Jeanine Pirro, the Trump administration’s top federal prosecutor in D.C., has dismissed charges against a former Olympic athlete whom the admin had accused of vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.
Former Olympic canoeist David Hearn was arrested and accused of damaging the pool during a June 19 visit to D.C.
Watch his arrest below:
Exclusive! RAW VIDEO. Man arrested for vandalizing Lincoln Reflecting Pool. He grabbed the hose that female National Park Service workers were using to clear the algae. Police and National Guard responded. Watch pic.twitter.com/oMIXFqKwEs
— emily miller (@emilymiller) June 19, 2026
Speaking with The Washington Post after his arrest for “destruction of government property,” he alleged that he’d spotted a piece of the “American flag blue” liner that was detached from the bottom of the pool and reached in merely to see what it felt like.
“I reached in there, and I was able to grab the end of that flapping piece, the already peeling piece,” he said. “It was still attached to the bottom. I didn’t remove anything.”
He was subsequently accused of grabbing a hose that female National Park Service workers had been using to clear the algae. He denied ever touching the hose, though he did admit his bike tire may have.
“I didn’t vandalize anything,” he told the Post. “I didn’t destroy or break or peel anything. By the time I realized what was going on, I was being put in handcuffs.”
In addition to being placed in handcuffs, he was also blamed by President Donald Trump for allegedly vandalizing the pool:
Trump: “The United States Park Police have arrested multiple individuals for vandalizing our Nations magnificent Reflecting Poll. Who would do such a thing? These are very serious crimes having to do with the destruction of National Monuments. Years in jail! Work will begin… pic.twitter.com/0HekGSccxY
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 20, 2026
Hearn eventually pleaded not guilty to a single count of destruction of property earlier this month and was scheduled to go to trial in late September.
Weeks later, Pirro’s team has since concluded that Hearn did not vandalize the pool. In documents filed Friday, her team said they’d recently received new information undermining their case against the former Olympic star.
“It was not until after these documents were produced that (prosecutors) first became aware of information showing that the damage was the result of a botched installation and not vandalism as initially represented,” they wrote.
Hearn’s legal team is now demanding an apology.
“The Government’s case against Davey Hearn should never have been brought,” defense attorney Steve Levin told NBC News. “Its dismissal today does not erase the abuse of government power in arresting and charging a patriotic American. The government’s approach was ready, shoot, aim. The federal government owes Mr. Hearn an apology.”
The dismissal comes just days after Hearn’s team submitted a court filing challenging Pirro’s case against their client.
In the filing, they demanded proof on “whether the grand jury received and applied legally sufficient evidence and was properly instructed on an essential element of malicious destruction of property—namely, the amount of loss caused by the defendant’s alleged conduct.”
“In order to be charged with felony malicious destruction of property, a defendant must have caused damage in the amount of $1,000 or more,” they alleged in the filing. “And to be charged a misdemeanor, a defendant must have caused damage amounting to some value.”
This mattered, they explained, because the evidence showed that the pool had already been damaged prior to Hearn dipping his hand into it.
“Here, based on the discovery provided to date, the Government’s sole grand-jury witness on damages testified that the property was already damaged before Mr. Hearn allegedly touched it; that the same repairs would have been required regardless of Mr. Hearn’s conduct; and that he could not quantify any loss attributable to that conduct,” the team of lawyers explained.
“That testimony raises a substantial question whether the grand jury had legally sufficient evidence of the loss element necessary to support the indictment and whether the grand jury was properly instructed on that element,” their explanation continued.
Writers and editors can be contacted at [email protected] with feedback, tips, or corrections.
V. Saxena is a staff writer with a decade of experience as a professional writer, and a lifetime of experience as an avid news junkie. He holds a degree in computer technology from Purdue University. Saxena also contributes to BizPac Review.
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.