When I wrote about the shocking triple failure of prosecutors in Washington, D.C. to secure an indictment in the case of an alleged assault against a federal agent, I noted that the rejection raised the prospect that the case against sandwich thrower Sean Charles Dunn “might not make it past the grand jury stage, either.”
That prospect may have been realized Tuesday, when a grand jury refused to approve a felony charge against him, as the New York Times reported Wednesday.
Beyond the inevitable quips playing on the old saying that prosecutors could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, something serious and profound is happening in the nation’s capital.
Given the relative ease with which prosecutors secure indictments (hence the saying), it’s all the more noteworthy when grand jurors refuse to approve that preliminary step of formally accusing someone of committing a crime. Grand jury presentations are one-sided affairs, guided by prosecutors and governed by the relatively low standard of probable cause, as compared to the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard that prosecutors must clear at trial.
While the Sidney Reid case is eye-popping due to the number of times (three) that D.C. grand jurors refused to approve a felony case against her, Dunn’s case could signal something at least as significant in response to the Trump administration’s show of force.
After his arrest earlier this month, the administration sought to make an example of the man who, notably, was working for the Justice Department. According to the initial complaint and statement of facts filed against him, Dunn allegedly called federal agents “fascists,” said he didn’t want them “in my city” and “str[uck]” an immigration agent in the chest with a “sub-style sandwich.”
Attorney General Pam Bondi highlighted Dunn’s case after his arrest, writing that she had just learned he worked at DOJ and that he is now “FIRED” in addition to facing a felony charge. “If you touch any law enforcement officer, we will come after you,” wrote Bondi, who is a top official in an administration that has coddled Jan. 6 defendants who attacked law enforcement.
Similarly, former Fox News host and current U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro released a video upon Dunn’s arrest that was accompanied by the text: “Assault a law enforcement officer, and you’ll be prosecuted. This guy thought it was funny — well, he doesn’t think it’s funny today, because we charged him with a felony.”
We don’t know what the grand jurors thought, but they apparently disagreed that the man who has become a folk hero of sorts should face a felony.
But he isn’t necessarily in the clear. Recall that prosecutors tried a whopping three times to get an indictment against Reid before reducing her case to a misdemeanor, which doesn’t require grand jury approval. It’s unclear how prosecutors will proceed in Dunn’s case.
In his case and others, the DOJ would do well to bear in mind what Reid’s lawyers said in connection with her now-reduced prosecution. They said they’re “anxious to present the misdemeanor case to a jury and to quickly clear Ms. Reid’s name,” and that Pirro “can try to concoct crimes to quiet the people, but in our criminal justice system, the citizens have the last word.”
The last words haven’t been spoken yet in these cases. But the first words the citizens of D.C. are speaking should ring loudly in the administration’s ears. They seem to echo Dunn’s alleged cry, “I don’t want you in my city!”
Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for expert analysis on the top legal stories of the week, including updates from the Supreme Court and developments in the Trump administration’s legal cases.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
Comments