Judge Releases California Man Accused of Bringing Guillotine Near Supreme Court

A D.C. judge released a California man accused of bringing a 10-foot guillotine near the U.S. Supreme Court, rejecting prosecutors’ request to keep him jailed while he faces a misdemeanor weapons charge.

Philan Tam Duy Le, 35, pleaded not guilty Wednesday to attempted possession of a prohibited weapon. U.S. Capitol Police arrested him a day earlier after officers found the guillotine mounted in the bed of his pickup truck near the Supreme Court and Library of Congress.

The truck was parked illegally in a permit-only area when officers approached Le, who was sitting on a platform attached to the vehicle, according to an arrest affidavit. An officer inspected the guillotine and found that its metal blade was sharpened at an angle. When asked whether the device worked, Le allegedly replied, “Yeah, it’s the real deal, man.”

Police said Le told officers he was not in Washington for a specific reason and did not have issues with particular members of Congress. Searches of the truck found no guns or explosives. Capitol Police said Le had driven to Washington from Julian, California, and investigators are continuing to examine why he made the trip with the guillotine.

Capitol Police initially announced that Le had been arrested for carrying a dangerous weapon. By his arraignment Wednesday, federal prosecutors had instead filed a misdemeanor charge of attempted possession of a prohibited weapon and asked Magistrate Judge Robert Hildum to keep him in jail.

Prosecutors argued that Le had no ties to Washington and had been traveling around the country for about three weeks while living from his vehicle. Hildum rejected the detention request, citing Le’s lack of criminal history and his cooperation with officers. The judge also noted that Le had not threatened anyone or tried to flee when police approached him.

Hildum acknowledged that having the guillotine was a “very, very serious thing,” but said the government’s argument that Le might fail to return for court was “pure speculation.” The ruling concerned whether Le should remain jailed while the case moves forward, rather than whether he committed the charged offense. Le was released on his promise to return to court.

The unusual weapon at the center of the case could also shape what prosecutors must prove. D.C. law bans several weapons by name, including machine guns, sawed-off shotguns, switchblade knives, and knuckles. It also covers other dangerous weapons when someone possesses them with the intent to use them unlawfully against another person. A guillotine is not specifically listed.

That means the government’s case can depend on more than simply showing that Le possessed the device. Prosecutors must establish that it qualifies as a dangerous weapon under the law and address the required intent. D.C. courts have looked at what an object is capable of doing and how it was used or intended to be used when the item is not a weapon specifically named in the statute.

D.C.’s highest local court applied that rule last year in Carrington v. United States, throwing out a weapons conviction involving an umbrella because prosecutors had not shown that it was likely to cause death or serious injury in the way it was used. Police describe a very different object in Le’s case: a 10-foot guillotine with a sharpened metal blade that Le allegedly said was operational.

The arrest report does not identify a specific person Le allegedly intended to threaten or harm with the device. Capitol Police said investigators are continuing to review his background and determine why he traveled to Washington with the guillotine. Le has pleaded not guilty and is scheduled to return to D.C. Superior Court on September 24.