New York Times: Prosecutors Fail to Obtain Indictment Against Man Who Threw Sandwich at Federal Agent

It was a sharp rebuke to the prosecutors who were assigned to bring charges against those arrested after President Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops and federal agents to Washington.

Federal prosecutors on Tuesday were unable to persuade a grand jury to approve a felony indictment against a man who threw a sandwich at a federal agent on the streets of Washington this month, according to two people familiar with the matter.

The grand jury’s rejection of the felony charge was a remarkable failure by the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington and the second time in recent days that a majority of grand jurors refused to vote to indict a person accused of felony assault on a federal agent. It also amounted to a sharp rebuke by a panel of ordinary citizens against the prosecutors assigned to bring charges against people arrested after President Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops and federal agents to fight crime and patrol the city’s streets.

The rejection by grand jurors was particularly noteworthy given the attention paid to the case of the man who threw the sandwich, Sean C. Dunn. Video of the episode went viral on social media, senior officials talked about the case, and the administration posted footage of a large group of heavily armed law enforcement officers going to Mr. Dunn’s apartment.

It remained unclear if prosecutors planned to try again to obtain an indictment against Mr. Dunn, 37, a former Justice Department paralegal. They could also forgo seeking felony charges and refile his case as a misdemeanor, which does not require an indictment to move forward.

Mr. Dunn was initially charged on Aug. 13 in a criminal complaint accusing him of throwing a submarine sandwich at a Customs and Border Protection officer who was on patrol with other federal agents near the corner of 14th and U Streets in the northwest section of the capital, a popular part of the city filled with bars and restaurants.

Before he threw the sandwich, the complaint asserts, Mr. Dunn stood within inches of the officer, calling him and his colleagues “fascists” and shouting, “I don’t want you in my city!”

Mr. Dunn’s lawyer, Sabrina Shroff, declined to comment.

It is extremely unusual for prosecutors to come out of a grand jury without obtaining an indictment because they are in control of the information that grand jurors hear about a case and defendants are not allowed to have their lawyers in the room as evidence is presented.

But Mr. Trump’s decision to flood the streets of Washington with federal agents and military personnel who are generally not trained in conducting routine police stops has resulted in a flurry of defendants being charged with federal crimes that would typically be handled at the local court level, if they were filed at all.

It has also led to an increasing number of embarrassments for federal prosecutors, who have had to dismiss weak cases or reduce the charges that defendants were facing in recent days.

On Monday, for instance, prosecutors refiled a felony assault charge as a misdemeanor in the case of a woman who was accused of injuring an F.B.I. agent during a protest last month against immigration officials at the local jail in Washington.

The charges were reduced against the woman, Sidney Lori Reid, after prosecutors failed not just once but three times to obtain an indictment in the case.

That same day, at the request of prosecutors, a federal magistrate judge dismissed all charges against a man who was arrested at a Trader Joe’s grocery store last week for what the police said was possession of two handguns in his bag.

At a hearing, the magistrate judge, Zia M. Faruqui, lambasted prosecutors for having charged the man, Torez Riley, in an apparent violation of his constitutional rights.

“Lawlessness cannot come from the government,” Judge Faruqui said, according to HuffPost. “We’re pushing the boundaries here.”

In a separate case, the judge blasted federal prosecutors and corrections officials on Tuesday for having allowed a woman, Kristal Rios Esquivel, to remain in jail for nearly six days after she was arrested for allegedly spitting on a National Zoo police sergeant.

Ms. Rios Esquivel’s lawyer, H. Heather Shaner, had submitted an emergency motion to the judge seeking her release and ended her filing with a single word, “HELP!!!”

While Ms. Rios Esquivel was ultimately freed, Judge Faruqui pointed out in an order that she had somehow been allowed to languish behind bars even though prosecutors had not asked for her to be detained.

“This is inexcusable,” he wrote.

Mr. Dunn is scheduled to appear next week in Federal District Court in Washington for a preliminary hearing where another magistrate judge, G. Michael Harvey, will determine if there is probable cause that a crime was committed during the sandwich-throwing incident.

