Washington, D.C. – Former U.S. Olympian David Hearn celebrated a court ruling that permanently dismissed the federal vandalism case tied to the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. In an exclusive interview with Good Morning America, Hearn called the decision “a victory for democracy” and said he feels “relieved” that the legal threat has been removed.
Case background and dismissal
Hearn was indicted last summer after prosecutors alleged he ripped a piece of the pool’s lining while cycling near the monument. U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro had presented the case as a “forceful and violent” act, asserting that the government possessed proof “beyond a reasonable doubt.” President Trump publicly claimed the damage was the work of vandals and linked it to a renovation project he championed.
However, evidence later emerged suggesting that ongoing renovations, not Hearn’s actions, caused the damage. Six weeks after the indictment, Pirro dropped the charges. President Trump then criticized Pirro, saying she “choked.” The Justice Department had sought to preserve the option of refiling, but Judge Todd Edelman dismissed the case with prejudice on Thursday, meaning Hearn cannot be charged again on the same allegations.
Trump’s comments and judicial rebuke
In his ruling, Judge Edelman noted that despite the lack of criminal evidence, President Trump’s public pressure created “a risk that Mr. Hearn will be prosecuted nonetheless.” The judge’s language underscores concerns that the President’s statements may have attempted to influence the judicial process.
Hearn’s response and next steps
Hearn expressed gratitude to supporters who rallied around him during the ordeal and said the experience had been “difficult.” He emphasized that no one should feel immune from “this kind of abuse of power.” When asked whether President Trump should apologize, Hearn replied, “Yes,” adding, “If pigs fly, maybe.”
Hearn and his attorney, Norm Eisen, are now evaluating whether to pursue legal action against President Trump or the administration. Eisen told ABC News that the options are “actively” being considered and that “nothing is off the table.”
Implications
The dismissal highlights the tension between the executive branch’s public commentary and the independence of the judiciary. Supporters of President Trump argue that his remarks were merely expressing concern for public property, while critics view the comments as an attempt to intimidate a private citizen.
For Washington residents and the broader national audience, the case serves as a reminder of the importance of due process and the need for elected officials to respect the limits of their authority.
Original reporting: Brookhaven News – ABC7 New York — read the source article.
