Nancy Pelosi's Husband Assault: Prosecutors Fighting Man Convicted of Hammer Attack Over Plea for New Trial

Prosecutors urged a federal judge to reject a motion for a new trial for the man convicted in the brutal hammer attack against Nancy Pelosi’s husband, RadarOnline.com has exclusively learned.

David DePape claimed his constitutional rights were violated because the government failed to prove he carried out the attack to prevent Pelosi from carrying out her official duties as a member of Congress.

In addition, DePape, who faces up to 50 years behind bars, claimed the federal judge erroneously instructed jurors to consider the prosecutors’ charge that he plotted to interfere with Pelosi’s duties.

But prosecutors argued DePape was hell-bent on kidnapping the then Speaker of the Houe simply because she was the leader of the Democrats and viciously walloped Paul Pelosi when he learned she was in Washington, D.C.

"The defense team was permitted to argue its theory to the jury – that the defendant targeted Speaker Pelosi because he believed she was part of an elite, corrupt cabal and because of her role as the head of the Democratic Party,” prosecutors argued in a 16-page motion.

“The Court properly instructed the jury on the legal requirements for both charges and the government did not misstate these requirements in its jury addresses. The jury rejected the defense theory of the case and instead convicted [the] defendant," the motion read. "A new trial is not warranted."

As RadarOnline.com previously reported, the 42-year-old conspiracy theorist broke into Pelosi’s Richmond, California mansion in 2002 and used a hammer to assault her horrified 83-year-old husband.

During police questioning, DePape railed against Hillary Clinton and accused Nancy of being the “leader of the pack” viciously targeting former President Donald Trump, and then blathered about several right-wing QAnon conspiracy theories.

DePape argued he was entitled to the new trial because prosecutors were unable to prove his intent to interfere with Nancy’s duties.

“The Court’s refusal to give this instruction (or any other instruction) defining ‘on account of the performance of official duties’ requires reversal of Mr. DePape’s convictions on both counts because this instruction is both supported by law and has a foundation in the evidence presented at trial,” his lawyer argued.

Never miss a story — sign up for the RadarOnline.com newsletter to get your daily dose of dope. Daily. Breaking. Celebrity news. All free.

Prosecutors argued DePape told police he planned to break Pelosi’s kneecaps and then wheel her into Congress and insisted the confession is evidence enough to show he wanted to interfere with her duties.

“Far from misstating the law, the government explained that the evidence supported the conclusion that defendant targeted Speaker Pelosi because of the performance of her official duties, and that those official duties included a political role as the lead Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives,” the court documents stated.