Prosecutors typically have 30 days to secure an indictment after a defendant is arrested. If they fail to do so within that window, they either have to reduce the charges to a misdemeanor or dismiss the case altogether.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/27/us/politics/trump-sandwich-assault-indictment-justice-department.html?unlocked_article_code=1.hU8.6_7F.mWOcOCzHww3X&smid=url-share

Law & Crime: ‘Doesn’t speak with precision about things sometimes’: DOJ attorney offers mixed praise for Trump’s communication skills during Abrego Garcia hearing

An attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice offered some mixed praise of President Donald Trump‘s communication skills during a previously secret hearing in the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case.

A transcript of the hearing was recently released, in redacted form and limited fashion, by U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, a Barack Obama appointee, in response to a motion to unseal several documents in the case filed by multiple news organizations.

While the transcript is not yet available on the public court docket, The New York Times’ Alan Feuer obtained a copy of the document and posted a notable snippet of an exchange between the judge and DOJ attorney Jonathan Guynn in a post on X (formerly Twitter).

“President Trump is you know, is a master messenger in many ways, but he also doesn’t speak with precision about things sometimes,” the government lawyer said. “And I think that this might be one of those situations where perhaps his comments were based on what he was recalling may have been the state of play previously.”

While the transcript is not yet available on the public court docket, The New York Times’ Alan Feuer obtained a copy of the document and posted a notable snippet of an exchange between the judge and DOJ attorney Jonathan Guynn in a post on X (formerly Twitter).

“President Trump is you know, is a master messenger in many ways, but he also doesn’t speak with precision about things sometimes,” the government lawyer said. “And I think that this might be one of those situations where perhaps his comments were based on what he was recalling may have been the state of play previously.”

The DOJ lawyer’s remarks came amid a discussion about the 45th and 47th president’s ability to have Abrego Garcia brought back stateside.

Until the Maryland man was abruptly returned earlier this month, the official position of the government was that the U.S. simply no longer had control of the situation. Attorney after attorney, in courtroom after courtroom, insisted the decision rested with officials in El Salvador.

Xinis appeared suspicious of this claim, based on an April 29 interview of Trump by since-fired ABC News anchor Terry Moran. During that interview, Trump said he “could” just pick up the phone and have the Salvadoran president return Abrego Garcia to the U.S. But, Trump added, “we have lawyers that don’t want to do this.”

The hearing was the very next day — and part of Guynn’s job was cleaning up Trump’s statement, which flatly contradicted the DOJ’s position.

Xinis was not, however, the only judge to be struck by Trump’s admission about Abrego Garcia during the ABC News interview.

During a May 7 hearing in the initial Alien Enemies Act case before U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, a jurist who got his start under George W. Bush and was then promoted by Barack Obama, the president’s words were put directly to DOJ attorney Abhishek Kambli.

“Is the president not telling the truth, or could he secure the release of Mr. Abrego Garcia?” Boasberg asked the government lawyer.

The DOJ attorney tried to sidestep the question by launching into a broader argument about the government’s case. But he was quickly brought back on track by Boasberg, who interjected to say he wanted his questions answered first….

Click the links below for more mumbo jumbo from Trumpski & his attorneys:

New York Times: If We Can’t Prosecute Trump’s Foes, We’ll ‘Shame’ Them, Justice Dept. Official Says

Few, if any, of those singled out have done anything to invite conventional prosecutorial scrutiny, much less committed crimes to warrant an indictment under federal law.

President Trump has kept up a steady bombardment of suggestions, requests and demands to arrest, investigate or prosecute targets of his choosing — the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey, various Democrats, officials who refuted his election lies, Beyoncé, the Boss.

But Mr. Trump’s directives have so far hit a stubborn snag. Few, if any, of those singled out have done anything to invite conventional prosecutorial scrutiny, much less committed prosecutable crimes to warrant an indictment under federal law.

But a Trump loyalist, given new, vague and possibly vast power, has found a workaround.

In recent days, Ed Martin, the incoming leader of the Justice Department’s “weaponization” group, made a candid if unsurprising admission: He plans to use his authority to expose and discredit those he believes to be guilty, even if he cannot find sufficient evidence to prosecute them — weaponizing an institution he has been hired to de-weaponize, in the view of critics.

In other words, if they can’t prosecute their target, they’ll engage in character assassination.

So much for a professional Department of Justice!

https://archive.is/SLN1j#selection-707.0-730.0