From Diddy to the Deli, 2025 in Review

It's that time of the year again, dear listener: our season five finale, where three cases, three courtrooms and one very strange year collide. 

We kick things off with the trial that dominated headlines with its circus-like atmosphere: The United States of America v. Sean "Diddy" Combs. The rapper and producer was acquitted in Manhattan of racketeering conspiracy and two counts of sex trafficking by a jury, but convicted of transporting individuals for prostitution. The mixed verdict spared Combs a life sentence while raising questions about how far prosecutors can stretch RICO law as fans proclaimed, "Freako is not a RICO."

Next, with help from our France correspondent, Lily Radziemski, we head overseas to a trial fueled by internet rumor. French First Lady Brigitte Macron has gone on the offensive as conspiracy theorists spread false claims about her biological sex, testing the limits of free speech and whether courts can rein in online harassment.

And finally, back in Washington, D.C., reporter Ryan Knappenberger walks us through the sandwich heard 'round the District: Sean Dunn, a former Justice Department lawyer, was acquitted of assault after throwing a sandwich at federal agents during an immigration crackdown. The viral incident turned Dunn into a case study in protest, power and prosecutorial restraint.

Hard Hats & Justice
Hard Hats & Justice is the podcast dedicated to New York's construction workers and...

Listen on: Apple Podcasts   Spotify

This episode was produced by Kirk McDaniel. Intro music by The Dead Pens.

Editorial staff is Ryan Abbott, Sean Duffy and Jamie Ross.

Chapters

• 13:49 [Ad] Hard Hats & Justice
• 14:25 (Cont.) From Diddy to the Deli, 2025 in Review

Transcript

(Intro music) 

Amanda Pampuro: This year marked the 100-year anniversary of the Scopes monkey trial in Dayton, Tennessee. A trial staged to attract controversy that some see as a lesson in hubris, and others as a precursor to the Age of Outrage. In the centuries since Scopes' guilty verdict, we've mostly forgotten about the Wassily Chair, the Tri-State Tornado and whoever Jack Benny was. What will we remember from these roaring 20s? Welcome to Sidebar, a podcast by Courthouse News, and thank you for tuning in to our annual year-end special. We have the full Sidebar crew on mic to talk about some of the strangest cases we've covered this year, ones that just might go down in history. 

Josh Russell: I'm Josh Russell in New York City.  

Hillel Aron: I'm Hillel Aaron. I'm reporting out of Los Angeles.  

Kirk McDaniel: Hey, this is Kirk McDaniel here in Austin, Texas. 

Kelsey Reichmann: Supreme Court reporter Kelsey Reichmann, still in D.C. 

AP: And I'm Amanda Pampuro in Denver. On our docket, we've got a fallen hip-hop king, a royal gender-bender conspiracy, and the last supper ... if you count sandwiches as supper, which I do. We'll start with what was arguably the trial of the year. People vs. Sean Combs, aka Diddy, aka P. Diddy, also known as Puff Daddy. Twenty years ago, VH1 “Behind the Music” called him hip-hop's answer to “The Great Gatsby,” which also recently hit its 100-year anniversary. This year, that so-called champagne-sipping, streetwise player faced charges of racketeering, sex trafficking and prostitution. Josh, you were at the federal courthouse in Lower Manhattan. What was the trial like? 

JR: It was pretty circusy. I've covered some large trials in New York in the last couple of years, and this one had a particular strain of circus energy, just due to his, Diddy's, popularity in the culture, sort of name recognition, and a lot of entertainment-related influencers, streamer types of all levels showed up, you know, to try to tap into the content mine of the Diddy trial. So, there were fights to secure a seat for the ostensibly public section of people that would have their notebooks and then rush outside when there was a break and shoot their vertical video, you know, emotionally and exaggeratingly recalling what had just happened in court. 

AP: Were you able to get a seat? 

JR: As an in-house reporter at the Manhattan federal trial, we had a reserved row and then we had a whole press room with a direct feed. So, I stuck mostly to the feed. It actually had a better view, I think, it's sort of from the judge's perspective into the courtroom gallery. So, you would see Diddy from the front in a way that you wouldn't get in the courtroom. I guess he couldn't dye his hair in jail, so, we watched his gray, his salt and pepper come out throughout the course of the trial.  

