The U.S. Justice Department announced on July 31 it is dismissing the criminal case against David Hearn, a former Olympic canoeist, after concluding the damage to the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool was caused by a contractor’s flawed work, not intentional vandalism.

Case Dismissed After New Evidence Emerges

Hearn was arrested in June 2026 on a felony destruction of property charge after being accused of causing more than $1,000 in damage to the pool. However, the government’s only grand jury witness,a National Park Service official,testified that the damage existed before Hearn interacted with the pool.

Court filings obtained by USA TODAY revealed that the U.S, though Attorney’s office was only informed of the contractor’s role after Hearn had already been indicted. The Department of Interior provided documents showing that the damage was the result of a botched installation by Atlantic Industrial Coatings, a contractor working on the pool ahead of the 2026 America 250 celebration.

Timeline and Background of the Incident

The incident occurred on June 19, 2026, and led to the initial arrest of Hearn. The government’s filing explained that the damage to the pool was due to the rushed installation process, which was linked to preparations for events surrounding Independence Day 2026.

According to the filing, the contractor was under pressure to complete the project quickly, leading to improper installation; the National Park Service had already noted pre-existing damage but did not disclose it to law enforcement before Hearn was charged.

Public and Legal Reactions

While the charges have now been dropped, the case has raised questions about the initial decision to indict Hearn, while USA TODAY reached out to Atlantic Industrial Coatings for comment but had not received a response at the time of publication.

Legal experts have pointed out that the case highlights the importance of thoroughly investigating incidents before pursuing criminal charges. The dismissal of the case could also serve as a reminder of how external factors,like contractor errors—can play a role in what initially appears to be intentional damage.