Grand Juries Repeatedly Decline Felony Indictment for Man Who Threw Sandwich at Federal Agent
Former DOJ attorney Sean Charles Dunn faces misdemeanor assault after two grand juries declined felony indictments for throwing a sandwich at a federal agent.
Overview
Sean Charles Dunn was arrested in Washington, D.C., for throwing a sub-style sandwich at a Customs and Border Protection agent during President Trump's public safety operation.
The incident, captured on a viral video, involved Dunn allegedly swearing at the agent, calling him a "fascist," and attempting to flee the scene.
Despite the video evidence, federal prosecutors repeatedly failed to secure a felony indictment against Dunn, with two grand juries declining to approve charges.
This failure to indict is considered highly unusual by legal observers, occurring shortly after President Trump deployed federal agents and Dunn was fired from his Justice Department position.
Defense lawyers and a federal judge raised concerns about potential federal overreach in arrests typically under local jurisdiction, highlighting the grand jury's crucial protective role.
Analysis
Center-leaning sources frame this story as a significant setback for the Trump administration's aggressive prosecution of violence against law enforcement. They emphasize the unusual nature of the grand jury's decision, linking it to broader public frustration and drawing comparisons to the administration's pardons for Jan. 6 rioters, thereby highlighting perceived inconsistencies in policy.
Sources (31)
Center (12)
FAQ
Sean Charles Dunn is a 37-year-old Air Force veteran and former Department of Justice trial attorney who served as a cyber transport systems specialist from 2006 to 2011, including an assignment in Germany.
Dunn approached Customs and Border Protection officers in Washington D.C., shouted insults including calling an officer a 'fascist', threw a wrapped sub-style sandwich forcefully at a federal agent, and then attempted to flee the scene.
The grand juries declined to indict Dunn on felony charges despite video evidence, reflecting concerns about federal overreach in arrests that are typically under local jurisdiction and the grand jury's protective role against unjust prosecutions.
Defense lawyers and a federal judge have raised concerns about potential federal overreach by prosecuting cases that usually fall under local jurisdiction, emphasizing the grand jury as a safeguard against such overreach.
The grand jury's refusal is seen as a safeguard against unjust prosecutions, echoing colonial-era grand juries that resisted British tyranny; similar recent cases include declined indictments in protester assaults, highlighting a critical check in the justice system.
History
This story does not have any previous versions.