionist dead to rights on what they did get him for.

          Sometimes, you take the sentence you can get. :(

    • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      94 months ago

      Would love to see some kind of therapy to help de-program his cult veil of what actually happened, and to work through why it’s him paying the price right now instead of the cult leader.

    • @Delusional
      link
      44 months ago

      No consequences for the assholes that started the lies to get their dumbass voters to raid the capital to overthrow the nation.

    • @Buffalox
      link
      34 months ago

      Why not? 4 years is only 48 months.

      • @Rapidcreek
        link
        -64 months ago

        Really?

        Most legal scholars agree that in order to charge treason, the US must be at war.

        • @Rapidcreek
          link
          74 months ago

          Sorry, missed the context.

          The reason is the judge has a sliding scale for sentencing per guidelines. The DOJ tend to ask for the top of the scale. In this case 5 years. Because of the lack of remorse, the judge sentenced 4 years and 5 months. By being an asshole, this guy bought himself an extra almost half year.

          • @Rapidcreek
            link
            -94 months ago

            Sure, the US Constitution, Article III, Section 3, Clause 1

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              8
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              That’s not a legal scholar. This clause in the constitution says it’s treason to “levy war” against the US, which one would imagine includes a large group of armed people storming the Capitol, regardless if the country is currently “at war”.

              I’m curious about the idea that “legal scholars agree” that the country itself must already be at war, unless that’s not what you meant?

              • @Rapidcreek
                link
                -6
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Since you obviously refuse to read it…

                Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.