Authorities struggle to keep same story in riot cases

BOSTON — There’s little doubt the Oath Keepers were planning for something on Jan. 6. The question at the heart of the case against its members in the attack on the U.S. Capitol is: What, exactly, did they intend to do?

Authorities suggested for weeks in court hearings and papers that membersof the far-right militia group plotted their attack in advance in an effort to block the peaceful transition of power. But prosecutors have since said it is not clear whether the group was targeting the Capitol before Jan. 6.

“The plan was to unlawfully stop the certification of the Electoral College vote ... and the plan was to beprepared to use violence if necessary,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Kathryn Rakoczy said during a hearing this month. But the Oath Keepers “did not know precisely the way in which force and violence might be needed to support this plan,” she said.

Authorities are still combing through a sea of evidence in what they say is likely the most complex investigation ever prosecuted by the Justice Department. More than 300 people are facing federal charges, and more are expected.The most serious charges have been brought against10 people described as members and associates of the Oath Keepers and several members of another far-right extremist group, the Proud Boys.

Butas the probe has unfolded, prosecutors have struggled to maintain a consistent narrative and had to walk back statements, creating an opening for defense attorneys.

“The government presented a theory (without evidence) that there was a weeks long plan to invade the Capitol,” an attorney for one of the Oath Keepers, Jessica Watkins, wrote in a recent court filing. “Therewas no such plan.”

In one case, prosecutors said in court documents in January there was “strong evidence” the pro-Trump mob-aimed to “capture and assassinate elected officials.” The Justice Department quickly clarified it had no such evidence yet, blaming it on a miscommunication between prosecutors.