WASHINGTON — The D.C. man accused of assaulting a U.S. Border Patrol agent with a Subway sandwich was discovered not responsible by a jury Thursday, the end result of a three-month legal case that was each an absurd spectacle and a deeply critical conflict over protest and prosecution within the Trump period.
Sean Dunn, a 37-year-old Air Drive veteran and former Justice Division paralegal, confronted as much as a yr in jail for hurling what turned referred to as the hoagie heard around the globe. His acquittal following a two-day trial quantities to a rebuke of President Donald Trump’s immigration and crime crackdown in Washington, in addition to one other embarrassing authorized setback for Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. legal professional for D.C., whom he appointed.
“I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything,” Dunn stated outdoors outdoors the courthouse following the decision. “That night I believe I was protecting the rights of immigrants… Every life matters, no matter where you came from, no matter how you got here, no matter how you identify.”
Viral video from Aug. 10 confirmed Dunn shouting on the Border Patrol agent, Gregory Lairmore, earlier than heaving a sandwich at his chest, operating away and getting arrested after a quick foot chase. With anger brewing throughout town over Trump’s takeover of metropolis policing and deployment of the Nationwide Guard, Dunn shortly grew right into a footlong people hero and image of anti-Trump resistance.
Pirro’s workplace initially pursued a felony assault cost towards Dunn, however a grand jury rebuffed prosecutors by declining to return an indictment. Desperate to undertaking the president’s tough-on-protest picture, Pirro declined to drop the case and proceeded with a much less critical misdemeanor cost that resulted on this week’s trial.
Prosecutors have been playing that jurors in liberal Washington would discover that Dunn’s actions amounted to an “assault,” despite the fact that he was being broadly celebrated and the case mocked as a joke.
In an acknowledgment of Trump’s deep unpopularity right here, prosecutors informed jurors that Dunn had a proper to insult Lairmore and different federal brokers enlisted in native policing, together with calling them “fascists.” However they claimed he “crossed a line” bodily by throwing the Subway sandwich into Lairmore’s chest.
“No matter who you are, you can’t just go around throwing stuff at people because you’re mad,” John Parron, an assistant U.S. legal professional, argued in a gap assertion.
Dunn’s protection staff painted the prosecution as an overzealous waste of time. They by no means disputed that Dunn threw the sandwich ― solely that it might have injured Lairmore, or prevented him from doing his job that night time. They acknowledged their shopper hated that Trump was “turning his hometown into a military occupation,” and so they described the sandwich hurl as an “exclamation point at the end of a verbal outburst, a harmless gesture that did not and could not cause harm or injury.”
“Dunn’s defense team painted the prosecution as an overzealous waste of time. They never disputed that Dunn threw the sandwich – only that it could have ever injured the agent.”
“He threw that sandwich at that agent, and now the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia has turned that moment, a thrown sandwich, into a criminal case – a federal criminal case charging a federal offense,” one in every of Dunn’s attorneys, Julia Gatto, informed the jury in a gap assertion.
“His conduct is not a federal criminal case,” Gatto stated. “It is not close.”
After the sandwich toss the Justice Division fired Dunn from his job ― a termination Legal professional Common Pam Bondi publicly gloated about ― and the White Home used footage of a swarm of closely armed brokers arresting Dunn in a promotional video boosting Trump’s takeover of D.C. policing.
The trial drew a gaggle of reporters to the U.S. District Courtroom in downtown Washington, and lots of observers had a tough time retaining a straight face via the in-depth testimony concerning the deli projectile and its affect on the agent.
A key query for the jury was whether or not the sandwich might have resulted in “bodily harm.”
Lairmore, a division chief with 23 years on the U.S. Customs and Border Safety, which incorporates the Border Patrol, was deployed to D.C. streets as a part of Trump’s govt order aimed toward making town “safe and beautiful.” He stated that after Dunn exited the Subway sandwich store, he berated Lairmore and different brokers and appeared “fixated” on them. Video confirmed Dunn calling them “fascists” repeatedly, leaving the nook and later returning with the sandwich nonetheless in his hand.
“He threw a subway-style sandwich at me, which struck me in the chest,” the agent stated, narrating a video being proven to the jury.
Lairmore testified that he was not injured by the sandwich, however stated he might really feel its affect via the ballistic vest he was carrying. It got here aside and “kind of exploded” when it struck his chest, he testified.
“I could smell the onions and mustard,” he stated.
