DOJ Inspector General Rejects Probe Into Prosecutors Over False Olympian Indictment
The DOJ inspector general has declined to investigate prosecutors who falsely accused Olympian David Hearn of vandalizing the Reflecting Pool. Read more.
POLICY WIRE — Washington, D.C. — The Justice Department’s inspector general has officially declined to launch an investigation into the prosecutors responsible for the false indictment of Olympian David Hearn. Hearn had been wrongly accused of vandalizing the Reflecting Pool, a charge that was later dropped.
The Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) is typically tasked with reviewing attorney misconduct, but it is led by an appointee of the Attorney General rather than a Senate-confirmed official. Critics and department veterans have expressed concerns regarding the office’s independence, particularly after leadership changes last year sparked fears that the unit would struggle to hold political appointees accountable.
Legal counsel for Hearn argued that the OPR has seen its staff levels drop by approximately 50% since the start of the Trump administration. In a statement, his attorneys asserted that the office is no longer a fully functioning entity capable of conducting rigorous oversight, noting that the inspector general’s refusal means an investigation will simply not take place.
On October 6, Hearn’s legal team, which includes former DOJ Inspector General Michael Bromwich, requested probes from both the Justice and Interior Department inspectors general. They sought an inquiry into the arrest, indictment, and subsequent dismissal of the felony destruction of property charge.
The case originated on July 2, when U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro held a press conference accusing Hearn of tearing the Reflecting Pool liner with his hands. The case was later dismissed after new information revealed the damage resulted from a contractor’s botched installation.
Hearn’s lawyers contend that the handling of the case suggests potential criminal activity, including witness tampering, subornation of perjury, obstruction of justice, and criminal civil rights violations. They argued that these allegations fall squarely within the traditional investigative function of the inspector general.
The legal team highlighted a specific incident involving a grand jury witness who initially stated the pool needed repairs and could not estimate the damage costs. Following a 21-minute break, the witness returned to testify that the damage was definitely $1,000 or more, a threshold required to secure a felony indictment.
While the OPR holds exclusive jurisdiction over department lawyers during litigation, the inspector general has previously conducted high-profile investigations into attorneys. For example, in 2023, the office investigated former U.S. Attorney Rachael Rollins for the District of Massachusetts regarding allegations that she leaked information to influence a local election, though the Justice Department ultimately declined to pursue criminal charges.
Reporting by Policy-Wire (PW)
