Re:Man who threw sandwich at US border agent not guilty of a...
by ghuffed on Thursday November 06, 2025 @06:42PM
(#45841941)
Surely they could (will?) be charged with something though, right? I mean if I walk down the street now and launch a sandwich at a random stranger, it's some form of assault. "Attempt to cause bodily injury" is a bit much, but it's something.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Man who threw sandwich at US border agent not guilty of a...
by cogman10 on Thursday November 06, 2025 @06:56PM
(#45842068)
Double Jeopardy [1] applies. If they had a better charge they should have brought it.
You can't be tried multiple times for the same incident.
Re:Man who threw sandwich at US border agent not guilty of a...
by mmooss on Thursday November 06, 2025 @06:59PM
(#45842094)
In the US you can't be tried multiple times on the same charges for the same incident by the same government body.
You can be tried by both the federal and the state governments, separately, on the same charges (that is, on equivalent federal and state charges).
I think you can be tried for the same incident, by the same government body, on different charges.
Re:Man who threw sandwich at US border agent not guilty of a...
by cogman10 on Thursday November 06, 2025 @07:13PM
(#45842202)
> I think you can be tried for the same incident, by the same government body, on different charges.
Yeah, reading through the wiki on it, it appears you are correct. That usually does not happen just because it's costly.
Re:Man who threw sandwich at US border agent not guilty of a...
by burnt-resistor on Friday November 07, 2025 @03:02AM
(#45844433)
Interestingly, when a case is dismissed without prejudice, for mistrial, or appeal, it can be retried again and again. Flowers endured six trials with 2 mistrials and 4 capital convictions and 4 appeals including an overturn by SCOTUS. He can still be prosecuted for the 7th time.
Re:Man who threw sandwich at US border agent not guilty of a...
by BobaFloutist on Friday November 07, 2025 @02:58PM
(#45850363)
To be fair, there are absolutely situations where the court should be able to say "This particular trial was a shitshow and we're throwing it out, but there should still be a trial." Say, if the defendant has a malicious or incompetent defense attorney, it's fair that both they don't have to suffer the harm of that being their final chance to defend themselves but also the government doesn't have to just fully acquit them forever because their counsel sucked. Either alternative would lead to some pretty absurd incentives.
Re:Man who threw sandwich at US border agent not guilty of a...
by Gigachad on Thursday November 06, 2025 @07:32PM
(#45842321)
In all reality if you just threw a sandwich at a stranger you'd likely get away with it. Society only functions because people don't want to throw sandwiches for no reason.
Seemingly most things that are technically illegal are rarely enforced because it's just too much work and not severe enough to be worth it.
Re:Man who threw sandwich at US border agent not guilty of a...
by nobody9999 on Friday November 07, 2025 @01:33PM
(#45849407)
>Surely they could (will?) be charged with something though, right? I mean if I walk down the street now and launch a sandwich at a random stranger, it's some form of assault. "Attempt to cause bodily injury" is a bit much, but it's something.
Littering?
Another, similar case[0] was also brought, in Massachusetts some time ago. And there were, at least temporarily, some negative impacts on the defendant[1].