Dem
47
GOP
53
We hate to use the same cliché multiple times in the same week, but sometimes...
Earlier this week, we wrote:
The old saying, which we've repeated many times, is that a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich if they really want to. Well, it would seem that the grand juries of Washington are keeping kosher these days. Pirro's office went before one grand jury with the felony assault charge, and got the thumbs down. So, Pirro tried again, and yet again, and got two more rejections (proper term "no true bill"). That almost never happens, particularly three times on the same case. A prosecutor need only give evidence for the probable cause of a crime, with no arguments/pushback from the defense, and need only get the votes of a majority of the grand jurors. It's a low bar to clear, and Pirro and her team failed... three times.
As we noted in that item, Pirro's office eventually had to bow to reality, and pursue a lesser (and more reasonable) charge.
And now, it's happened again. As it turns out, Pirro's team can't get a jury to indict a ham sandwich, even if that sandwich is thrown at a law enforcement officer. The sandwich in question here was a Subway cold-cut combo (ham, salami, and bologna), and the thrower was Sean Charles Dunn, who hit a Customs and Border Protection officer on the night of August 10 in one of D.C.'s "nightlife" areas. Dunn lost his job working for the Department of Justice, and was arrested and jailed. It's the old story, you know: unlawful possession of an unlicensed hoagie.
Earlier this week, Pirro's office tried to return an indictment for felony assault of a law enforcement officer, but the grand jury was having none of it, and refused to approve the indictment. At least Pirro is able to learn from her mistakes, though. Instead of trying again and again, and ending up with egg on her face three times (enough for an omelet!), she gave up after the first fail, and reduced the charge to misdemeanor assault.
There are two things worth noting here, we think. The first is that a big part of the reason that grand juries almost always sign off on indictments is that they operate under the assumption that prosecutors are capable, have integrity, and are operating in good faith. Under those circumstances, a grand juror is going to be loath to substitute their own, amateur, judgment for that of the professionals. But if the grand jury believes that they cannot, in fact, put their faith in the prosecutors to play things straight, then all bets are off. Pirro, and other Trump prosecutors, could well be in for a long line of defeats of a sort that, until recently, were rare.
Second, whether Dunn does time or not, he's already become something of a folk hero. Copies of this Banksy-style image are popping up on walls in cities around the country:
There is very clearly a vocal, growing resistance to the Trump administration. And if he keeps going, it will keep growing. And motivated, angry, fed-up people are exactly the type who make sure to get themselves to the polls on (or before) Election Day. (Z)