Jiry gets DC ‘sandwich guy’ charged with misdemeanor assault for shoving a Border Patrol agent
Sean C. Dunn, known as the “Sandwich Guy” on Social Media, was released on Thursday for misdemeanor assault after trying to fill a sandwich below and across the border in Washington, DC. This means that the Federal Government arrested Dunn for throwing a sandwich, but then failed to find a defendant, so the government arrested him on almost unlimited misdemeanor charges, and now we failed to convict him of that unreasonable burden.
Dunn is now 3 and 0 against the federal government. Maybe it’s actually the FEDS Dunn. (Please don’t block me.)
According to the New York Times, the not guilty verdict was reached after jurors deliberated for seven hours.
Seven hours.
What the hell were the jurors even talking for seven hours? I can only imagine that it’s like:
Juror 1: “But we all saw him throw the sandwich. It was on camera.”
Juror 2: * throws potato chip at Juror 1 * “You want to throw me in jail now?”
Then they spent the next six hours and 58 minutes playing charades and talking about their kids, because they had to make it look like they did the hard work to come to a decision.
From the times:
It marked the important return of Jeanine Pirro, the US attorney in Washington, who made Mr. Dunn Case the center of Mr. Washington citizens have now twice rejected the government’s case against Mr. Dunn, after refusing to face the President’s crackdown.
The jury decided that the introduction of a 12-inch deli sandwich from the government described as “empty range” was not an attempt to cause bodily harm, to prevent conviction.
The only interesting thing is that the prosecutors even use the word “point-less” to describe the sandwich thrown at the agent that the testimony of the agent earlier this week.
“I could hear it through my ballistic vest,” said border agent Gregory Lairmore on the force, adding that “that exploded” and “smelled like onions and mustard” as the match “came out of the sandwich.
This is scriptural, but I like to think that Lairmore really gave his testimony, tears flowing and all.
The prosecution’s opening argument was also great, as they absolutely emphasized how unpopular the case was, while trying their best to make it sound like a case worth prosecuting.
More from the Times:
The next morning, jurors heard lawyers talk about principles that often sound louder in kindergartens than law schools.
“It doesn’t matter who you are, you can’t just throw things around people because you’re crazy,” said John Parron, of the State Government, in his opening remarks.
“That’s something you can’t do,” he insisted. Mr. Parron argued that the fight against him interfered with the operation of the law and was not a violation of Mr. Dunn’s First Amendment rights. Mr Dunn took off running after grabbing the sandwich, Mr Parron said, indicating he knew he had “crossed the line.”
Yes – I’m sure he ran for the same reason kids run when they play Ding-Dong Ditch. It’s part of a prank.
At the time, Dunn’s lawyer, Sabrina Shroff, showed the court that Lairmore and his colleagues failed to handle the incident with an inappropriate personality.
He showed a picture of the sandwich solid on the ground and in the bag after Dunn threw it, prompting Lairmore’s defiant admission that it “exploded” in his chest. Shroff also presented as evidence the “gag gifts” that trick found his colleagues, including the “folony lacondlong” badge that he kept in his lunch box after the incident.
“If someone hit you – someone wronged you – would you keep a memento of that attack?” asked Maryuds. “Can you stick it in your daily lunch box and carry it with you?”
This whole test could have been an email with names.
What are we doing here?
BREAKFUT:
Federal Grand Jury won’t end DC sandwich power
Jury selection begins in a misdemeanor subway sandwich case
