Olympian David Hearn’s lawyers are calling on internal watchdogs at the Ministry of Justice and the Home Office to investigate possible misconduct.

Lawyers for Olympic canoeist David Hearn on Tuesday asked internal watchdogs at the Justice and Interior ministries to investigate the circumstances surrounding his arrest, indictment and dismissal of the case, according to a letter seen by CBS News.

Hearn’s case attracted national attention after he was falsely accused for vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool and subsequently indicted for the crime of destruction of government property.

Jeanine Pirro, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, later moved dismiss the case after she said new information emerged showing the damage was caused by a contractor’s “sloppy installation,” not vandalism.

“As a result of the actions of various DOJ and DOI employees, Mr. Hearn was deprived of his liberty, indicted for a crime he did not commit, threatened with a prison sentence of up to 10 years, and suffered defamation of his name and reputation at the hands of high-ranking government officials,” Hearn’s attorneys wrote in the letter to DOJ Inspector General Don Berthiaume and DOI Inspector General Caryl Brzymialkiewicz.

Those officials, they pointed out, included Pirro, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and President Trump.

“The DOJ OIG and DOI OIG must conduct detailed and comprehensive investigations to determine what happened within their agencies that led to the shocking and indefensible treatment of Mr. Hearn,” they wrote. “Anything short of a full and fair review would be a betrayal of your mission and would perpetuate the outrageous mistreatment of Mr. Hearn.”

Hearn was initially held in jail for five hours on June 19, after stopping near the Reflecting Pool during a bike ride. He put his hand in the water and touched a piece of the covering that had already come loose before a member of the National Park Police asked him to remove his hand from the water.

His lawyers said that during his five-hour detention, he was never informed of his Miranda rights or allowed to make a phone call, and that he only learned he was initially facing misdemeanor charges after finding two citations stuffed in a brown paper bag with his other belongings shortly after his release.

A Washington Superior Court grand jury then indicted him on the count on July 2.

Despite a request from Hearn’s lawyers to preserve physical evidence in the case, his attorneys said the government fenced off the area around the reflecting pool in question and undertook repairs to the section of the liner that was at the heart of the indictment.

In late July, Pirro decided to dismiss the case altogether, alleging that the Interior Department had delayed providing prosecutors with documents that undermined the evidentiary basis of the case.

“The record reflects an indictment obtained through unusual haste and a prosecution shaped from the outset by political pressure and based on an inadequate investigation,” Hearn’s lawyers wrote in the letter to the inspectors general.

Pirro was later seen carrying a large box to the White House that sources later confirmed to CBS News contained evidence of the case she presented to Mr Trump, after he criticized her for dismissing the case against Hearn.

The White House has since held meetings with prosecutors to determine whether further charges could be filed. But a Superior Court judge ruled out that possibility on October 1, after ruling that the case should be dismissed with prejudice – which means he cannot be brought back.

“If the Court were to dismiss this case in a manner that would allow the Government to revive prosecutions in the future, the Court would expose it to the risk that, due to pressure from the President of the United States apparently motivated at least in part by Mr. Hearn’s political views, he would again be charged with a crime that prosecutors have determined he did not commit,” the judge wrote in the opinion dismissing the case.

The letter alleges that prosecutors had exculpatory evidence before seeking an indictment against Hearn. It also alleges that Pirro inappropriately approached one of the defense’s expert witnesses who was inspecting the reflecting pool and bombarded the expert with questions.

“Defense counsel was not informed that the meeting would take place and was not present during the meeting, and the government never produced a report, note, or record of the exchange,” Hearn’s attorneys wrote.

They continued: “A U.S. Attorney who personally questions a represented defendant’s testifying expert, in the field, surrounded by his own staff and without notifying the attorney, is not gathering evidence – he is testing how the defense intends to prove its case.”

They also accused Pirro of violating rules of professional conduct for attorneys when she spoke publicly about the case at a news conference, and questioned whether the sole grand jury witness in the case was recalled in order to “fabricate” a damage estimate to help support the felony charge.

Hearn’s lawyers also complained that Pirro’s statements announcing the indictment “went far beyond the mere fact of the accusation.”

“(S)he previewed the expected testimony, vouched for the credibility of the government’s witnesses, spoke directly to Mr. Hearn’s guilt, and characterized the alleged conduct as ‘lawless’ and ‘criminal behavior’ – conduct involving the trial publicity and prosecutorial conduct constraints of the D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct,” Hearn’s attorneys wrote.