I would note grand juries are required to charge someone with a felony, meaning they did already get atleast (13 of 23?) a majority of the grand jury to agree he did do the crime.
However, there have already been multiple cases dismissed for incorrect procedure during grand juries under this admin, so it is possible that is the case for why the grand jury would agree to charge in this case.
No they aren’t. They tried to charge the sandwich guy with a felony and the grand jury refused to do it so they had to downgrade the charge to a misdemeanor.
Nowhere did I see it said on my sources on grand juries but I looked up the Wikipedia for the DC Sandwich Guy case and: “U.S. law typically gives the Justice Department 30 days to secure an indictment after an arrest.”
David Hearn, a two-time whitewater racing world champion who competed in the canoe slalom at three Olympic Games, was indicted by a grand jury Thursday in D.C. Superior Court on one felony charge, according to court records.
“A grand jury focuses on preliminary criminal matters only and assesses evidence presented by a prosecutor to determine whether there is “probable cause” to believe an individual committed a crime and should be put on trial. If the grand jury determines there is enough evidence, an indictment will be issued against the individual”
That makes it sound to me like they would need to do that rather than charge him, as the right to indictment by grand jury for federal felonies is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.
My issue with assuming he has been indicted by a grand jury though is that in the article is specifically uses “charged” over and over and charges are brought by Attorneys not Grand Juries.
I would note grand juries are required to charge someone with a felony, meaning they did already get atleast (13 of 23?) a majority of the grand jury to agree he did do the crime.
However, there have already been multiple cases dismissed for incorrect procedure during grand juries under this admin, so it is possible that is the case for why the grand jury would agree to charge in this case.
No they aren’t. They tried to charge the sandwich guy with a felony and the grand jury refused to do it so they had to downgrade the charge to a misdemeanor.
And then the jury said not guilty to that, despite the full confession in court lol
You are correct.
Nowhere did I see it said on my sources on grand juries but I looked up the Wikipedia for the DC Sandwich Guy case and: “U.S. law typically gives the Justice Department 30 days to secure an indictment after an arrest.”
https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/grand-jury-declines-indict-man-arrested-throwing-sandwich-us-agent-source-says-2025-08-27/
(this is the source cited by Wikipedia but seems to just be stated without source itself in the article)
I think they still have to bring the charge to the grand jury.
From the article:
I became more confused upon trying to look it up.
“A grand jury focuses on preliminary criminal matters only and assesses evidence presented by a prosecutor to determine whether there is “probable cause” to believe an individual committed a crime and should be put on trial. If the grand jury determines there is enough evidence, an indictment will be issued against the individual”
Source: https://www.uscourts.gov/court-programs/jury-service/types-juries
That makes it sound to me like they would need to do that rather than charge him, as the right to indictment by grand jury for federal felonies is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.
https://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment5.html
My issue with assuming he has been indicted by a grand jury though is that in the article is specifically uses “charged” over and over and charges are brought by Attorneys not Grand Juries.
So maybe just admin doing crime?