Not The Onion

18529 readers

971 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

kescusay@lemmy.world

634

‘It smelled of onions and mustard,’ Border Patrol officer hit by sandwich in DC testifies (www.cnn.com)

submitted 18 hours ago by CubitOom@infosec.pub to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

102 comments fedilink hide all child comments

“He did it. He threw the sandwich.”

That’s how the defense counsel for Sean Dunn, the man who threw a sub-style sandwich at a Border Patrol officer in Washington, DC, this summer began the federal trial against him Tuesday morning.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 48 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

I'm sure we all know the phrase that a prosecutor could get a grand jury to "indict a ham sandwich". It took prosecutors THREE Grand Juries to finally get an indictment for someone throwing that sandwich.

It's all a complete waste of time and taxpayer funds, and in any other point in history these prosecutors would have been fired immediately for incompetence at even considering an indictment in the first place, not even considering the possibility that they would try for three attempts.

[–] mercano@lemmy.world 56 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

They never got the indictment. The prosecutor had to downgrade the charges from a felony to a misdemeanor, which doesn’t have to go before a grand jury.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

if a grand jury won't indict, doesn't double jeopardy apply? not a lawyer, just haven't dealt with this part of the process before

[–] austinfloyd@ttrpg.network 1 points 1 hour ago

A grand jury is a sort of sanity check on a charge, and does not count towards the trial. It is basically "with these facts (provided only by the prosecution), is there enough probable cause to move a case to trial?". Double jeopardy in the 5th amendment has specific protections from going to trial multiple times or from getting multiple purchasing for a crime.

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 26 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I didn't even realize that, last I had heard was them putting it before the third jury, and then that there was going to be a trial.

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 31 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Actually, it's even stupider than that I'm pretty sure, two grand juries refused to give them an indictment for a felony charge, so they brought a way less severe misdemeanor charge because you don't have to get a grand jury to sign off on those, and that's what we're wasting this time on

[–] archonet@lemy.lol 6 points 9 hours ago

As it so happens, they can indict ham sandwiches, but not turkey subs. And I think this is arguably funnier.