Props to the Cops – Arrests Made in Aggravated Assault on GW Professor in Dupont and Robbery Force and Violence of CNN Producer in NoMa

Photo by PoPville flickr user KJinDC

From MPD:

“Detectives from the Metropolitan Police Department’s Homicide Branch announced an arrest has been made in an aggravated assault which occurred in the 2000 block of S Street NW.

On Sunday, October 27, 2013, at approximately 4:15 am, members of the Second District received a call for the report of an assault in the 2000 block of S Street, Northwest. Upon their arrival, Second District members located an adult male lying unconscious on the sidewalk. Personnel from DC Fire and Emergency Medical Services transported him to a local hospital where he was admitted and remains hospitalized.

The investigation has revealed that the male complainant was assaulted in the 2000 block of S Street, Northwest, by one of two males. Two individuals moved the complainant from the middle of the 2000 block of S Street to the sidewalk where he was located by police.

On Friday, November 1, 2013, 38-year-old James Brown of Southeast, DC, was charged with Aggravated Assault, pursuant to a District of Columbia Superior Court Arrest Warrant in connection with this offense. He was arrested by members of the Homicide Branch.”


Also on Friday from MPD:

“Detectives from the Metropolitan Police Department’s First District announced today a suspect has been arrested in connection with a robbery force and violence incident that occurred in the 800 block of 1st Street NE.

On Thursday, October 17, 2013, at approximately 4:00am, a male subject was assaulted and robbed in the 800 block of 1st Street NE. As a result of their investigation, on Thursday, October 31, 2013, detectives from the First District arrested 20-year-old Shabazz Thompson, of Washington, DC and charged him with Robbery Force and Violence. An additional person of interest is still being sought as the investigation continues.”

NBC Washington reported that this was a “brutal beating of a CNN producer who was jumped while walking to work two weeks ago.”

40 Comment

  • I don’t see why the victims should have special mention made of their professions, as though their professional/class status somehow merits a “special” kind of reportage that non professors/CNN Producers aren’t granted. Their careers do not change the indecency of the behavior committed against them, but reporting things like this does perpetuate the classism that in its own way drives perpetrators to violence and non-perpetrators to marginalization within our community.

    • I might have been unclear, but let me put it this way: when Popville generally reports on crimes, they do not often include the profession of the victim. Doing so insinuates, to me at least, that we should feel a special kind of heightened outrage, because GW professors/CNN producers are part of a protected class that is normally not privy to the same violence that the “average” victim is.

      • couldn’t agree with you more. well put. thank you!

      • it implies that the victims weren’t also criminals, unlike those cases where violence accompanies criminal behavior (like the case of a victim showing up at the hospital with a gunshot wound but refusing to talk to the police about it).

        • I suppose that’s one way of thinking it, but I don’t often assume victims are criminals unless it specifically states so in these posts, which generally, it does not.

      • I think you’re misinterpreting this. Anonymous got it right, but I’ll expand a little bit.

        If I hear about a violent crime, I would like to know whether the victim would best be described as a junkie getting beaten up by the dealer he owed money to, a partier who decided to drunkenly stumble home in the middle of the night, or just some random person walking to work.

        Why? Because some of these occurrences have a lot more relevance me than others.

        When I hear “4am in Dupont” I’m assuming something like case #2. I think it’s important to specify it was actually more like case #3. And you can do that by either mentioning some relevant details, such as the victims profession, or by saying “the victim, who was definitely not a drunken fratboy,” which would be ridiculous.

        • + 1 Million

        • How does calling him a professor make it more like case #3 than #2 in your examples? I don’t know many professors who go to work at 4am. A quick trip to Google yielded further information that the professor was a 39 yo male, who was walking home in a Halloween costume from a night out with friends. Furthermore, it clarified that he was a part-time professor of fencing (how many people thought that when they read the word professor?). That sounds exactly like case #2. Either way, I agree with Eric that it is not relevant other than to make readers feel more sympathetic to the victim because they must be “good” people or something like that. What seems more relevant, and is not covered, is that he was not robbed.

          • The source article specifically says he was called in to work early to his job as a CNN producer. Granted, it could be inaccurate, but that’s a different issue.

          • That is the NOMA incident. The Dupont incident, which I assumed you were referring to since you referenced “4am in Dupont” was not related to work.

