Assault by Sandwich
You might recall that when federal officials were put on duty to clean up Washington, D.C., one Justice Department attorney who was out for a late night snack took the sandwich he had just purchased at Subway and after screaming at an officer, decided to hurl the sandwich at the officer—then ran away. He lost his job, and was arrested for assault.
Yesterday, a jury in D.C. found him not guilty. I was not there, did not hear the testimony, and have no idea if the jury’s verdict was correct or not. On the face of it—and from video we’ve all seen—the guy threw an object and struck a law enforcement officer with it. That’s pretty textbook assault.
I know, there are plenty of wiseacre comments to be made about committing an assault with a submarine sandwich. But what if it was not a sandwich?
If the jury thought he should not be guilty because it was just a sandwich…what if it had been, for example, a book? Or a smartphone? Or a brick? Or something that contained an explosive?
The action is the crime, not whether it was a foot-long sandwich or a piece of cement. For that jury, what object would have been “enough” for it to be a crime?
Or, because it was a defendant assaulting an officer who was following an order from President Trump, there would be full justification no matter what was thrown?
Sadly, if that is the case…we are in more serious trouble as a people than we think. And I’m afraid we, in fact, are.
