…by twelve hangry men.
(Stolen from Fark)
[0] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/indict_a_ham_sandwich
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sol_Wachtler
[2] https://history.nycourts.gov/biography/sol-wachtler/
[3] https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/a-grand-jury-would-indict-...
This was filed as a misdemeanor case, because federal felonies require a grand jury indictment, and the grand jury declined to indict when the prosecutor tried to bring felony charges.
To be fair, they only tried to charge the thrower, and not the sandwich, so maybe the old saying might have held up with the right defendant here.
The jury determined that the launching of the 12-inch deli sandwich from what the government described as “point-blank range” was not an attempt to cause bodily injury, preventing a conviction.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/06/us/politics/trump-sandwic...
You can't be tried multiple times for the same incident.
You can be tried by both the federal and the state governments, separately, on the same charges (that is, on equivalent federal and state charges).
I think you can be tried for the same incident, by the same government body, on different charges.
Yeah, reading through the wiki on it, it appears you are correct. That usually does not happen just because it's costly.
Seemingly most things that are technically illegal are rarely enforced because it's just too much work and not severe enough to be worth it.
(For those outside the US: being called to serve on a jury is a surprisingly frequent event for Americans, and can be very powerful civil act, though a time-consuming and costly one).
"The jury determined that the launching of the 12-inch deli sandwich ... was not an attempt to cause bodily injury, preventing a conviction."
It seems like that couldn't have taken seven hours by itself.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/06/us/politics/trump-sandwic...
What we have is a case of jury nullification, where a jury recognized the crime and decided not to convict. This is probably fine with the prosecution though, as the real punishment was holding him in jail, getting him fired, and wasting his life savings defending this case.
> This is probably fine with the prosecution
It's an embarrassment, so not at all fine. I doubt anyone is deterred. I wonder if we'll see copycat 'assaults' - I'm surprised we haven't.
He's fairly lucky he doesn't have a criminal record, but it didn't come without consequences. I think the fact that the sandwich was still wrapped on the ground, hit the officer's shoulder, that the other police at the time were visibly amused during the incident, and clearly joking about it for several days after as well with the officer who had it happen to him, showed that the incident wasn't serious enough to ruin anyone's life over. A formal criminal conviction in the US would've made it hard for him to get employment for some time, if not the rest of his life.
That it was a simple question doesn’t mean that the jury was initially unanimous on the answer,
In one video taken from a police officer’s body-worn
camera, Dunn told the officer, “I was trying to draw
them away from where they were. I succeeded.”
Don't say things like this! He was acquitted of assault, but he admitted on camera to a violation of 18 USC 111. (How I know this is, a friend of mine who's a trustee for our suburb was just indicted for the same thing, not over a sandwich, but for slowing down an ICE employee's car).It almost sounded like a post hoc rationalization, to make an outburt sound clever and intentional. Likely a stressful situtation to put yourself in.
You mean, if they say that with the intent of helping you? I doubt that's assault.
Not for me, but it would be a blow to my reputation and might cost a relationship with the vendor (depending on the dollar value to the vendor). And I'd be very embarrassed.
Or was it meant to be a reply to someone else's comment and would make more sense in context?
And where's the kosher salt?
Where's the fine-chopped rosemary leaves
to be a flavor catapult?
---
Isn't there some olive oil and sliced provolone cheese?
Slice up a large tomato
And a bell pepper that's been peeled
---
I need a hero, I'm holding out for a hero to snack on at night
It's gotta be long, and it's gotta be fast, and it's gotta be freshly on-site
My hypothesis is that people generally feel that police face little to no accountability and so there is a more serious double standard to contend with.
If a 90 year old person with a cane threw a sandwich at a 6'3" 250 pound professional athelete, everyone would check if the 90 year old was ok. Vice versa, and there would be a lot of anger and an arrest.
The state's law enforcement, with weapons, training, ballistic vests and helmets, etc. is the ultimate power. You can't do bodily injury to them, but minor contact and sandwiches are usually not taken seriously.
People ask the same question about situations where there is discrimination - is it a double-standard? They are forgetting about relative power: If someone is in a group that is threatened - e.g., an Auburn fan in a large crowd of rowdy, drunk Alabama fans (Auburn and Alabama are arch-rivals) - then an Alabama fan saying something threatening is a real threat, a real danger. If the Auburn fan says something threatening to the 100 Alabama fans around them, it doesn't represent anything; it's almost funny.
The equation is,
Threat x Power = Danger
floren•1h ago
God, how horrifying. Maybe with time and intensive therapy he'll eventually be able to heal.
yndoendo•1h ago
I would say Gregory Lairmore is a po' boy full of shit.
natebc•1h ago
Now that's a sandwich-in-the-face worthy of getting worked up about!
spl757•1h ago
edit: one too many words
pxc•1h ago
zippyman55•1h ago
gamblor956•1h ago
tdb7893•1h ago
jahsome•1h ago
adrr•1h ago
jrflowers•1h ago
tehwebguy•57m ago
jojobas•1h ago
malfist•1h ago
jojobas•1h ago
cogman10•50m ago
This "attack" was about as close to non-violent protest as you can get. Taking someone to court was only done because the ICE kidnapper had his fee fees hurt.
mmooss•26m ago
mmooss•28m ago
Why is the state so special? The USA's foundational value is individual liberty, not state authority.
fzeroracer•25m ago
dragonwriter•16m ago
Infringement of what?
> You can't allow anything getting thrown at cops on duty without repercussions.
You absolutely can, and of the thing involved was neither intended to—nor raised reasonable fear of, nor did, nor had any meaningful likelihood to—cause injury to the officer, I can’t see any overwhelming reason you shouldn’t, either.
I suppose I could see a case for civil liability for reasonable and necessary cleaning costs directly attributable to the sandwich, but beyond that...
AngryData•1h ago
p_ing•1h ago
When an officer attempts to murder a civilian, they should face attempted murder charges. When an officer kills a pet, he should face a destruction of property charge.
Unfortunately this rarely happens.
Anyone should be able to exercise their human rights and resists so-called officers of the law where possible up to and including deadly force.
mmooss•30m ago
I think you are way overstating it. It's hard to imagine society without police, and I've encountered many good, effective police.
> there are two classes of people, civilians and military -- they're not military
???!!!! Do you think people in the military have different or special rights?
p_ing•15m ago
Agreed, and that's not what we have. We have an overly aggressive, fearful, and self-protective/self-interested police force. Not one for the 'good of the people'.
> Do you think people in the military have different or special rights?
Yes, there are two classes of people in the US -- civilians and military. You're one of two, not that individuals in the military can violate civilian law, but they're beholden to their own laws (UCMJ) separate from civilians. Along with limits on their rights that they would otherwise have under the US Constitution.
squigz•1h ago
ethin•1h ago
techdmn•1h ago
You don't bump them, you attack their fists and clubs with the softer parts of your body.
pxc•1h ago
grebc•1h ago
amarant•1h ago
dktalks•1h ago
By this standard most of the sports player in the nation should be indicted.
Good news we unanimously rejected it