A federal judge indicated Tuesday he will decide within days whether Brian Cole Jr., the Virginia man charged with planting pipe bombs outside Democratic and Republican National Committee headquarters before January 6, 2021, should be released to home detention pending trial.
The case has drawn scrutiny from conservatives who question why it took nearly four years to make an arrest in what the FBI called one of its highest priority investigations. Cole was only arrested in January 2024, despite the bureau's extensive resources and public appeals for information.
U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper said he expects to rule on Cole's detention status "within the next day or two," according to court proceedings. The 27-year-old suspect has been held since his arrest earlier this year on charges including using an explosive device during a crime of violence.
Timeline Raises Questions
The delayed arrest has sparked criticism about the Biden administration's Justice Department priorities. While hundreds of January 6 defendants were swiftly prosecuted, often for far lesser charges like trespassing, the pipe bomb case languished for years despite being labeled a top FBI priority.
Cole allegedly placed the devices outside both party headquarters on January 5, 2021, with the bombs discovered the following day during the Capitol events. The FBI offered a $500,000 reward for information leading to the perpetrator's arrest.
Conservative legal analysts have pointed out the irony that someone who targeted both Republican and Democrat facilities equally is now potentially receiving more lenient treatment than many January 6 defendants who never engaged in violence or property destruction.
The case comes as President Trump has indicated he will review January 6 prosecutions and consider pardons for those he believes were treated unfairly by the previous administration's weaponized Justice Department.
If released to home detention, Cole would await trial from his Virginia residence while wearing electronic monitoring. The judge's decision could set a significant precedent for how explosive device cases are handled moving forward.