D.C. grand jurors reject latest wave of Justice Dept. indictment requests

Washington – What was going on in the criminal affair of Nathalie Rose Jones, who faced charges in Washington, DC, the Federal Court this summer, was not typical.

A great jury of Citizens of DC on Tuesday had denied the request of the Ministry of Justice to charge Jones, who was accused of a federal crime for having allegedly published an Instagram threat against President Trump.

In the almost empty and weakly enlightened courtroom, judge Moxila Upadhyaya listened to the lawyer’s arguments for almost 15 minutes and questioned the file in front of it. She stopped, looked up at the federal prosecutor standing at 10 feet and asked what the Ministry of Justice planned to do in the case.

The prosecutor did not have an answer but said he would have an answer “as soon as possible”, perhaps in a few days.

The rejection by this great jury of the request for accusation of the Ministry of Justice was one of the four cases of this type during last week during which a large jury denied an indictment in the District of Columbia.

“Not only did I never hear about this, but I have never heard of a prosecutor who heard of this,” said former federal prosecutor Brendan Ballou, who served the American lawyer’s office in DC until January 2025.

“Office failure – again and again – to obtain accusation acts suggests that the administration has absolutely destroyed its credibility with jurors,” Ballou told CBS News.

Another former federal prosecutor, Victor Salgado, said: “It is exceptionally rare that the major federal juries reject the proposed accusations, taking into account the low evidence for the indictment and policy of the Ministry of Justice to continue affairs only when there is sufficient evidence both to secure and support a conviction.”

Jones is accused of having published on Instagram in early August: “I am ready to kill sacrificing this potus by disembodied it and cutting his trachea with Liz Cheney and all the present affirmation.”

According to the Ministry of Justice, on August 15, the American secret services carried out a voluntary interview with Jones, during which she declared that the president was a “terrorist” and a “Nazi”.

In a statement to CBS News, the lawyer of the DCUS Jeanine Pirro said: “A great Washington DC jury refused to inform someone who threatened to kill the President of the United States. His intention was clear, traveling through five states to do so. She even confirmed the same with American secret services. It is the essence that should be created by a specific threat to kill the president, the Grand Jury in the Grand Jury in DC”

Jones was briefly detained in pre -trial detention in the case last month, but was released before Tuesday’s hearing. She appeared by zooming in the hearing in the courtroom of Upadhya and listened to a prosecutor told the judge that the authorities had not decided to return to the Grand Jury for the second time to request an indictment.

His lawyer argued in a legal file this week that Jones had no firearm and “she told them several times that she had no intention of harming anyone, including the president, and was in DC, to attend a peaceful demonstration”.

In a separate case, several people familiar with the decision declared that a great jury refused a request from the Ministry of Justice to charge Sean Dunn, accused of launch a sandwich to a federal agent in August. Dunn is a former employee of the Ministry of Justice who was dismissed after news circulated his arrest in the Sandwich affair. The Ministry of Justice has rather filed a new count of offense against Dunn, which does not require an indictment of the Grand Jury.

The judicial files examined by CBS News declared that a great DC jury had also rejected a request from the Ministry of Justice to charge Sydney Reid, which was arrested in July for having pretended to interfere with the transfer of an alleged member of a gang in police custody.

“While Reid tried to hinder the transfer, one of the (officers) pushed it against the wall and told him to stop,” said the Ministry of Justice in a complaint. “Reid continued to fight and fight with the officer.”

The Ministry of Justice recognized in a judicial file on August 25 in the case of Reid that “[a]n on the accusation has not been returned. “”

Last week, a large DC jury also refused to charge Alvin Summers, who was accused of having swung his arms on a US Park police officer after a prosecution on August 15. The prosecutors claimed that Summers “caught” the officer forcefully and charged him with having attacked and resisted an officer.

Shortly after the Grand Jury rejected the case, a defense lawyer for Summers filed a request in court, who argued: “Mr. Summers should not be forced to live under the threat of subsequent charges and rearraction. The accusations against Mr. Summers were based on an allegation made by an officer who was carrying a worn camera.

The Ministry of Justice filed a request for rejection of the Summers affair on August 29.

The trajectory of the Jones affair was less clear after Tuesday’s hearing. UPADHYAYA has planned a hearing for Monday, but refused Jones’ request to loosen the restrictions governing his release from pre -trial detention.

The reasons why these major DC juries did not give accusation acts in these cases are not known, but Salgado suggested that it is possible that in each of these cases “that they did not agree with the theory of prosecution of the Ministry of Justice”.

“It is not difficult to imagine 12 DC jurors concluding that throwing a sandwich on a federal officer – although clearly reprehensible and potentially illegal – is not a criminal assault,” said Salgado. “Basically, the great federal jury works as a vital constitutional safeguard and a critical control of the discretionary power of prosecution, as guaranteed by the fifth amendment.”