Here’s what happened.
A Washington, D.C., judge is questioning whether federal prosecutors should ever be allowed to revive a high-profile criminal case that drew the personal attention of President Donald Trump.
D.C. Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman pressed prosecutors Friday over the dismissed case against former U.S. Olympian David Hearn, who had been accused of damaging the newly renovated Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.
The central question now is whether the case should remain dismissed in a way that allows prosecutors to potentially bring charges again—or whether the court should permanently close the door on another prosecution.
During the hearing, Edelman also focused on Trump’s public statements about Hearn and his criticism of U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro after her office abandoned the original prosecution.
The judge questioned how those comments should be viewed when the government itself currently lacks the evidence needed to prosecute Hearn.
Judge Presses Federal Prosecutors Over Trump Comments
The Friday hearing centered on an important legal distinction.
Prosecutors want Hearn’s case dismissed “without prejudice.” That would leave the government with the ability to seek charges again if new evidence emerged.
Hearn’s attorneys want a dismissal “with prejudice,” which would prevent prosecutors from reviving the same case.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Spence argued that the government should retain the ability to present new evidence to a grand jury if something significant is discovered later.
But Edelman pressed the prosecutor to explain what kind of new evidence could realistically turn the matter into a viable criminal case.
The judge also raised concerns about President Trump’s continued public criticism of the decision to drop the prosecution.
Those comments have become a major issue because Hearn’s attorneys argue that leaving the case open could expose their client to another prosecution despite the government’s acknowledgment that it currently lacks evidence to charge him.
Prosecutors Say There Is No Current Case Against Hearn
One of the most significant revelations from Friday’s hearing involved the government’s current position.
Prosecutors acknowledged that they do not presently have probable cause to charge Hearn. They also said there is no ongoing investigation and no current intention to bring charges against him again.
The government nevertheless wants to preserve its ability to act if new evidence eventually surfaces.
Hearn’s attorneys argue there is no legitimate reason to leave that possibility hanging over their client.
Attorney Steve Levin questioned why prosecutors should retain the power to seek another indictment after the government acknowledged major problems with its original case.
That disagreement now rests with Edelman.
Former Olympian Was Charged With Felony
Hearn, a three-time U.S. Olympic canoeist, was indicted on July 2 on one felony count of destruction of property.
Federal prosecutors originally alleged that Hearn damaged the recently installed blue sealant at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool on June 19.
The Justice Department announced at the time that a D.C. grand jury had returned the felony indictment.
Hearn pleaded not guilty.
As with anyone charged with a crime in the United States, Hearn was presumed innocent unless prosecutors could prove the allegation beyond a reasonable doubt.
But before the case could reach trial, the government’s position changed dramatically.
Evidence Raised Questions About Reflecting Pool Damage
Prosecutors eventually moved to dismiss the case after receiving information suggesting the Reflecting Pool’s coating had serious installation problems.
According to the government’s subsequent position, evidence indicated that a flawed and hurried installation was likely responsible for problems with the coating.
The renovation had been undertaken ahead of celebrations marking America’s 250th anniversary.
Prosecutors also blamed the Interior Department for failing to provide important documents before the original case was presented to the grand jury.
Information about the condition of the coating further complicated the prosecution.
A National Park Service engineer had reportedly raised concerns shortly after installation that the material was susceptible to peeling.
That provided a potential explanation for the damage that did not involve criminal vandalism.
Prosecutors also acknowledged during Friday’s hearing that there was no evidence of the level of economic damage needed to support the felony charge originally filed against Hearn.
Trump Criticized Decision to Drop Case
President Trump strongly objected after the prosecution fell apart.
Trump had taken a personal interest in the approximately $14 million renovation of the Reflecting Pool, including its distinctive blue coating.
After Pirro’s office moved away from the case, Trump publicly criticized the U.S. attorney, saying she had “folded like an umbrella.”
Trump subsequently posted about Hearn on Truth Social and maintained that the Reflecting Pool had been vandalized.
The president also drew attention to Hearn’s previous political donations to Democrats through ActBlue.
Those comments are now relevant to Hearn’s argument that the case should be permanently closed.
Judge Questions Possibility of Another Prosecution
During Friday’s hearing, Edelman confronted prosecutors about the president’s public statements and the government’s request to preserve its ability to pursue Hearn again.
The judge questioned how he could interpret Trump’s comments other than as encouragement from the nation’s chief executive for prosecutors to pursue a case that the government currently cannot bring.
Spence maintained that the government had acted based on the evidence available at each stage of the case.
According to prosecutors, the original indictment was pursued in good faith based on the information available at the time. Once additional evidence surfaced, the government moved to dismiss the charge.
The prosecution argues that this history does not justify permanently stripping a future grand jury of the ability to consider genuinely new evidence.
Hearn’s attorneys see the situation very differently.
Hearn’s Lawyers Want Case Closed Permanently
The defense argues that prosecutors have already acknowledged there is no viable case against Hearn.
They contend that keeping the possibility of another prosecution alive serves little legitimate purpose while forcing Hearn to live with the possibility that the government could come after him again.
The defense also points to the government’s acknowledgment that it currently has no probable cause to charge Hearn and is no longer investigating him.
For Hearn’s attorneys, those facts strengthen the argument for permanently ending the case.
Prosecutors counter that circumstances can change and that courts generally should not prevent the government from responding if legitimate new evidence unexpectedly emerges.
What Happens Next?
Edelman has already approved the dismissal of the original felony charge.
What remains undecided is whether that dismissal will be “with prejudice” or “without prejudice.”
That technical-sounding distinction could determine whether the Reflecting Pool case is truly over.
If Edelman grants Hearn’s request and dismisses the matter with prejudice, prosecutors would be barred from simply reviving the same prosecution.
If the dismissal remains without prejudice, the government would retain the ability to pursue the matter again if circumstances justified doing so.
Edelman did not announce his decision during Friday’s hearing but indicated that a ruling would come soon.
Until then, several important facts remain clear: The original felony charge against Hearn has been dismissed, prosecutors say they currently lack probable cause to charge him, there is no ongoing investigation, and Hearn has not been convicted of any crime connected to the Reflecting Pool.
The judge’s forthcoming decision will determine whether prosecutors retain another opportunity—or whether this unusual Washington legal battle finally comes to an end.
Leave a Reply