Prosecutors are seeking to dismiss the Reflecting Pool vandalism case against former Olympian David Hearn without prejudice, a move that would preserve the option to refile charges in the future. In a court filing on Tuesday, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro argued that dismissal without prejudice is sufficient to protect Hearn from potential prosecutorial overreach.
"Should the case be re-presented, the grand-jury process provides extensive protection to the defendant," the filing stated. This comes in response to a defense motion to dismiss the case with prejudice, which would permanently bar Hearn from being charged again for the same alleged crime.
Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman had previously dismissed the vandalism case against Hearn, a former U.S. Olympic canoeist, and indicated he would decide whether the dismissal would be with or without prejudice. Hearn's defense attorneys contend that President Donald Trump's public criticism of Pirro's initial decision to drop the charges does not provide Hearn with the finality required by the Constitution's speedy trial and double jeopardy protections.
"The extraordinary public and political circumstances surrounding this prosecution demonstrate a continuing risk of harassment and renewed prosecution," Hearn's defense team stated. They argue that the political attention surrounding the case creates a risk of future prosecution.
Hearn was initially indicted on felony charges for allegedly damaging the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. However, the Justice Department later moved to dismiss the charges without prejudice after discovering evidence suggesting a government contractor, not Hearn, was responsible for the damage. Prosecutors revealed in a motion last month that they received a significant volume of documents from the Department of the Interior after Hearn's indictment. The defense claims these materials "significantly undermine the evidentiary basis for the indictment" and first alerted them to the possibility that the damage resulted from a "botched installation."
Hearn's defense team has also requested access to the government's evidence as part of the discovery process, arguing it is relevant to Judge Edelman's decision on whether to dismiss the case with prejudice. The defense seeks to ensure Hearn receives meaningful finality, citing constitutional protections against repeated prosecution.