Reflecting Pool vandalism charges against Olympic canoeist David Hearn definitively dismissed

A Washington, D.C., judge on Thursday permanently dismissed the criminal indictment against U.S. Olympic canoeist David Hearn, ending a months-long saga surrounding allegations of vandalism at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool after the government admitted to “sloppy” construction work during recent renovations.

In August, federal prosecutors asked Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman to dismiss the criminal indictment against Hearn, who had been charge with criminal destruction of government property. He was accused of causing more than $1,000 in damage to sealant installed last summer at the bottom of the Reflecting Pool.

Hearn has pleaded not guilty to the charges, saying he stopped by the pool in July while on a 64-mile bike ride through the nation’s capital. He said he was arrested after diving into the pool and detained for five hours.

The project of renovate the pool was defended by President Trump, who in April spear an effort to address the pool’s “terrible” condition, part of a series of spring cleaning projects in Washington, D.C., as the nation’s 250th anniversary approaches. He had the pool’s stone floor coated with a sealer he called the “newest and greatest filament” and a variation of “industrial grade” pool coating. He told reporters that he personally chose the color of the sealant: “American Flag Blue.”

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington admitted in a court filing that Hearn did not in fact damage the pool, although U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro claimed at a July news conference that that was the case. Prosecutors said new information had emerged revealing the rips and tears in the pool liner were caused by a contractor’s “sloppy installation.”

Edelman dismissed the case shortly after the government’s motion, but did not rule whether the case would be dismissed with prejudice, meaning the case could not be brought again, or without prejudice, meaning the charges could be revived. Hearn’s lawyers said the charges should be dismissed without prejudice, while Pirro’s office argued for dismissal without prejudice.

Hearn’s case, Edelman wrote, “presents a markedly different scenario” from the typical dismissal of criminal cases in federal court because “within a month, the government acknowledged that its prosecution was without merit.”

“He reached this conclusion not because he falsely identified Mr. Hearn as the perpetrator of the alleged act, but because no crime was committed,” Edelman wrote, adding that the government’s interest in retaining the ability to re-indict Hearn would result in “unfounded and politically motivated prosecutions.”

After Pirro’s office decided to drop the case, Mr. Trump publicly chastised his hand-picked Washington prosecutor, saying she “choked” and “made a mistake” with the decision.

“I was disappointed in Jeanine Pirro,” Mr. Trump told reporters in August. The president has often insisted that the peeling was caused by vandals and not problems with the more than $10 million project. “Who would do such a thing?” the president wrote in a Truth on social media June 20, that too mentioned several arrests. Many other defendants accused of vandalizing the Reflecting Pool were also given the right the charges against them were dropped.

Pirro then attempted to prove to Mr. Trump that the damage to the reflecting pool was caused by shoddy construction work, bringing to the White House a box full of evidence demonstrating that sources said contained all the evidence collected from the Home Office exonerating Hearn and several others of criminal vandalism.

The New York Times reported in September that the contractor, Atlantic Industrial Coatings, admitted in government documents that workers did not use enough primer and that the pool coating it applied contained two incompatible chemicals.

Days after Pirro’s office decided to dismiss the case, CBS News reported that White House officials had asked the Justice Department to weigh if it would be possible to bring a new criminal case against Hearn.

In a statement, Norm Eisen, Hearn’s attorney, said Edelman’s decision is “a victory for the rule of law and for an innocent American seeking justice.”

“This case should never have been brought in the first place,” Eisen said, adding that the lawsuits were a “miscarriage of justice” and an “contempt that should shock all Americans.”

A spokesperson for Pirro’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Edelman’s decision.