HA: I mean, who among us?  

JR: Yeah, he berated one of the courtroom sketch artists for making him look too much like a chipmunk or a squirrel. Yeah, he was like, “Hey, why are you making me look like a squirrel or some kind of, you know, some cute rodent?” 

KR: Was he serious? 

JR: I think it was playful, but I'm sure he was a longtime image-focused guy.  

HA: He does look a little like a chipmunk. 

AP: Now, remind me, was he charged with the Mann Act violation? 

JR: Yeah, he essentially was charged with sex trafficking or transporting someone across state lines for the purposes of prostitution. 

HA: Which they also got Chuck Berry for. 

JR: But Diddy was also hit with the more sprawling charge of racketeering, or RICO. 

AP: And why RICO? 

JR: You know, RICO, you typically think of a mafia case, sort of crime family. In the Diddy trial, the feds tried to make Diddy's network of close insiders and company employees who did the small tasks to facilitate the freak-offs, tried to make it out to be a criminal syndicate, basically. The government alleged, took a whole litany of small crimes, you know, drug possession and drug sales and illegal gun possession and arson. They attached all these small predicates to the RICO allegations. 

HA: We should say that the charges here all stem from what have famously come to be called freak-offs. 

AP: What are freak-offs? 

JR: Essentially drug-fueled, sort of ecstasy-fortified sex marathons, often in hotel rooms, sometimes in private residences. But, you know, up to dayslong, a lost weekend of sex and drugs. And I think the public wanted to hear these were like celebrity-filled orgies, a la some kind of “Eyes Wide Shut” scenario. But what it turned out to be, at least from trial, were these very private, rehearsed episodes with Diddy and one or two girlfriends. They would hire male escorts who performed this choreographed sequence that Diddy allegedly carefully directed involving like lots of baby oil and scented candles and mood lighting and music. So, as the women described, Diddy would watch, I think initially from like a dark corner and then later like on the sort of hotel room suite couch, would watch this freak-off scenario play out, and then join in, and then the male performer would finish what he was there for, and then Diddy would step in, and they might even hire in another male escort to follow, and this would repeat itself for a whole weekend, oftentimes multiple times a week, according to some of the women. 

AP: So, these were Diddy and a few select people. What do you remember most about the trial? 

JR: One of the key witnesses was Cassie Ventura, Diddy's ex-girlfriend. She was really the one who got the whole case started. She sued Diddy in a civil complaint in 2023, and it settled like a day later. We later found out it was for $20 million. But after she settled, CNN obtained a video showing Diddy violently beating Cassie in the hallway of a hotel in LA. And that's when everything gets started again. And it's sort of like a legal feeding frenzy. Diddy's hit with a slew of civil lawsuits accusing him of all sorts of sexual misconduct and violent abuse. And that's when details of these freak-offs start coming to light. Cassie's testimony was super moving and heart-wrenching, telling her stories about physical abuse and drug addiction. The prosecution played that Intercontinental Hotel security footage of the beating over and over again while she testified. Cassie also happened to be super pregnant, like eight months pregnant at the time, while she was on the stand. 

AP: And she gave birth to a healthy son in May. The abuse she endured, though, that was related to the charges? 

JR: I think part of the sex trafficking involves force, fraud and coercion. So, whatever the way, the means that these women were kept in this freak-off event over and over again included, like, Diddy admitted, I think sort of from the outset, even from his apology video about the Cassie video, that he did commit domestic violence, that he did physically abuse her, sort of citing a temper and jealousy and his own drug problem at the time. And then he claimed that he wasn't charged with domestic violence, so he's not admitting to what he's being charged with. But prosecutors attempted to fit that in under the force, fraud and coercion part of it. 

HA: And one other famous person testified as well, right? 

JR: The rapper Kid Cudi showed up one day to testify. He said Diddy's goons tried to blow up his Porsche in the Hollywood Hills. 

AP: What? Why? 

JR: Because Kid Cudi had started dating Cassie, and Diddy became overcome with jealousy. This was all according to Cudi's trial testimony. And so, Diddy got some guys to show up to Cudi's house, where they broke in and rifled through his Christmas gifts that had been wrapped. apparently spooked Cudi's dog in the process. And then they attempted to blow up Cudi's convertible in the driveway with a makeshift Molotov cocktail, which didn't really work, completely. Just kind of singed the luxury car.  

