The bar for securing indictments in criminal cases is relatively low — so low that there’s a saying that prosecutors could indict a ham sandwich. But prosecutors in the nation’s capital have failed a shocking three times to get grand jurors’ approval for a felony case to move forward in an alleged assault against a federal agent.
As the Trump administration seeks a show of force in Democratic-led cities (and not in Republican-led cities with higher crime rates), the rare serial rebuke is a reminder of the limits of government power on matters of crime and punishment.
The rejection came in the case of Sidney Reid, who prosecutors in Washington alleged last month had “forcefully pushed” an FBI agent’s hand against a cement wall and “caused lacerations” on the agent’s hand during an immigration enforcement protest.
The initial complaint filed against her, which didn’t require grand jury approval, charged the same crime that D.C. prosecutors have alleged against the famous sandwich thrower, Sean Charles Dunn, which raises the prospect that his case might not make it past the grand jury stage, either.
Last week, a federal magistrate judge held a preliminary hearing and found probable cause that Reid violated the assault law, 18 U.S.C. Section 111(a)(1). The judge gave the government until Monday afternoon to secure an indictment.
Monday afternoon came and the government filed not an indictment but a notice to the court. It said not only that “an Indictment has not been returned in this case” but, incredibly, that “a third grand jury returned a no true bill.” A true bill is when the grand jury votes to indict.
This is not normal.
Indeed, it’s unusual for a grand jury not to indict any case, though it happens. Twice is rarer still. Three times is a sign that things are fully off the rails.








