Connect with us

Washington

Jurors in sandwich thrower case talk about their deliberations in his trial in Washington, D.C.

Published

on

Jurors in sandwich thrower case talk about their deliberations in his trial in Washington, D.C.


The brief federal criminal trial last month of Sean Dunn, the man who threw a “submarine-style sandwich” at a Customs and Border Protection officer in downtown Washington, D.C., was only a misdemeanor case. But the courtroom was filled, and the overflow room was crowded, too.

The 12 jurors didn’t realize initially that Dunn’s case — and their verdict — would garner national attention.

One juror thought the deliberations would last under an hour. The juror, a longtime resident of Washington, D.C., also noted that some people in the courtroom struggled to “keep a straight face” during the trial and even laughed openly. 

“It seemed to me like an open and closed type of thing,” another juror said.  “It was kind of ridiculous.” 

Advertisement

Dunn hurled the sandwich at the CBP officer stationed at a busy intersection in August. The incident was widely publicized and quickly became a symbol of resistance against President Trump’s federal policing crackdown and National Guard deployment in the nation’s capital. 

After roughly seven hours of deliberation, the jury acquitted Dunn. It was the second time a group of D.C. citizens rejected the Justice Department’s claim that Dunn, who was fired from his job at the Justice Department after the incident, had committed a crime in tossing a sandwich at a federal agent. A separate grand jury had rejected the prosecutors’ request to indict Dunn on a felony charge earlier this year. 

Inside the jury room

Three jurors who sat on the panel spoke with CBS News about the deliberations, revealing how the politically charged case played out behind closed doors in the jury room of the E. Barrett Prettyman federal courthouse in Washington, D.C., near the U.S. Capitol.

All asked to remain anonymous. A court order from the chief judge of the D.C. U.S. District Court prohibits CBS News and other media outlets from publishing the jurors’ names.

The jurors described an initial 10-2 split on the 12-person panel. The deliberations were not as simple as some of them had expected.

Advertisement

The majority of jurors thought the incident did not merit criminal charges, or that criminal intent was not proven, according to two of the members of the panel. One juror told CBS News, “I thought we’d be out of there quickly. This case had no ‘grounding.’ He threw a sandwich at the agent because he knew it wouldn’t hurt. A reasonable person wouldn’t think a sandwich is a weapon.”

A second juror, who told CBS News this was not her first time serving on a D.C. jury, said the panel eventually “agreed that this is not and should not have been a federal case.”   

The jurors said the two initial holdouts worried that a not guilty verdict would send a message that it’s sometimes acceptable to throw things at federal agents.    

The two jurors told CBS News that the jury debated at length about the type of “criminal intent” that needed to have been demonstrated by prosecutors.  

One juror said, “We asked each other: If we only look at this case, can someone really do harm to someone wearing a ballistic vest by throwing a sandwich?”

Advertisement

One of the jurors also credited the “gentle and patient” foreperson with coming up with a productive communications strategy during deliberations.

A juror who spoke with CBS News by phone was surprised to be assigned to the case, because the juror had heard about the prior rejection by a grand jury of Sean Dunn’s felony case.

“I was surprised some of the other jurors were unfamiliar with it,” the juror said, noting the headlines generated by Dunn’s arrest and the video of the sandwich toss in August.

Though the case was a misdemeanor, without the prospect of a lengthy prison term for conviction, one juror said she noticed an unusual tension in the proceedings at trial.  

“There seemed to be a lot of back and forth between lawyers and the judge to begin with. I’ve been on a jury before, and that hasn’t happened,” she said. “So, that kind of stood out to me.”

Advertisement

The notoriety of Dunn’s case and the political tensions surrounding the Trump administration’s deployment of federal agents on the streets in D.C., added a unique stress on the jurors. Three told CBS News they’re worried about being publicly identified and facing the prospect of threats or harassment.

“We were very scared and nervous about what this meant for us,” one juror said.    

The same juror, who was familiar with the case before she was selected, said she thought Dunn looked “really sad and desperate at the defense table because he was going up against the U.S. government.”

One juror noted one witness and some attorneys in the room appeared to “giggle” or fight to keep a “straight face” during some of the testimony. 

“I mean,” the juror said, “it was a thrown sandwich.”

Advertisement



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Washington

Judge tosses Trump Media’s $3.8 billion defamation suit against The Washington Post | CNN Business

Published

on

Judge tosses Trump Media’s .8 billion defamation suit against The Washington Post | CNN Business


Another one of President Donald Trump’s lawsuits against a news organization has fizzled out.

