President Donald Trump's initiative to repaint the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool has grown into a legal controversy that continues to unfold. In the latest development, the Department of Justice has once again disclosed evidence that appears to undercut its own case against former Olympian David Hearn, who was arrested on charges of vandalizing the pool.

Adam Klasfeld, editor-in-chief of All Rise News, reported the development on Wednesday in a post on X. "In a new filing," Klasfeld wrote, "Trump DOJ reveals that there's an NPS email showing peeling due to overspray in the section of the pool relevant to the David Hearn case. It's dated June 11, more than a week before Hearn's arrest."

Klasfeld attached a screenshot from the DOJ filing, which reads: "The email detailed that the ‘contractor stated that the peeled area was "overspray" from spraying the perimeter joint with polyurea.’ The engineer stated his ‘concern that this "overspray" along the perimeter of the pool could lead to a 1’-2’ strip that is vulnerable to peeling.’ The engineer also stated ‘[t]he polyurea liner that has peeled does not float in water, so should not be highly visible to visitors and can be vacuumed out along with sediment and algae during the normal cleaning process.’ These statements cast significant doubt that the defendant caused damage to the lining. This information — that the piece of liner peeled by the defendant was overspray, of little or no value — was first furnished to the prosecutors weeks after the grand jury indicted the defendant."

The National Park Service email described in the filing predates Hearn's arrest and attributes the peeling to contractor overspray rather than vandalism. The Reflecting Pool, located on the National Mall, is maintained by the National Park Service, a bureau of the Interior Department — which is why the agency's own engineering records, surfacing through an Interior Department investigation, ended up contradicting the prosecution's account.

According to Klasfeld, "Prosecutors say that the files showing the earlier peeling ‘sabotage’ their ability to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt — but also (absurdly) claim that ‘newly discovered evidence’ could rehabilitate the case later." He added: "They still want dismissal without prejudice, even though their case is gutted."

Earlier this month, Hearn's defense team filed a motion to have the charges dismissed "with prejudice," following U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro's admission that the case was groundless. Pirro requested dismissal after documentation from an Interior Department investigation contradicted the prosecution's claims. The distinction between the two forms of dismissal is central to the dispute: a dismissal "with prejudice" permanently bars prosecutors from bringing the same charges again, while a dismissal "without prejudice" leaves the door open to refile them later. The defense sought dismissal "with prejudice" out of concern that Trump could attempt to come after Hearn again.

It has since come out that Trump has in fact requested further charges against Hearn. While prosecutors now argue the case should be dismissed without prejudice in case new evidence comes to light later, Trump's demand for additional action against Hearn supports the defense's assertion that the case was "motivated by political considerations" and that there is a high ongoing "risk of harassment and bad faith" on the part of the president. The next step rests with the court, which must decide whether to grant the dismissal prosecutors have requested — and on which terms.