A Washington judge stated on Friday that he will make a prompt decision regarding the dismissal of an indictment against former U.S. Olympic canoeist David Hearn, who is charged with vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. The indictment has been discredited, and prosecutors acknowledged that there are currently no grounds to sustain a criminal case against Hearn. They requested Judge Todd Edelman to dismiss the indictment without prejudice, allowing for the possibility of future charges if new evidence emerges. Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Spence emphasized the public interest in permitting a grand jury to issue an indictment in the future if warranted.
Hearn's attorney, Steve Levin, contended that the case should be dismissed with prejudice, arguing that there is no valid reason to keep the indictment active. Levin stated, "There is nothing that can save the case that was dismissed," and expressed concern about the potential for the case to linger over Hearn for years.
After the nearly hour-long hearing, Judge Edelman indicated he would take the matter under advisement and would issue a ruling soon. Hearn, 67, was indicted in July for allegedly damaging a two-square-foot section of the Reflecting Pool's liner on June 19, facing a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison if convicted. Hearn has maintained his innocence, claiming he did not vandalize anything and was arrested while simply examining the pool after a bike ride.
In July, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro requested the indictment be dismissed without prejudice, stating that damage to the pool's sealant was due to a flawed installation rather than Hearn's actions. President Donald Trump publicly criticized Pirro's decision, asserting that it was a clear case of vandalism.
During the hearing, Judge Edelman questioned the speed at which prosecutors obtained the indictment, noting they had not received all relevant information from the Department of the Interior. He also raised concerns about Trump's comments regarding Hearn, suggesting they could be seen as pressure on prosecutors to pursue the case despite its lack of merit. Spence acknowledged that whatever Hearn did at the pool did not cause economic damage, which would negate the charge of destruction of property.