Former Olympian Requests Investigation into DOJ Case
Lawyers representing David Hearn, a former U.S. Olympian, are advocating for a federal investigation into the Justice Department’s handling of a felony case they pursued against him. Hearn had been accused of damaging the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, a charge from which he was later cleared.
On Tuesday, Hearn’s legal team sent a letter to the inspectors general of the DOJ and the Interior Department. The letter called for inquiries into what they termed a mishandled investigation and prosecution. According to the attorneys, officials ignored critical evidence and expedited charges against Hearn due to pressure from then-President Trump.
The request for investigation follows D.C. Superior Court Judge Todd Eldeman’s decision to permanently dismiss the case against Hearn. Judge Eldeman described the indictment process as ‘lightning-fast’ and ruled out any future attempts by the DOJ to charge Hearn.
The judge noted the ‘unique possibility’ that U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office might attempt to reinstate the case because of alleged ‘political pressure’ from Trump. The pressure was reportedly to pursue legal action against suspected vandals.
“In light of these findings and the government’s own admissions, a critical purpose of the requested investigations is to collect the facts — through witness interviews and the collection and analysis of electronic media and documents — necessary to hold accountable the individuals and groups who failed Mr. Hearn, the criminal justice system, and the public,”
Hearn’s lawyers highlighted this in their letter.
The accusation against Hearn stemmed from an arrest in June, when he was charged with felony property destruction for allegedly damaging the Reflecting Pool’s liner. However, later evidence from the Interior Department indicated that the damage resulted from issues related to the pool’s renovation for America’s 250th birthday celebrations.
Hearn’s attorneys now argue that evidence clearing him was accessible to the government well before they dropped the charges. They criticized the indictment as being ‘obtained through unusual haste’ and asserted that the prosecution was ‘shaped from the outset by political pressure and built on an inadequate investigation.’