It could easily take 7 hours to determine, empirically and with good statistics, if a sandwich could cause bodily injury.

I somehow doubt the jury deliberation involved empirical testing of a sandwiches capacity to cause bodily injury, though it's fun to imagine.

I’d guess there were some “law and order” types on the jury and it took a while to convince them to acquit.

So now anyone can throw sandwiches at ICE agents w/o fear of retribution?

I think any time charges are over something so entirely lacking in even plausible potential (let alone actual) harm that each individual juror has suffered far, far more harm by being called to serve on the case, yeah, there's a good chance the prosecutor's going to be told by those same jurors to go fuck themselves.

This never should have been anything more than something in roughly the same legal realm as a parking ticket, for that if no other reason. Instead, probably a thousand-plus person hours and god knows how much money were wasted to use the process itself as punishment... over a thrown sandwich.

You can if you don’t intend to hurt them by doing so, and can convince a jury of that.

They apparently ate lunch in the middle. You’ll never guess what they had.

They needed to do ballistics tests in deliberation.

There was a lot of bread remaining but not many dangerous cold cuts, hazardous mayo, or lethal onions.

Can the jury do empirical experiments?

Clearly, either the jury had some members that were not initially ready to make a decision without review of the evidence in the case, or at least the first poll of the jurors was split, probably either the latter or both.

That it was a simple question doesn’t mean that the jury was initially unanimous on the answer,

Interesting points.

> This is probably fine with the prosecution

It's an embarrassment, so not at all fine. I doubt anyone is deterred. I wonder if we'll see copycat 'assaults' - I'm surprised we haven't.

The guy got arrested, lost his job and had to hire a lawyer. Almost got charged with a felony assault, but the jury decided that he shouldn't be charged. Instead, later charged with a misdemeanor. I'd be super stressed about all of that, plus the trial and then having to wait 7 hours to find out I'm not guilty, but also incredibly happy after. However, all that and his name is forever associated with this incident, so despite no criminal history he might find future employment more challenging. He has probably been through quite a bit despite not being found guilty of a crime. I think that any person who is somehow inspired by doing what he did because he got away with it was always willing to do it anyway. Surely any reasonable person would realize how much he already had to go through which is enough of a deterrent. It was some degree of luck as well, even with similar or same circumstances it might up that another individual is charged and found guilty.

He's fairly lucky he doesn't have a criminal record, but it didn't come without consequences. I think the fact that the sandwich was still wrapped on the ground, hit the officer's shoulder, that the other police at the time were visibly amused during the incident, and clearly joking about it for several days after as well with the officer who had it happen to him, showed that the incident wasn't serious enough to ruin anyone's life over. A formal criminal conviction in the US would've made it hard for him to get employment for some time, if not the rest of his life.

> The guy got arrested, lost his job and had to hire a lawyer. Almost got charged with a felony assault, but the jury decided that he shouldn't be charged. Instead, later charged with a misdemeanor. I'd be super stressed about all of that, plus the trial and then having to wait 7 hours to find out I'm not guilty, but also incredibly happy after. However, all that and his name is forever associated with this incident, so despite no criminal history he might find future employment more challenging.

While it probably won't be with DoJ again (at least under this Administration), I don't think he's going to have much problem finding a job. Being associated with "this incident" I don't think is the kind of universal black mark you seem to think it is.

You are buried in the details. The guy is a hero who opposed a fascist takeover of the US government. He's not going to have any difficulty finding employment.

I will add I don’t think it’s morally fine, it’s just the system we have. They’re fine with it; if you get involved at all it can ruin your life. I can promise you this guy regrets the throw with every ounce of his soul, even if he doesn’t admit it publicly

> I can promise you this guy regrets the throw with every ounce of his soul, even if he doesn’t admit it publicly

It's possible he regrets it, but I wouldn't be sure at all. It could be the proudest moment of his life. He could have PTSD. There are many possibilities.

I expect there will be some interviews soon ...