KM: That's a pretty big celebrity sighting.  

JR: And he wasn't the only one. Weeks later in the trial, Kanye West, who doesn’t really have anything to do with the trial, showed up. And ostensibly I think he was there in support of Diddy. He didn’t really speak when he showed up. He showed up late to court, after the trial day had started, all white suit, sort of like Oakley's with the croaky strap behind him, glasses on in the courthouse. He kind of struts through, through security. By that point, the courtroom, like I said, every seat is taken in the courtroom. So, they're not making an exception for Kanye. I think they say, “Okay, go to the overflow room with the public.” I think that would have just caused hysteria. And imagine these streamers, extremely online people, are without their cell phones in the overflow room. So, imagine the reaction of the extremely online when Kanye shows up. So, they direct Kanye to his own entire overflow room, a separate empty courtroom just for him. And I think that doesn't click for him, so he's like, “I'm out.”  

KM: That's a fun cameo. 

AP: It sounds like the making of a great song. Did some of Diddy's former assistants also testify? 

JR: There was a mix of admiration and fear they described about him. One assistant claimed that she was kidnapped, was her RICO predicate supposedly, and taken to like an abandoned office building and subjected to a lie detector test for hours when Diddy thought she stole jewels from him or something. And stuff like that is where it felt a little more kind of mobby, little more RICO-y, but the jury didn't bite on it. 

AP: They didn't. What did the jury decide? 

JR: After two months of trial, the jury acquitted Diddy on the top three most significant charges. They didn't convict him on RICO or sex trafficking, and he was only convicted on the bottom pair of prostitution transportation charges. 

AP: Those are the Mann Act charges. Why was he acquitted on the other ones? 

JR: I think Diddy's attorneys made the case that this was just like a swinger's lifestyle, quote unquote, according to them, that it was despite the evidence of coercion or control that these women consensually participated in these non-monogamous swingers threesome orgy scenarios of their own volition. They also made the point that Cassie made tens of millions of dollars settling her lawsuit and that the other woman, the other girlfriend was compensated in other ways. And I suspect the jury bit on that, I think, because these women were compensated for participating, I think they didn't think it was criminal and didn't convict him on those charges. 

AP: And the RICO, was that just overreach? 

JR: Diddy's supporters, or at least his PR team, distributed T-shirts during the trial that said, “A Freako is not a RICO.” I think his defense made that case.  

HA: Tell me you got one of those shirts, Josh.  

JR: I didn't. I felt like it would be a violation of my ethics. I have friends who are vintage sellers who were like, I could have made money flipping “Freako is not a RICO” shirts. In the midst of the trial, I felt like this is not a good thing to celebrate. 

AP: Yeah, that's fair. So, this was a pretty big win for Diddy, right? 

JR: The day the verdict came in, his team saw it as an enormous success. I think they thought they beat the top charges, vindicated against the most severe allegations, and they thought he would walk free. I think they thought he could get out of jail and wait out sentencing at home. And so, there were a couple hours that day between the verdict and sort of the judge's decision to keep him remanded, where Diddy's team thought he had this won. 

AP: Why was that decision made? 

JR: Again, it was just the history of violence that was shown in the Cassie hotel video and Diddy's defense even sort of conceded to repeatedly. The judge just said, like, he couldn't overlook that and release him. And there was all these people who testified against him were worried about intimidation or violence. Or just, you know, Diddy is a powerful business mogul. You know, these various... a stylist testified against him or multiple assistants. So, I think there was some argument that those witnesses who testified against him could have faced some kind of intimidation. 

AP: The judge sentenced Diddy to 50 months and ordered him to pay a $500,000 fine. With good behavior, he’ll likely be out in a couple years. 

HA: He has an appeal pending, but in the meantime, he's also been hit with a great many lawsuits. 

JR: A lot of these are filed by the same attorneys, so they kind of get kind of boilerplate. Those all seem to rely on young women at some kind of event, find themselves dosed with a date rape drug, and then assaulted by one or more men in, you know, a hotel chamber or something. They all sort of follow that pattern ostensibly. But yeah, like I said, he's beaten a bunch on motion to dismiss. 

