Man who threw sandwich at US border agent not guilty of assault

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Officer’s Testimony and Credibility

  • Many commenters see the officer’s description (“exploded all over him,” felt through vest, mustard/onions everywhere) as wildly exaggerated, especially given evidence that the sandwich was found still wrapped on the ground.
  • This leads to widespread accusations of perjury and broader claims that if agents will lie over a sandwich, they’ll lie in more serious cases.
  • Some call for the officer to face consequences or be Brady-listed; others pessimistically assume nothing will happen.

Police Power, Double Standards, and the State

  • Strong criticism that minor actions against law enforcement in the US are aggressively charged, while police abuses often go unpunished.
  • One side argues an attack on a cop is an attack on the state, which must be harshly deterred.
  • Others counter that in a free society individual rights trump “collective will,” and police are supposed to serve the people, not be a protected class.

Assault, Battery, and Jury Nullification

  • Debate over legal definitions: some note US law can treat even “offensive touching” (e.g., spitting) as assault; by that standard, a sandwich throw qualifies.
  • Others insist intent to cause bodily injury wasn’t met here, aligning with the jury’s finding.
  • Several frame the verdict as classic jury nullification: recognizing a technical offense but refusing to convict over something so trivial.

Civil Disobedience, Protest, and Consequences

  • Some call throwing the sandwich a legitimate, almost nonviolent protest against immigration enforcement and authoritarian drift.
  • Others stress that, regardless of outcome, the defendant suffered arrest, job loss, legal bills, stress, and lasting notoriety—“the process is the punishment” and a deterrent in itself.
  • The case is used to reinforce advice: don’t talk to law enforcement; offhand “I was trying to draw them away” statements can be weaponized as interference charges.

Legal Process, Power, and Tone

  • Discussion of grand jury refusal to indict on a felony and the eventual misdemeanor acquittal; some see the prosecution as a political message to chill protest.
  • Several note the power imbalance: a heavily armed, vested officer vs. a thrown sandwich makes claims of “danger” feel absurd.
  • The thread is laced with sandwich puns and dark humor, underscoring how farcical many commenters find the entire prosecution.