Submitted by HoldenGambles t3_zwo1lb in massachusetts

Vincent Gillespie was found guilty earlier this month of several charges stemming from the Jan. 6 attacks.

He showed no contrition for attacking an officer with a riot shield during the fight for the Lower West Terrace tunnel. Jury forewoman said he testified he thought the riots were "fun and enjoyable." He even spoke with an AP reporter during the riots and have his full name and where he was from.

He turned down a plea deal last month that would have sent him to jail for about 4 years, but now he faces a potentially longer sentence following his conviction.

Edit: His dad is Gregory Gillespie

Edit 2: Spelling

Full story:




You must log in or register to comment.

bubalusarnee t1_j1vtu6n wrote

Ramming cop with shield, and he passed on a four year deal?

He must know we will all be better off with him on the wrong side of a wall.


ManWithTheCats t1_j1xc7cx wrote

I wonder if he has a “Back the Blue” bumper sticker or yard sign.


BrockVegas t1_j1wts9z wrote

Fuck him, and his apologists.

Present company included.


BearDen17 t1_j1wp62y wrote

Sounds like a true loser.


Anthropomorphotic t1_j1w4tzn wrote

Fuck him. Let him enjoy the fun of federal prison.


eightfingeredtypist t1_j1ypea4 wrote

We can call him names, but this political action is working with a certain percentage of the people in the United States. People like this have a lot of support.

Please get out and vote against politicians that would bring authoritarian government to the US.


MonsieurReynard t1_j1w4391 wrote



HoldenGambles OP t1_j1wef2r wrote

Ha. This is what autocorrect gives you when you misspell contrition so poorly. My bad. Thanks for the call-out


richg0404 t1_j1xhp3i wrote

> He turned down a plea deal last month that would have sent him to jail for about 4 years, but now he faces a potentially longer sentence following his conviction.

SO how is it only a "potentially longer" sentence after conviction? Surely he can't get less than the plea bargain.


cuddlefarts42069 t1_j1xtaor wrote

He could be found innocent


bubalusarnee t1_j1ycots wrote

"Vincent Gillespie was found guilty earlier this month"

First line of the post.

So, on a scale of 1 to 10, how awesome is reflexive contrarianism, from the inside?


cuddlefarts42069 t1_j1yei92 wrote

I forgot that no one in the history of the law has ever had a sentence overturned. It’s not reflexive contrarianism, it’s answered a question that was asked. However unlikely the outcome would be, that is how it would happen, ya cunt.


richg0404 t1_j1yybtg wrote

She it could be overturned but as of now he has been found guilty.


bubalusarnee t1_j1ycl5v wrote

>Surely he can't get less than the plea bargain.

A plea bargain is between him and the prosecutors. It can be whatever good or bad deal the accused and the prosecutors come to.

But, we're at the part where the prosecutors are out of the picture, with their job done. The judge is not bound by arrangements the prosecutors tried to come to.


Banea-Vaedr t1_j1zfxx9 wrote

Least conservative Worcester County resident.


warlocc_ t1_j1w0s16 wrote

Sounds like a legitimate mental health situation, behaving like that, on film, admitting it, and passing on a deal after assaulting an officer?


redcapmilk t1_j1y5fqc wrote

It's called trumpism.


warlocc_ t1_j1yad7w wrote

Yeah, that's an accurate word for it, probably.

I'm guessing by the downvotes I'm not being hateful enough for this sub?


Temporary_Target4156 t1_j1ydhx0 wrote

No, not because you’re not being “hateful enough.” I’m guessing calling it a “mental health situation” sounds like you’re excusing his actions as not done with clear mind. Based on the article, he was well aware, and proud of, what his was doing.

Honestly, probably just a wording issue that’s getting the downvotes.


tashablue t1_j1z84w4 wrote

No, it's because most mentally ill people are not violent, and when you make statements like these, you are continuing to stigmatize people with mental illness, while excusing people with violent antisocial tendencies.


warlocc_ t1_j1zap2q wrote

I'm not talking about most mentally ill people, only this particular individual.

There's no way we can call his behavior and decisions reasonable or rational, I think. Makes me wonder what made him think any of it was a good idea.

Violent and antisocial, by the way, are symptoms of some mental illnesses.


tashablue t1_j1zb66x wrote

People can be irrational without being mentally ill. Again, you seem determined to make excuses for this person.


warlocc_ t1_j1ze4xd wrote

Really? "That's crazy" is making excuses?

Brings me back to "guess I'm not being hateful enough for you".


tashablue t1_j21vtfu wrote

No, it's because you're being hateful towards people with legitimate, diagnosed mental illness.

Armchair psychiatry diagnoses only harm and stigmatize swaths of the population.


[deleted] t1_j1wjqlc wrote