KM: While P. Diddy's trial came to a close here in the U.S., in France, a case brought by the nation's first lady, Brigitte Macron, went to trial and is expected to get a ruling early next year. The story involves a rumor about Macron being a transgender woman. 

AP: This was popularized for us by right-wing commentator Candace Owens, right? 

HA: Who is Candace Owens?  

KM: Candace Owens is a prominent social media figure on the political right here in the U.S., is often commenting on things going on with the current administration and has gotten a little bit more into conspiracy-related content in these recent years. She did this entire podcast series trying to give credence to this conspiracy theory. 

AP: I actually listened to a couple episodes of the series this week. I was trying to understand why she was claiming Brigitte is a man, but a lot of the series was really about how the French government is trying to stop her from running the series. She almost seemed to be goading the Macrons into suing her. 

Candace Owens: They're lying. They are, in fact, lying to the public about Brigitte Macron's past identity. And a court case would have given us the opportunity to prove it via subpoena power. America is not France. And the state of Tennessee sure as hell isn't Paris. So, let me tell you why this story matters worldwide, OK? 

KM: Well, she certainly got her wish, and I caught up with Courthouse News' France correspondent, Lily Radziemski, to learn more about these rumors and how Macron's legal endeavors against online conspiracy theorists at home and abroad have panned out. 

Lily Radziemski: Basically, this is all about this conspiracy theory that Brigitte Macron, who's the first lady of France, is actually a man and is concealing her true gender. So, this was a rumor that was started by two women who made a YouTube video in 2021, and that became very popular. So, that was kind of the big catalyst for what's happening now. 

KM: Last year, Macron sued the two women and eight others for cyber harassment, a criminal offense that, if found guilty, could land them in prison for up to two years. 

AP: Who are these people named in the suit? 

KM: Well, the two women who made the video are seen as the people who really got this rumor spreading first, so it's obvious why they would be targeted. And Lily told me that Macron has sued these two women in the past. But other than one being an online influencer, many of these other people were just regular middle-aged social media users. 

LR: There was another man that is a quite prominent influencer. So, his presence was also, you know, it made sense. But a lot of the people were really just these normal people that barely had any Twitter followings. I think there was a teacher, there was someone that owned a gallery, there was an IT specialist. This was kind of just the gist of it. And really, I think the interesting thing is that, I mean, some of these people had maybe like a dozen or two dozen followers on Twitter. So, it's really not any kind of, you know, influence in the grand scheme of Twitter, or X, I guess this is now called. They were doing just a lot of retweets that barely got any attention. And they were very, very confused about why they were there and how they were found. And, you know, kind of wondering if they were being taken to kind of be, you know, if they were trying to make an example out of them. 

KM: During the two-day trial back in October, the court heard testimony about how the spreading of this rumor had caused the first lady to suffer. 

LR: So, she hasn't herself actually come to the trial, but her daughter, Tiphaine, came to the trial and basically in her testimony was saying that Brigitte Macron suffers from a lot of insecurity. She is very careful about the clothes that she wears because she's worried that she's going to be criticized. Her grandchildren are being questioned in school about her gender identity. So, these are all kind of pointing to the suffering that she has dealt with as a result of these tweets and this rumor. 

AP: What did the defense look like? 

KM: For many of them, especially the seven men who re-shared this rumor, they argue that they did nothing wrong. 

LR: A lot of the men were saying, you know, ‘Why can't I just tweet what I think from my bed, you know, at night when I can't sleep? And this is ... I didn't think it would reach her.’ She doesn't have social media. So, they weren't tweeting at her. And they were really invoking this idea that they think that this should be protected under free speech. In France, I think there are stricter laws than the U.S. surrounding free speech in terms of spreading false information about people even if they are public figures. 

KM: Lily told me that for one man, of his 36,000 posts he's ever made to X, only nine were associated with this conspiracy theory, so he was quite surprised that those few posts could land him in court. Part of this case also had to do with posts made by some of the defendants accusing Brigitte Macron of being a pedophile, pointing to the fact that the French president met his wife in high school while he was a student and she was a teacher. The Macrons have routinely addressed this, saying Brigitte Macron never acted inappropriately while Emmanuel was underage. 

