Why This Article Was Fact-Checked
This article raised public concern after reporting that President Trump issued an unconditional pardon to a former Virginia sheriff convicted of bribery and fraud. Many readers have asked if this pardon undermines the integrity of the judicial process and whether the article accurately represents the facts surrounding the conviction and subsequent pardon.
Historical Context
In the United States, the president has constitutional authority to grant clemency — including pardons — for federal crimes. However, this power has often drawn controversy when used to benefit political allies or high-profile individuals convicted of public corruption. Past presidents have also faced criticism for pardons perceived as undermining judicial accountability. Former Sheriff Scott Jenkins was among a wave of law enforcement officials indicted on corruption charges in the early 2020s, part of broader Justice Department efforts to crack down on public misconduct under both Republican and Democratic administrations.
Claim #1: Scott Jenkins was convicted on multiple federal charges including bribery and fraud.
This claim is accurate. According to publicly available court records from the Eastern District of Virginia, Scott Jenkins was found guilty by a federal jury in 2024 of one count of conspiracy, four counts of honest services fraud, and seven counts of bribery involving federal programs. The Department of Justice confirmed in a March 2025 press release that Jenkins had been sentenced to 10 years in federal prison. These charges arose from a scheme where Jenkins accepted money in exchange for handing out sheriff credentials that allowed individuals to carry firearms and evade certain legal scrutiny.
Source: United States Department of Justice – Press Release, March 2025
https://www.justice.gov
Claim #2: Trump described Jenkins as a “victim of an overzealous justice department.”
This is a largely accurate summary of Trump’s position shared on his Truth Social platform. In his post, Trump criticized the Justice Department’s motivations, claiming that Jenkins was unfairly targeted for political reasons during the Biden administration. However, there is no independent evidence that the prosecution was politically motivated. The investigation into Jenkins began in 2022, prior to President Biden’s re-election, and included undercover FBI operations. Trump’s language reflects opinion rather than documented fact.
Claim #3: Jenkins was prevented from defending himself in court.
Trump’s suggestion that Jenkins was “shut down” and “prevented from presenting evidence” is misleading. According to court records, Jenkins, represented by legal counsel, participated in a month-long jury trial where evidence was presented from both prosecution and defense. Legal experts note that federal courts follow strict procedures to allow a fair trial. While it is common for defendants to claim bias or procedural unfairness post-conviction, there is no documented ruling or judicial finding that Jenkins was denied a fair defense.
Source: PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) – Eastern District of Virginia trial records
https://pacer.uscourts.gov
Claim #4: Trump also pardoned over 1,500 individuals involved in the January 6th attack.
This claim is inaccurate. While Trump has publicly signaled support for participants in the January 6 Capitol riot, the assertion that he issued 1,500 pardons is unsupported by official documentation. The U.S. Office of the Pardon Attorney, which logs all presidential clemency actions, has not listed a mass pardon of January 6 rioters. Fact-checking outlets including Reuters and PolitiFact report that, as of May 2025, fewer than 150 individuals tied to that event have received any form of clemency during Trump’s second term — with most being low-level offenders.
Source: Office of the Pardon Attorney
https://www.justice.gov/pardon/clemency-statistics
PolitiFact – May 2025
https://www.politifact.com
Conclusion
The Guardian article is largely accurate in its core reporting: Scott Jenkins was convicted of public corruption, sentenced, and later pardoned by President Trump. However, the article includes some framing that reflects a perspective critical of Trump’s clemency powers, particularly highlighting controversial pardons from his administration. Trump’s allegations of courtroom bias and wrongful conviction are presented without legal corroboration, and one significant numerical claim about January 6 pardons is exaggerated. While factual overall, the piece would benefit from more precise sourcing and acknowledgment of the constitutional scope of presidential pardons.
Take Action and Stay Informed
Curious about other controversial pardons or corruption cases? You can submit your own fact-check requests directly through the DBUNK app — it’s free and designed to help you uncover the truth behind today’s headlines.
