What public records or police statements exist that officially confirm William Kelly’s identity or any charges related to the church incident?
Executive summary
The public record as reported by federal agencies and news outlets shows that Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and FBI partners arrested William Kelly in connection with the disruption of a St. Paul church service and that federal authorities said the three arrestees face charges under a statute commonly cited as "conspiracy to deprive rights" (18 U.S.C. §241), but the reporting and releases available in the provided sources do not include the underlying charging documents or local booking sheets for independent verification [1] [2] [3]. Multiple senior officials and agency statements publicized the arrest and the federal charge category on social media and press pages, while local police described the incident as also being investigated for disorderly conduct — leaving an incomplete paper trail in the sources supplied here [4] [5].
1. Official federal announcement: DHS press release names Kelly and cites 18 U.S.C. §241
The Department of Homeland Security issued a public notice saying Homeland Security Investigations, working with FBI partners, arrested Nekima Levy Armstrong, Chauntyll Louisa Allen and William Kelly in connection with the St. Paul church disruption and stated the three are being charged under 18 U.S.C. §241, the federal conspiracy statute referenced in coverage as "conspiracy to deprive rights" [1].
2. Senior officials amplified the arrest and charge on social media and in statements
Attorney General Pam Bondi and other senior officials posted that the three were taken into custody and would be charged, and FBI Director Kash Patel and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem made public social-media statements identifying Kelly as arrested and linking the case to federal civil-rights-related charges, which local and national outlets repeated [6] [4] [7].
3. National and local reporting corroborates the arrests but not the formal charging documents
Major news organizations — including Reuters, NBC, PBS, and others — reported that Kelly was arrested and described the charge category and federal involvement, noting Kelly’s presence in the church video and his social-media profile; these outlets cite officials and agency statements rather than reproducing the criminal complaint, indictment, or a U.S. Attorney’s filed charging document in the public record provided here [3] [2] [8].
4. Local law-enforcement characterization and parallel disorderly-conduct inquiry
Saint Paul police told reporters the incident was being investigated as disorderly conduct, and local spokespeople are quoted characterizing it as an active investigation — information that appears alongside the federal statements but does not in these sources yield a local arrest report or booking record for Kelly [5].
5. Court actions and releases: judge-ordered releases reported, but details limited
Coverage from MPR and The Guardian states that a judge ordered the release of the three activists, including William Kelly, and that officials said Kelly surrendered peacefully; those articles report judicial action and release but do not attach the magistrate’s docket entries or provide the federal charging papers in the material supplied [9] [10].
6. What is absent from the provided public record and why it matters
None of the supplied sources includes the text of the federal criminal complaint, indictment, charging instrument, or a visible Minnesota booking sheet; reporters cite DHS and DOJ statements and officials’ social posts, and one magistrate decision regarding Don Lemon was reported separately, but the underlying charging documents for Kelly are not reproduced in these files — so official confirmation in primary-source paperwork is not present among the provided materials [3] [8].
7. Competing narratives and implicit agendas in the public statements
The federal and political officials emphasizing arrests and federal civil‑rights charges have framed the action as protecting worshippers’ rights, while lawyers for the arrested have argued it was protest protected by free speech; several sources note the highly political rollout of the arrests — including high-profile social media posts by partisan officials — which suggests both legal and political aims in how the arrests were presented to the public [1] [11] [6].
Conclusion: Based on the documents and reporting supplied, the authoritative public confirmations that exist are DHS’s public announcement naming William Kelly as arrested and citing 18 U.S.C. §241 and multiple officials’ public statements repeating that claim [1] [4]. What is not present in the material provided here are the primary charging documents (criminal complaint or indictment) and local booking records that would independently verify the precise charges and formal identity filings in court; those would be the next documents to obtain for definitive, primary-source confirmation [3] [8].