AP: How did all this shake up in court? 

KM: It didn't sound like the judge really wanted to let it slide. 

LR: So, one of the men, he retweeted something about her being a pedophile, and then response to the judge he read out the definition of pedophilia and he was like, ‘This is by definition pedophilia or it would be if the relationship did start at the time,’ and her response, she was very not aggressive but she was kind of asking, ‘Oh, so you think that you're a journalist now and an investigator and you know that the first lady is a pedophile,’ and he was like, ‘No, I'm just reading the definition.’ So, that was really interesting. They were definitely being challenged. But yeah, I think most of them were just very, very surprised to be there. And they were saying that they just thought that this kind of speech was protected. 

AP: What was Lily's take on the French public's reaction to the trial? 

KM: She said that many members of the public showed up to watch the trial. So many, in fact, that the court actually set up an overflow room for those who could not fit in the main courtroom. And it sounds like the audience was having a pretty good time watching things play out. 

LR: I was in this room for part of one of the days and it kind of felt like these people were kind of watching like a soap opera or something. They were very loud in their reaction, which couldn't really do this if you're in the actual courtroom. But, you know, there was a lot of laughter, a lot of just expressions about, you know, the judges. They were clearly very supportive of the men that were defending themselves. And they seem to be just kind of shocked that this was going on as well. 

AP: And Candace Owens was not a defendant on this case. How does she fit into all of this? 

KM: Well, picking up from the YouTube video that started things off in the French case, she made her own series of videos called “Becoming Bridget.” From my conversation with Lily, it looks like Candace Owens really helped turn this into a more widely known conspiracy theory. 

LR: I'm not sure it would have become as much of a global kind of conspiracy theory. I don't think that they would have had any reason to sue anyone overseas if Candace Owens hadn't done that. And I do think that it helped to kind of popularize this theory. 

KM: Like Lily just said there, the Macrons have filed suit against Owens here in the U.S., accusing her of defamation. That case was filed back in July, so there will certainly be more to come on that story in 2026. 

AP: What about the trial in France? When do we expect to see a ruling? 

KM: The court will be releasing its decision on January 5th, so we don't have to wait too long to learn the fate of these 10 defendants. 

AP: So, this being a criminal trial, the defendants could face jail time if the court rules in Macron's favor, right? 

KM: While that's true, Lily said it's unlikely that the defendants will serve time. 

LR: So, they made a distinction between instigators and followers. So, the influencers are considered more instigators and the people that were kind of retweeting and didn't have as much as a role in this are considered the followers. I think the followers will get off pretty unscathed, if I had to predict, I'm not sure. I think the influencers might get fines, but again, I really don't see prison time. 

KM: There is an open question as to what impact Macron's lawsuit against Candace Owens will have here in the U.S., where a lot of incendiary speech is protected. But for France, it looks like the first lady is on the verge of sending a message against those who seek to spread online conspiracy theories, and that is that your posts carry consequences. And she's not the only one looking to spread that message. 

LR: I did speak to a lawyer in Marseille who defends victims of cyber harassment a lot, not usually famous people. He said that usually the biggest challenge is identifying people online because so many people use fake names, and I think because of French privacy laws, you can't necessarily track someone down. He's just hoping that this brings more attention to the issues of cyber harassment, that it shows that it's, you know, hard to hold people accountable, and I also hope that it just brings some attention to the issue. 

AP: Donald Trump's return to the White House in January reverberated on court dockets across the country with challenges to his many, many executive orders, personal overhauls, sweeping deportation efforts and deployment of military on U.S. streets. But I'm curious, Kelsey, what is it like to live at ground zero in D.C.?  

KR: No taxation without representation isn't just an ode to history in D.C. It's a modern-day dilemma that has been strongly felt during the Trump era. Since D.C. isn’t a state, its 700,000 residents have fewer levers to pull than, say, National Guard deployments in California or Illinois.  

AP: Even though D.C. is just a federal district, it doesn't seem to be rolling over for Trump and the Republican Congress. 

KR: That's definitely not the style around here. There are big signs of resistance, like the massive protests, but there's also smaller acts of resistance, like community members standing on street corners to warn about ICE checkpoints. 

