The case of Michelino Sansery has been controversial among outside enthusiasts. But the newly released information shows that it is also divisive among the government agencies involved in it.

32 -year -old California Dheeraj Running is being charged by the Interior Department (DOI), in which the posted signage is being taken to take a prohibited shortcut to ignore the posted signage, then Cut a switchback During the fastest known time (FKT) attempt on Grand Tatten. Sansery is facing a 5 -year ban from the Grand Tetten National Park (GTNP) and a fine of $ 5,000.

However, on May 19, NPS Deputy Director Frank Lands sent an email to DOI lawyers, stating, “We believe that earlier punishment, five-year ban and fine, is an overwhelmingness based on the gravity of crime. Therefore, we withdraw our support.”

Two-way bench trials of Sunseri proceeded, yet, on 20 and 21 May, 2025. But his rescue was not informed about the decision of NPS. It was only revealed only after the Information Act (FOIA) request filed by the legal team of Sunseri.

Now, Sanseri’s lawyers are arguing that the fairness of the test has been reduced.

Michelino Sansery: An example of ‘Overcriminalization’?

NPS’s decision to cancel its support is as follows executive Order On May 9, signed by President Trump, targeting “Overcrimination in Federal Rules”. The purpose of the order is “to ensure that no American is transformed into a criminal to violate a regulation, they have no reason to know.”

The email series, which was shared with Gearzanki on 6 June, questions whether the prosecutors in the case of Sunseri fulfilled the constitutional obligations to share the information that could be helpful for their defense. Sources close to the case also alleged that it suggests that the Department of Justice is not complying with Trump’s executive order.

Trump’s executive order was mentioned twice in the email received by Damn Hagan, a legal team of the Doi Solicitor, the advisor to the Doi Solicitor. It was not directly quoted for the reason that NPS had canceled its support for the Sanseri case, but it was referred to as the subject of direct meetings before the email of Deputy Director Lands, which informs them about the support of withdrawal of NPS for DOI.

One in motion Filed on 6 June, Saseri’s rescue said prosecution failure in sharing information about NPS’s decision[ed] Fundamental impartiality of the test of Shri Sunsery. ,

Cut a switchback? Or using an old mark?

Sunseri completed his FKT attempt on Grand Tetten on September 2, 2024, sprinting from the trailhead at the summit and back in the bus 2 hours, 50 minutes and 50 secondsHe publicly published his route online, and the fastest known time. (Informal record keeper for FKts) admitted that he had defeated the previous record for 3 minutes and 12 seconds.

However, 16 days later, his fkt was Dismissed When it is discovered that it would cut a switchback using an old climbing mark. The shortcut was allegedly repeatedly performed by the tour guide and used by the previous FK holders during his efforts on Grand Tatten.

When Sunseri used this route, they sidelined two small signs, one reading “closed for restoration” and the second reading “causes a shortcutting switchback.”

It was not too long before GTNP Rangers Charged sanseri Violating 36 CFR 21 (B)The code states that a park superintendent “may restrict hiking or using pedestrians in a specified trail or walkway system.”

Sunsery’s legal team said that despite two signs, it was not clear that the mark was closed. Advocate of Ed Bushnell, Sanseri’s defense, further argued that there is a strict process to close trails in national parks. This requires the park superintendent to make a written determination and is informed to the public using specific signals, maps, even a newspaper publication, and printing/posting in the park media.

During the test, Bushnel said about the old climber’s mark, “There is no clear prohibition. This is not a specific sign.”

‘Reduce fundamental fair’

motion He has been filed by Sunseri’s legal team that he should have been informed about the NPS’s decision to withdraw his support for the case of Sansery before the trial. They cite the 1963 case Brady V. MarylandIn which the Supreme Court said that this is a proper process of a criminal defectist which is relevant to the evidence and/or punishment for the evidence.

Prosecution “access to this email [from Lands] Prior to the test, “Sangeri’s legal team wrote in the proposal, and yet, he decided not to disclose it for defense, despite” the DOJ Authority, defense strategy and its obvious relevance for witness impeachment. ,

If he knew about it before the trial, Sunsery’s legal team alleged that he would have called additional witnesses including NPS Public Affairs Officer Emily Davis.

“Time and content of stop communication raises severe constitutional questions,” written in speed, “and directly go to the integrity of prosecution and fairness of testing.”

There is no guess that the judge will issue the decision in the case of Sunseri. Gearzanki will continue reporting on this story as it develops.