This time, it is a defamation lawsuit that the Trump Media and Technology Group brought against The Washington Post in 2023 over a story titled “Trust linked to porn-friendly bank could gain a stake in Trump’s Truth Social.”

A federal judge in Florida has thrown out the suit, saying that Trump Media “failed to present evidence that would allow a jury to find by clear and convincing evidence” that The Post “published the allegedly defamatory statements with actual malice.”

US District Judge Thomas Barber’s conclusion came during the summary judgment phase of the case, when a judge can evaluate evidence and make a determination before proceeding to trial.

Advertisement

The Post’s lawyers argued that Trump Media could not prove “actual malice,” the high legal standard that public figures must meet to prevail in a defamation case. It means that the defendant either knew a claim was false or displayed “reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”

The Post’s reporter who wrote the story in question, Drew Harwell, “thoroughly investigated” the subject and “had confidence in the article’s accuracy at the time of publication,” the newspaper’s lawyers wrote.

In a summary docket entry last week, first reported by Reason magazine, Barber sided with the Post. He said he would issue a full opinion later.

The Post itself reported on the legal victory on Tuesday. “We are pleased with the court’s decision and look forward to reviewing its written order upon release,” a spokesperson told CNN.

A spokesperson for Trump Media did not immediately respond to CNN’s request for comment, but the company told The Post, “We believe a jury should decide whether these falsehoods were actionable and will evaluate whether to appeal last week’s ruling in due course. We will also continue to hold the media accountable.”

Advertisement

Trump Media positions itself as an opponent of, and an alternative to, traditional tech and media companies. It is best known for operating Truth Social, a relatively small social network favored by the president.

The publicly traded company has been losing money for years; it made less than $1 million in revenue in the first quarter of this year, according to public filings.

The company has repeatedly filed lawsuits over news coverage it deemed false. A defamation lawsuit against The Guardian and other defendants was thrown out by a different Florida judge last November. Trump Media initially filed an amended complaint, but then dropped the matter altogether in April.

Trump Media’s suit against the Post accused the newspaper of a “conspiracy” to harm the company and sought $3.8 billion in damages.

The lawsuit lawyers succeeded in narrowing the case considerably and asserted that Truth Media could not satisfy the “heavy burden” of the actual malice standard.

Advertisement

In May, while awaiting the judge’s ruling, The Post published a correction to the 2023 story stating that “discovery in the ongoing litigation has established” that two assertions in the story were incorrect. But the correction emphasized that the assertions were “based on The Post’s reporting at the time of publication.”

Trump and his businesses have a long history of getting publicity from lawsuits, only to see judges later throw them out.

In April, a federal judge dismissed Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal over its reporting on a lewd birthday letter to Jeffrey Epstein bearing his name. Trump refiled that suit in May. He also has pending litigation against the BBC, The New York Times and the Des Moines Register.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Washington

Washington records world’s worst air quality for a city after 850,000 Fourth of July fireworks

Published

on

Washington records world’s worst air quality for a city after 850,000 Fourth of July fireworks


Washington DC residents breathed in “unhealthy” air for hours after a 40-minute Independence Day fireworks show over the National Mall on Saturday night, with the country’s capital briefly recording the worst air quality of any major city in the world.

The highly emitting display, which the president called “spectacular”, came as the Trump administration rolls back an unprecedented number of pollution controls.

Hourly concentrations of particulate matter rose to 6.7 times their pre-fireworks levels, according to a Tuesday analysis from the company Clarity Movement based on its network of 26 air quality sensors throughout the city in partnership with the local department of energy and environment. Every one of those sensors reached air quality levels which the Environmental Protection Agency deems “unhealthy for sensitive groups” during the event, the researchers found, with some recording even worse levels of emissions.

Levels of particulate matter peaked at 4am on Sunday, approximately five hours after the display concluded, according to the new analysis. It remained elevated for approximately five hours after reaching its peak, the authors found, with city officials issuing a Code Red alert.

Advertisement
Smoke hangs in the air as the Independence Day fireworks launch over Washington. Photograph: Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images

“Outdoor air quality is unhealthy for seniors, kids, people with medical conditions,” the alert said. “General public may experience health issues. Limit time outside.”

The south-west region of DC experienced the highest pollution levels, the report’s authors found, probably because of its proximity to one of the fireworks launch sites in West Potomac park, as well as overnight meteorological conditions that trapped smoke over the area.