AP: I remember one act that caught my eye. If I'm remembering correctly, there was a sandwich. 

KR: Yes, the hoagie thrower turned D.C. folk hero Sean Dunn, who was charged with assault after throwing a sandwich at a border agent. His tale is both serious and silly, so I'm calling in a favor from D.C. federal courts reporter Ryan Knappenberger, who covered the case. 

Ryan Knappenberger: Happy to be back. 

KR: Let's start at the beginning. Who is Sean Dunn? 

RK: So, Dunn used to be a Justice Department trial attorney and became sort of a folk hero in D.C. after his confrontation with a group of federal immigration agents who had been, began patrolling the city streets in early August, just before Trump declared a quote unquote crime emergency and deployed the National Guard here. 

KR: The first I remember hearing about Dunn was when a grainy video went viral online. 

RK: That's right. In the video, you see a man in a pink polo and shorts confronting a U.S. Customs and Border Patrol squad. He's shouting at the agents, you know, calling them fascists and telling them to leave with a few profanities in there. Then he turns to seemingly walk away, but Dunn then turns back around and launches his Subway sandwich at the lead agent. 

KR: This kicks off a chase where multiple burly-looking agents in tactical gear are chasing after a man in a bright pink shirt and shorts. And remember, this is all happening at a time of particularly high tensions. Videos of violent immigration arrests are going around, so it kind of seems like a moment of levity in an otherwise serious and scary situation. 

RK: Sure. Dunn is eventually arrested but later released. Those real problems started after the video of the sandwich strike went viral. U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro announced that she'd be charging Dunn with assault and Attorney General Pam Bondi not only fired Dunn from his DOJ job but claimed he was part of the quote-unquote deep state that had been working against the administration. 

KR: The White House makes their own video of a SWAT-style raid to arrest Dunn for a second time. The highly produced video features agents in tactical gear, guns drawn and carrying bulletproof shields filing into a D.C. apartment complex. 

RK: Dunn, who, remember, was a DOJ attorney prior to this, had offered to turn himself in. But his attorney argued the Trump administration denied him any opportunity to do so, instead opting for that showy raid. 

KR: Ryan, there's this famous legal phrase that you can indict a ham sandwich. Here's our test if there ever was one. 

RK: While that's usually the case, the Trump administration seemingly failed to realize that grand juries do still expect some amount of evidence to indict the sandwich. So, Pirro initially tried a charge done with felony assault charges, which created the quote-unquote assault with a deli weapon jokes. But a grand jury refused to approve the indictment, forcing Pirro to instead charge him with misdemeanor assault, which does not require a grand jury's approval. And we're seeing more of these rejections during the Trump era, in particular arrests during Trump's crime emergency here in D.C., but also, Trump's retribution campaign against New York Attorney General Letitia James has also failed twice to convince a grand jury to approve an indictment based on mortgage fraud claims. 

KR: In early November, Dunn's trial begins. What's the mood in the courtroom? 

RK: My colleagues in the D.C. federal press corps joked in the lead-up that this was the trial of the century. And the prevailing mood was that we were in for quite a show, even if an acquittal seemed pretty obvious. Even the jurors themselves had a hard time viewing the case as seriously as the prosecutors were trying to frame it. You might have seen CBS reported that the jurors could see some of the attorneys in the room giggling throughout. 

KR: Usually trials aren't as they appear in movies, but Dunn's case seemed to be ripped from a comedy script. 

RK: Absolutely. It felt like it was ripped straight out of “The People vs. Larry Flint.” 

Movie clip: Mr. Flint, is that an American flag you have on there, sir? I have fashioned this American flag into a diaper because if you're going to treat me like a baby, I'm going to act like one. 

RK: The main highlight was Customs and Border Patrol Officer Gregory Lairmore's testimony, the guy who Dunn threw a sandwich at, where he described the incident and said he could feel the impact of the sandwich through his ballistic vest, that it, quote, “exploded all over my uniform,” end quote, and he could, quote, “smell the onions and the mustard,” end quote. Then, during Lairmore's cross-examination, Dunn's attorneys called baloney on the explosion description since the sandwich was still in the wrapper after Dunn threw it. At that point, the jury was actively fighting the urge to laugh with one juror fully hiding their smile behind a notebook. 

