Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Prosecutors Can Indict a Ham Sandwich, But Can They Convict? -- Joyce Vance
https://joycevance.substack.com/p/prosecutors-can-indict-a-ham-sandwichWhat happens when you indict a ham sandwich? The Justice Department is about to find out. Or, at least, find out what happens when you indict a salami sub.
Following jury selection yesterday, trial began today in the case of the Washington, D.C., man accused of throwing a salami sandwich at a federal agent. It’s ironic that yesterday was National Sandwich Day. Do federal judges have a sense of humor after all?
The defendant is 37-year-old Sean Dunn, a former DOJ paralegal, who was captured on video throwing a salami sub straight at a federal agent’s (well protected) chest. The video went viral last August, amid the earliest of Trump’s efforts to deploy National Guard troops on American streets. (Even though it’s only been two and a half months, it feels like it has been a lifetime in some ways. Refreshers here, here, and here.) Dunn was arrested on a complaint charging him with a felony assault on federal agents. The complaint alleged that “DUNN stood within inches of V-1 [victim one], pointed his finger in V-1’s face, and yelled, ‘Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!’ DUNN continued his conduct for several minutes before crossing the street and continuing to yell obscenities at V-1.”
A grand jury subsequently declined to authorize felony charges. Artwork depicting Dunn as an emblem of resistance cropped up across the city.
The Justice Department subsequently brought misdemeanor charges, which do not require a grand jury’s approval. That’s the subject of today’s trial. The felony assault charge would have carried a penalty of up to eight years in prison. Misdemeanors carry a penalty of no more than a year.
Lawfare Senior Editor Molly Roberts deserves an award for her live tweets of the proceedings today. If you aren’t already, make sure you follow her for the conclusion of the case. Among the gems she shared:
. . .
Following jury selection yesterday, trial began today in the case of the Washington, D.C., man accused of throwing a salami sandwich at a federal agent. It’s ironic that yesterday was National Sandwich Day. Do federal judges have a sense of humor after all?
The defendant is 37-year-old Sean Dunn, a former DOJ paralegal, who was captured on video throwing a salami sub straight at a federal agent’s (well protected) chest. The video went viral last August, amid the earliest of Trump’s efforts to deploy National Guard troops on American streets. (Even though it’s only been two and a half months, it feels like it has been a lifetime in some ways. Refreshers here, here, and here.) Dunn was arrested on a complaint charging him with a felony assault on federal agents. The complaint alleged that “DUNN stood within inches of V-1 [victim one], pointed his finger in V-1’s face, and yelled, ‘Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!’ DUNN continued his conduct for several minutes before crossing the street and continuing to yell obscenities at V-1.”
A grand jury subsequently declined to authorize felony charges. Artwork depicting Dunn as an emblem of resistance cropped up across the city.
The Justice Department subsequently brought misdemeanor charges, which do not require a grand jury’s approval. That’s the subject of today’s trial. The felony assault charge would have carried a penalty of up to eight years in prison. Misdemeanors carry a penalty of no more than a year.
Lawfare Senior Editor Molly Roberts deserves an award for her live tweets of the proceedings today. If you aren’t already, make sure you follow her for the conclusion of the case. Among the gems she shared:
“Defense begins with, ‘He did it. He threw the sandwich.’ Goes on to argue that the throw was ‘an exclamation mark at the end of a verbal outburst.’”
“The officer Sandwich Guy is charged with assaulting testifies that he could feel the impact of the sandwich through his ballistic vest, and it ‘exploded all over my uniform.’ He says he could ‘smell the onions and the mustard.’”
“Defense wants gag gifts provided to the officer after the incident included in discovery. One is a plushie sandwich and another is a patch that says, if I heard correctly, ‘Felony Footlong.’ Sounds like we won’t end up seeing these physically but will hear them described.”
“We’re back to the sandwich video. The paper, the defense points out, is still on. ‘You don’t see there’s mustard on it?’ ‘You can’t tell there’s ketchup on it?’ Mayonnaise? Lettuce? Tomato? ‘In fact, that sandwich hasn’t exploded at all?’ Witness says the sandwich ‘looks bent and out of shape.’”
. . .