That highly polluted air probably drifted into Arlington, Virginia, said David Lu, CEO and co-founder of Clarity Movement.

“Unfortunately, we don’t have sensors there to confirm it,” he said. “That’s exactly why expanding real-time air quality monitoring matters. Without comprehensive coverage, communities can be exposed to significant pollution events that go undetected.”

The air quality across the city could have been even worse in the aftermath of the display if it were not for thunderstorms that struck the city on Sunday evening.

Advertisement
Smoke hangs in the air as the Independence Day fireworks launch over Washington. Photograph: Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images

“Despite the scale of the fireworks display, the city’s air quality avoided a worst-case scenario thanks to favorable weather conditions and the timing of the event,” said Lu.

The Fourth of July fireworks show, organized by the Trump-backed non-profit Freedom 250, began at 11pm on Saturday evening. It involved more than 850,000 fireworks launched from 10 sites across the capital, the organizers said. (A typical Independence Day show in DC involves just 17,000 shells.)

Trump on social media called the show “the Most Spectacular Fireworks Show I have ever seen, and I’ve seen them all”.

The fanfare came as the region was baking under an extreme heatwave, which brought triple-digit temperatures to the city hours earlier. For a time after the fireworks show, the city recorded the worst air quality of any major city in the world, according to AirNow, the Environmental Protection Agency website that reports air quality measurements from its monitoring stations.

Asked to comment, a White House spokesperson, Taylor Rogers, said: “It was the largest and greatest firework display in the history of our country to properly celebrate America’s 250th birthday! Every year, fireworks on the Fourth of July cause short-term spikes in air quality across the United States, including Washington, DC. This was not unique to the 250th fireworks celebrations in our nation’s capital.”

Advertisement

The Guardian has contacted Freedom 250 for comment.

Americans shoot nearly 300m lb of fireworks into the atmosphere every year, according to the American Lung Association, letting off lung-harming gases such as sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide.

The Trump administration has, since re-entering office, engaged in a wide-ranging assault on pollution controls, exempting polluting facilities from emissions regulations, boosting coal power, and halting the consideration of the value of lives saved when restricting fine particulate matter and ozone. On 4 July, the president also pardoned nine individuals convicted of violations related to the Clean Air Act, including people found to have tampered with emissions control equipment in cars or selling parts to bypass air pollution standards.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Washington

Question of the week: What does Santana Moss think of Washington’s WR depth?

Published

on

Question of the week: What does Santana Moss think of Washington’s WR depth?


The Washington Commanders are looking for a bounce back performance from their offense, and they’ll need their wide receivers to take a step up to do so.

Terry McLaurin is the clear No. 1 option at the position, but after him, there are several questions about how the rest of the room will shake out. The No. 2 spot is wide open, and there are several players who could fit the role and others in David Blough’s new scheme. Analysts Santana Moss, Logan Paulsen and Fred Smoot broke down the position on one of the most recent “Command Center” podcast episodes, and as one of the franchise’s all-time best receivers, Moss had a few thoughts on the group. Here’s his assessment on three wideouts and how they could fit into the offense.

“Knowing that he can play both outside and inside, I would think with some of the guys and their size and their experience, I would mainly probably see Antonio attack that middle. I think his route running ability is already to the level of some of these guys who have already played at this level. And just showing me that you don’t look like that this is new to you … He ain’t scared to go out and compete against these guys. To me — and we don’t know anything; we’re just sitting here speculating and assuming — I’d say he’s a slot guy out the gate.”

“I think if I had to just say if I look at that paper, and I asked any coach in this building by name how they think this guy played…if you tell me that Burks played well this offseason, he would be my No. 2 out the gate. He would be my No. 2 wide receiver because one: he brings size, he brings speed, he brings a gear at that size that a lot of people ain’t comfortable checking … You got a guy with size, leaping ability, the catch radius and can run.”

Advertisement

“They talk about how he was one of those guys from Day 1 that could play every position, and that’s stemming from him being a quarterback. Quarterbacks learn the game a little different from just a regular skill position guy. Luke came in here, and he knew X, he knew Z, he knew Gator. When you have those intangibles and you have that kind of mindset when it comes to playing that position, they can use him where they want to use him. That’s why I said he’s a great committee guy. He’s a guy that I know I’m gonna have on special teams as a returner, and guess what? If he’s not the starter, I’m okay with that because I know I’m going to ask more of him if somebody needs to take a breather.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending