this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2025
436 points (99.8% liked)

politics

26105 readers
2973 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Prosecutor Jeanine Pirro failed to secure a felony indictment against the woman three times, then lost a jury trial on a misdemeanor charge. Ouch.

A Washington, D.C., woman accused of assaulting a federal agent was found not guilty by a jury on Thursday, the latest embarrassment for Jeanine Pirro, President Donald Trump's U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia.

Prosecutors had alleged Sidney Lori Reid kicked a Federal Bureau of Investigation agent during an altercation outside the D.C. Jail in July. Reid had been filming Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers while they were detaining a man who'd just been released from the jail.

Pirro's office tried three times to indict Reid on a felony assault charge, but D.C. grand juries declined to return an indictment each time


a highly unusual occurrence that suggested the flimsiness of the government's case.

After whiffing on the felony counts, prosecutors ended up trying Reid on a misdemeanor charge of assaulting or impeding a federal agent


but they couldn't even win that case. The jury deliberated for less than two hours on Thursday before returning the verdict of not guilty, WUSA9 reported.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ccunning@lemmy.world 63 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Prosecutors argued that though there was no contact, a jerk movement that Reid made with her knee near Bates’ groin during that struggle constitutes simple assault

On the one hand, many folks don’t realize Assault is the threat; Battery is the execution of the threat.

But over here in reality, this is like saying, “I feel threatened by women existing and that is assault”.

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 26 points 3 days ago

Hey man she had a phone. That's assault with a deadly weapon.

[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago

Many folks don't realize because the common usage doesn't work that way, and to muddy the waters further the laws are written in many jurisdictions such that "assault" is used as a legal term of art which requires some manner of physical contact between the perpetrator and victim. DC specifically treats assault and threats of bodily harm separately, (source) but the penalties are the same and in fact refer to the same paragraph anyhow, so the net difference in this case is kind of moot.

In some jurisdictions there is no such thing as "battery," and assault is the attack while threatening is the threat. This may or may not have something to do with dumbing down the wording at some point for the layman. I'm not a lawyer despite the occasional insinuation to the contrary, so I'm not qualified to speak on that possibility.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago

I wonder if there was near this level of concern for Tina Peters - seems she was trying to kick the officer when she was being arrested.

Meanwhile, dumpty trumpty was trying to lean on Colorado to have that POS released. And she tried to steal a fucking election.