          • My mistake – thought we were talking about the same thing.

    • “classism” drives perpetrators to violence? are you kidding me?

    • If “classism” were the origin of violence then middle class people like me would be going around beating the crap out of really rich people.

      • Right–I’m not condescending here–but now think about how the REALLY poor people must feel. Coupled with a more lax attitude pervasive in lower-income communities (with less educational infrastructure) surrounding criminal behavior, and, well, here we are. That’s what I mean by classism.

    • “CNN producer” is a reminder that even talentless hacks can experience horrific crimes.

    • i don’t see why victims should have violence inflicted on them.

    • Nice non sequitur, you effete, overeducated, yuppie

    • Because it can be an interesting detail.

  • I assume they add details like that to humanize the story. I guess it would be just as good if they’d just say, “carbon-based life form beaten unconscious by another, equally valuable carbon-based life form.”

    • People that read this website want to know if this is happening to young professionals who are just minding their own business/stumbling home drunk late at night vs. it was a “sketchy” person who was assaulted. The former scenarios are more relevant to the people reading this blog.
      If some dude was shot while making a drug deal at 3am, I think most people here would think that it isn’t a scenario that’s exactly relevant to their own lives.

      • Jinx!

      • And that, ladies and gentlemen, is classism. What you’re implicating is that we shouldn’t be as worried as much about crimes that happen to “sketchy” people, even though all crime, no matter who it happens to, as a pervasive and negative effect to the people of Washington DC. Specifying whether it happened to a “teacher” or a “junkie” is a meaningless (not to mention, mean-spirited) distinction that only serves to delude the professional class that things like this can’t happen to them because they don’t “deserve” it.

        • You are annoying. And I don’t think you should continue ranting about “classism” because you are only advocating that you don’t actually know what Classism is.

          • Thanks for the constructive comment.

          • its not that theres too much classism in DC, but its not well done. All those massive, inhumane federal office buildings that deaden the street. By comparison even bauhaus modernism is warmer.

            Did i miss something?

        • it must have felt good to say that.

        • Eric – You seem to know something about social sciences, but I was a math major.

          Statistically speaking, a data point that involves a crime happening to a person that is demographically different than me is less correlated to my likelihood of being the victim of a crime than a data point that involves a person demographically similar to me.

          Call it whatever you want, but that’s a fact.

          • …right, but but that doesn’t mean that all victims are worthy of empathy and respect and that WE are all in this together as residents of this city. Shirk off your social responsibility if that’s what makes you feel better as a math major, but only caring about victims that “fall in my demographic” seems like a shitty way of being to me.

          • I didn’t say I only care about victims who are demographically similar to me.

            But trying to assess the likelihood that I, personally, will be the victim of a crime is a whole lot different than lamenting the bad things that happen in the world and thinking about what, if anything, can be done about it.

            I can actually do both of those things, believe it or not.

        • its logic.

        • There’s nothing meaningless or mean-spirited about wanting to know if my behaviors are putting me at risk. If I were a junkie who typically went looking for a fix at 3am, I’d like to know that I’m more likely to get shot at that hour. If I were a while middle-aged professional walking home from work during daylight hours, I’d like to know that certain routes are safer for me than others.
          What this article tells me is that my whiteness and middle-agedness won’t protect me if I’m out at 4am. It confirms my suspicion that nothing good happens to anyone in this city between 1am and 6am.

          • So you don’t get laid often, huh?

          • “It confirms my suspicion that nothing good happens to anyone in this city between 1am and 6am”

            That’s your middle-agedness speaking. It needs to let go of the mic. Also being white usually is a good thing I’ve heard.

        • How is it classism?? The difference in concern is based on action/intent of the victim, not class.

          People on PoP would be just as outraged if these random crimes happened to a lower income service worker coming off a night shift. Conversely, there would be less concern if it were a lawyer trying to score some coke in a dark ally.

          • +1000

            I see the thought process behind the original post, but it’s a bit of a reach. I recall a waiter was brutally beaten to death a few years ago and the mention of the profession was less of a “classist” observation and more of a declaration that he was a contributing member of society.

            Last time I checked, you don’t have to be rich to contribute to society, not beat people down on the MBT, etc.

  • Shabazz? Really?

Comments are closed.