• phaedrus@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    26 minutes ago

    I once lost a tooth to a sandwich while chewing it, and the sandwich was pretty much stationary. I’m surprised this cop still has a face, tbh.

  • Tujio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Does it matter? In my city the cops fired tear gas canisters at protesters, calling it “less- than lethal force” but when protesters picked them up and threw them back, they got charged with Assault With a Deadly Weapon.

  • LOGIC💣@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    6 hours ago

    The question isn’t whether a flung sandwich can cause bodily harm. It’s whether that flung sandwich did cause bodily harm. They do make that clear in the article. The title simply doesn’t reflect that.

    Also, like they talked about in the article, the evidence didn’t match the officer’s testimony. He said that the sandwich exploded all over him and got mustard everywhere. But pictures of the sandwich after it landed showed the wrapper still fully covering the sandwich.

    The guy who threw the sandwich probably committed some sort of minor crime, but it wasn’t the one he was charged with, and it’s hard to believe the prosecution when their star witness seems to be lying his ass off.

    • pc486@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      31 minutes ago

      Sean Dunn was charged with a misdemeanor, which doesn’t require injury to the agent. This is the most minor crime possible of federal assault, and the jury acquitted him.

      Dunn committed no crime.

    • StinkyFingerItchyBum@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I almost saw my opening for the frozen sandwich rail gun. One day, I will change the face of the civil defense industry, but today is not that day.