For those of us who live in Charlottesville, Va., Jan. 6, 2021, was a difficult day. The violence that occurred at the U.S. Capitol brought to mind the violence we experienced in August of 2017. The parallels between what happened at Charlottesville and at the Capitol are numerous, including missed intelligence that predicted violent conflict, searing images of fighting and angry words, and the inability of law enforcement to protect community safety.
After the 2017 “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, I led an independent review of how the city managed those events. I was retained by the City of Charlottesville to gather facts about what occurred, analyze what went right and what went wrong, and make recommendations about how to better manage future mass demonstration events. After interviewing numerous stakeholders, reviewing tens of thousands of documents, sifting through hours of video, and consulting with law enforcement experts, we produced a lengthy report summarizing our findings.
Congress is now considering launching a similar after-action review, likely conducted by an independent, bipartisan commission. As our experience in Charlottesville shows, the creation of a process to study the events of Jan. 6 is imperative and can facilitate healing. An honest evaluation is necessary to ensure common understanding about what forces informed those events and prevent future breakdowns in public safety such as those we witnessed on Jan. 6.
As a former federal prosecutor, I was trained that every investigation must be guided by an objective assessment of facts. In the days after Charlottesville, facts were difficult to ascertain. Rumors abounded and contradictory information was widely shared. Over the course of our review, we dug deeply into what actually occurred and gathered reliable information from multiple sources. We produced a credible narrative and chronology of how the Unite the Right rally was organized and what happened in real time on the ground. That factual foundation was essential to the community’s subsequent understanding of these events and informed our findings of responsibility for the failure to protect public safety and recommendations for improvement.
A commission formed to study the Jan. 6 events must also start with facts. We need answers to crucial questions that have not yet been resolved. How much coordination among different groups and advance planning preceded the events? Did sympathetic law enforcement officers or legislators provide assistance to those who stormed the Capitol? Why did it take hours for National Guard troops to respond? The commission must answer these and other questions and establish a baseline of facts to create an accurate, credible chronology. Truth must be the foundation of everything that the commission studies and underlie all of its conclusions.
Facts inform accountability, which should be another goal of the Jan. 6 commission. In Charlottesville, the facts we gathered revealed the mistakes that were made in planning, communication and real-time management of events. Our report was critical of local, state and federal officials; rally participants; and community members, and it demonstrated that no one person, agency or group was responsible for mismanagement of the rally. The report informed personnel changes and led to something unusual in government — an apology to the people of Charlottesville for the failures we identified.
A Jan. 6 commission must similarly identify the decisions that led to the security breakdowns that occurred at the Capitol, as well as the people who made those decisions. The review should be unsparing in its hindsight assessment of the factors that influenced operations plans, deployment of law enforcement assets, and internal and external communications. The commission should also identify affirmative misconduct and flag instances where well-intentioned people exercised poor judgment and caused harm by their action or inaction. Accountability is a hallmark of any effective organization and is essential to our ability to learn from these events.
Finally, a Jan. 6 commission has a chance to make specific recommendations that will result in real improvement in Capitol security and the management of future protest events. Our Charlottesville report concluded with a list of specific recommendations for improved management of mass demonstration events, including more effective law enforcement coordination, robust communications with event participants and members of the public, the creation of a “stadium effect” and separation of groups with differing ideologies, and the use of both hard and soft law enforcement assets and flexible operational planning. Those recommendations have become a template for small cities around the country preparing for demonstration events that present the risk of violence.
The Jan. 6 commission has the potential to similarly enhance the security of the Capitol and other government sites. The narrative developed by the commission and its assessment of key points of failure will reveal ways to enhance the physical safety of the Capitol and the legislators and staff who work within that complex. It also may identify broader processes to minimize the risk of recurrence of the conditions that led to the security failures on Jan. 6.
The Unite the Right rally caused a great deal of trauma that continues to afflict our community. However, a careful review of what occurred has facilitated healing, improved processes and restored faith in government. As it gathers facts, evaluates accountability and recommends practical changes, a Jan. 6 commission will do the same. From tragedy can come increased understanding. I am hopeful that Congress will seize this opportunity to learn from these awful events and move us toward a better, more secure place.
Timothy J. Heaphy served as the United States Attorney for the Western District of Virginia from 2009-2014.