The protection appeared blissful to query Lairmore concerning the particulars of the sandwich, underscoring the obvious lack of seriousness of the alleged crime. They apparently wished to convey to the jury that the case was ridiculous and unworthy of a multiday federal trial.
Andrew Leyden by way of Getty Photos
Sabrina Shroff, one in every of Dunn’s attorneys, pressed Lairmore on whether or not the sandwich actually “exploded” on him. She confirmed the jury a photograph of the sandwich mendacity in its Subway wrapper on the bottom, apparently after it had bounced off Lairmore’s chest.
“That sandwich hasn’t exploded at all, has it?” Shroff requested him.
“It looks like a little bit is coming out towards the bottom,” Lairmore replied.
He acknowledged he couldn’t say whether or not it was a turkey sandwich or a ham sandwich, and wasn’t certain precisely which condiments it was topped with. However he might say definitively there have been onions as a result of one was left dangling on his radio antenna.
Lairmore appeared to smile or chuckle at a number of the extra amusing inquiries, together with when he was requested about gag items he’d obtained from different federal brokers after the incident. One was an opulent sandwich toy, which he stated he had positioned on the shelf in his workplace; the opposite was a patch that learn “Felony Footlong,” which he had placed on his lunch field.
In a dialogue with the decide on whether or not Lairmore ought to be questioned on the items, Shroff stated they helped illuminate the “state of mind” on the company and the way the entire affair appeared like a joke, even to the alleged sufferer and his coworkers.
“Just ask yourself: Would a man genuinely injured, genuinely offended by having a sandwich thrown at him, proudly, happily, joyfully display not one but two gag gifts?” Shroff informed jurors in a closing argument. “Would you stick it on your daily lunchbox and carry it around with you day in and day out? Of course not.”
The Dunn case is a part of a string of prosecutions Pirro has pursued, alleging D.C. residents assaulted or impeded federal brokers in the midst of their duties.
“The agent testified that he was not injured by the sandwich, but said he could feel its impact through the ballistic vest he was wearing. It came apart and ‘kind of exploded’ when it struck his chest, he said.”
Trump formally declared against the law emergency in Washington the day after the sandwich incident, claiming violent crime had grown uncontrolled regardless of Justice Division statistics that confirmed the other. The declaration introduced Nationwide Guard members to the streets of D.C., in addition to an uncommon variety of brokers from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Division of Homeland Safety, the U.S. Park Police, and different federal businesses.
Most of the alleged assault instances have crumbled in embarrassing style, with grand juries rejecting them or prosecutors downgrading or dropping expenses altogether after additional investigation. That features the case towards Sidney Reid, a D.C. girl who filmed Immigration and Customs Enforcement brokers and was accused of assaulting an FBI agent. A jury discovered Reid not responsible final month after a trial her attorneys referred to as a waste of cash and sources.
Dunn, with quick blond hair and a mustache and goatee, sat principally expressionless via the trial, carrying a shirt and tie beneath a good isle sweater. He had not spoken publicly concerning the incident or the fees, whilst posters sprang up round D.C. portraying a masked man heaving a submarine as an act of defiance, and residents adorned their yards with Dunn-inspired skeletons for Halloween.
The one talking Dunn did throughout the trial was to substantiate for the decide that he didn’t want to testify in his protection.
The formal cost towards Dunn technically coated extra than simply “assault” – the potential crime might additionally embody “resisting,” “opposing,” “impeding,” or “interfering” with federal brokers. Dunn’s attorneys tried unsuccessfully to restrict the trial to merely a query of bodily assault.
One of many important challenges for prosecutors was conveying {that a} sandwich toss may very well be thought of “forcible.”
“It’s a sandwich, but [he’s] throwing it hard,” asserted prosecutor Michael DiLorenzo. “That is sufficient for force, and it meets the definition of force.”
To broaden their case, the federal government confirmed police video of Dunn post-arrest showing to inform an officer that he had hoped to attract the brokers away from their spot ― what prosecutors portrayed as Dunn efficiently getting in the way in which of their work that night time. The incident occurred in D.C.’s busy U Avenue NW nightlife hall, close to a LGBTQ+ bar that was internet hosting a Latin night time that night.
“He was trying to impede and interfere with their assignment that night,” Parron stated.
However the jury in the end didn’t agree with that evaluation, both. They returned with the not-guilty verdict in about seven hours.
Talking outdoors the courthouse, Shroff thanked the jurors for sending again an “affirmation” that dissent is “not just tolerated.”
“It is legal, and it is welcome,” she stated.