KR: What was Dunn's defense strategy? We've all seen the video of him throwing the sandwich. 

RK: So, Dunn decided not to take the stand himself. Instead, his lawyers focused on the fact that Lairmore seemed to relish his involvement after the fact. His colleagues had gotten him this plushy sandwich that he then displayed in his office, and he had a sticker on his lunchbox of Dunn holding the sandwich above his head over the words, quote, “felony footlong,” end quote, below. And the judge, Carl Nichols, said at jury selection that he expected the case to wrap pretty quickly because, quote, “It's the simplest case in the world.” And Nichols, who's a Trump appointee, instructed the jury that in order to convict Dunn of the misdemeanor assault charge, they would have to find he acted forcibly and generated a, quote, “reasonable apprehension of bodily harm,” end quote. And so, Dunn's attorneys basically ran with that instruction and told the jury at closing that Dunn's conduct caused really as much injury as, say, an eight-year-old might when they throw a bear at their mom in the middle of a temper tantrum. And the prosecution, of course, argued that the sandwich was so much more than just a sandwich. This was thrown really hard and was accompanied by Dunn, you know, yelling profanities at the officers, all of which they said amounted to an apprehension of assault. 

KR: We didn't have to wait long for a verdict. 

RK: Not at all. The trial lasted all of two days, and after a few hours of deliberation, the jury returned a not guilty verdict. 

KR: While Dunn didn't testify, he did speak to the press after the verdict. 

RK: He did. So, Dunn said after that he was relieved to be moving forward with his life, and he quoted the seal of the United States, which says, ‘Out of many, one.’ Throughout this whole ordeal, Dunn became basically a resistance symbol in D.C. with Banksy-like portraits depicting him throwing the sandwich plastered all over alleys and streets across the city, and stickers even stuck on light poles. 

KR: I even ran into a family in T-shirts emblazoned with Dunn's image and the phrase, “The Battle for D.C.” When universities, law firms, companies, and even countries are bowing to Trump's wishes, seeing an underdog go toe-to-toe with the administration and come out victorious feels significant. Ryan, I have one lingering question: Does this mean we should all take up sandwich throwing as an act of resistance? 

RK: I can't say I'd recommend it, but if you do, make sure the wrapper stays on when you throw it. 

AP: Well, perhaps next year we'll get Hot Soup Guy or Corn Dog Girl to help us test the limits of which street foods double as weapons. Speaking of next year, what cases are you all looking forward to covering? 

HA: There's this guy named John Noguez, who was the L.A. County assessor, and he was arrested 13 years ago, and it might actually go to trial now in January, which is just kind of funny that it took that long. This was like a huge corruption story back then and it's since been subsumed by, you know, at least three or four other more high-profile L.A. County corruption cases. So, it's sort of like a journey back through time. 

KM: Well, as I'm sure everyone in the country knows, Texas is always a common litigant of many federal courts. So, there's many state laws that I'm looking at covering in the new year involving our Ten Commandments in schools bill. We have a immigration law that's still before a federal appellate court and whatever numerous things might also come up for the Lone Star State in 2026. 

KR: I think the better question is what cases I'm not looking forward to covering because we are going to see a lot of election litigation for sure, whether that be with redistricting or just election rules themselves. The Supreme Court has already agreed to hear a case that questions if ballots can be counted after Election Day, and those will surely have a large impact across the country. 

JR: I'm personally looking forward to following this case in Manhattan criminal court, it'll be called the Soho crypto bros torture kidnapping case, which includes the Kentucky king of crypto. 

AP: I think I use the same one every year. The Donald Trump campaign is finally supposed to go on trial for amplifying claims of 2020 election fraud that targeted a single Dominion worker in Colorado. And I've been waiting for that since December 2020. But those are just the ones that are scheduled right now. You gotta love to see what pops up unexpectedly. 

KR: And pop up unexpectedly it will. I would never have pictured a sandwich guy being a huge story in D.C. in 2025. 

KM: I might have expected conspiracy theorist gets called out. 

AP: Thank you all for joining me and thank you for listening. We're going on a holiday hiatus, and we'll return in January with more in-depth stories from the legal world. In the meantime, browse our five-season archive, leave us a review and try to stay out of trouble. 

(Outro music)