A jury in Washington has been unable to reach a verdict in the trial of Sean Dunn, following his infamous incident in which he threw a sandwich at a federal officer. Known as the “DC Sandwich Guy,” Dunn’s actions gained notoriety after video footage of the incident went viral. The jury commenced deliberations on Wednesday but were sent home for the night without making a decision.
Dunn’s defense team opted not to call any witnesses or to have him testify in his own defense. Both the prosecution and defense acknowledged that the essential facts of the case are not disputed. Dunn is facing charges under U.S. Code 18 Section 111(a), which addresses forcibly assaulting or interfering with law enforcement officers during their official duties.
The central question for the jury is whether Dunn’s sandwich toss, which hit U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agent Greg Larimer’s bulletproof vest, constituted a “forcible” act that interfered with the agent’s responsibilities on the night of August 10. The prosecutors need only to prove one element of the charges against Dunn to secure a conviction.
During the closing arguments, Dunn’s attorney argued that his action was a form of protected speech, characterizing the sandwich toss as an expression of dissent against the presence of federal agents in D.C. She stated, “This case is about a sandwich,” highlighting that the agent reportedly received gag gifts from colleagues related to the incident.
However, the Justice Department countered, emphasizing that regardless of the manner of expression, the act of throwing a sandwich at someone is not acceptable. They stated, “This is not about the First Amendment — it’s about someone who crossed the line,” stressing that no one has the right to physically strike another person, even with food.
Testimony during the trial revealed that Dunn shouted at the federal agents for several minutes before throwing his sandwich. Larimer, describing the striking act, noted that the sandwich burst upon hitting his vest, adding sensory details such as “I could smell the onions and mustard.”
The video of the incident has become emblematic of resistance against the federal law enforcement presence in the nation’s capital during the Trump administration. As the trial progresses, Dunn has taken measures to shield his identity from cameras, appearing with a mask and covering his face with his hands upon leaving the courthouse.
Initially, federal prosecutors sought a felony indictment against Dunn, but a grand jury opted not to pursue charges at that level. The jury’s current deliberation marks a pivotal moment in this unusual case, with implications for interpretations of protest and the conduct of law enforcement.