Two Women Assaulted in the 1300 block of Columbia Rd, NW – One Passed Away and One Arrest Made

From MPD:

“Detectives from the Metropolitan Police Department’s Homicide Branch have announced an arrest has been made in the homicide which occurred in the 1300 block of Columbia Road, Northwest.

On Thursday, July 31, 2014, at approximately 5:20 am, members from the Third District responded to a call for an aggravated assault in the 1300 block of Columbia Road, Northwest. Upon arrival, they located one adult female unconscious and unresponsive and another with non-life threatening injuries. DC Fire and Emergency Medical Services personnel responded and transported one victim to a local hospital. The decedent was subsequently transported to the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner for the District of Columbia where an autopsy will be performed to determine the cause and manner of death.

The decedent has been identified as 54 year-old Tajuana Lynn Hooks.

On Thursday, July 31, 2014, at approximately 6:06 pm, pursuant to a DC Superior Court arrest warrant, members of the Homicide Branch arrested 30 year-old Keiva Hooks of Northwest, Washington, DC, charging her with Second Degree Murder While Armed in connection to this homicide.”

64 Comment

  • I honestly just don’t understand why serious assaults and other crimes continue to happen in this area. It’s once or twice a week at this point. What are the cops doing? Can’t we see some proactive measures?

    • This one sounds domestic, though – not much the police can do to prevent those.

    • daughter killed mother

    • Police refuse to have a visible on the ground presence in this area, quite simple really. The amount of riff raff that loiters here on a continual basis creates a volatile environment. I am quite fed up with racial slurs being yelled at me almost every time I walk by here. CoHi is the pits. I am honestly surprised there are not more incidents here with all the selling of drugs, public consumption of alcohol, etc that occurrs on a daily basis outside of the Potbelly near the metro entrance. I live south on 14th and Harvard/Girard and almost every night there is a cop parked there, someone posted to PoPville recently pointing out that this effort is wasted and was completely mocked. The police presence should be on foot and in a wider area.

      • Valid points. I didn’t see it was a domestic. Still, doesn’t it seem like very few days there is some sort of incident in this area?

      • don’t blame the cops, blame the council. loitering is legal in dc. so is public intoxication.

      • It’s interesting the ways people experience and perceive all the people who hang out on that corner. I’m a white guy who has lived in Columbia Heights for 17 years and I walk through that area at least four times every day. I have never once had a bad interaction with anyone and in fact most of the time people go out of their way to be nice. I certainly have never been called a racial slur or been insulted in any way. So why do you get this reaction and perceive it the way you do? Honest question.

        In any case, loitering is not illegal in DC, and the worst things I ever see happening there are unlicensed selling of individual cigarettes and marijuana use, which is no longer a crime. I wish people wouldn’t leave trash behind or pee in the alley, but other than that, I don’t see what the big problem is. That people tend to hang out on the sidewalks and on front stoops is one of the nice, most redeeming aspects of Columbia Heights.

        • yeah, good point, vagrancy is just fine and totally healthy for the city.

          • What exactly makes it vagrancy? When white women sit on the front stoop or yard of their condo building to enjoy the weather and chit-chat, possibly sipping glasses of Chardonnay, is that vagrancy too?

          • I believe this person was pointing out that public urination is vagrancy. You are completely off-base, anyone enjoying THEIR condo building is much different then someone loitering (regardless of legality).

          • Ok, if we are talking about public urination, then yes that is a fair point for the particular individual doing the peeing. For everyone else though, you haven’t answered the question. What is the difference? What makes it “vagrancy”? Why are the Chardonnay sippers not vagrants?

          • Yea, especially when they do so on a work day! Get a job bohemian yuppies.

          • And if you’re trying to make a distinction based on being on private versus public property: 1) front yards, stoops, and porches in most DC neighborhoods are on public property — the government owns the land up to the front wall of the dwelling. 2) in any case, what if our Chardonnay sippers continue their conversation sitting on a park bench down the block (dutifully leaving their Chardonnay at home, of course). Now are they vagrants? 3) the whole point of declining to have an anti-loitering law is that everyone has the right to hang out on public property, with or without a “legitimate purpose.”

          • What’s this, anonymous @11:14 am? My front yard is mine all the way to the sidewalk. DC owns the strip of land between the sidewalk and the street. Period. And no one can stop me from drinking alcohol on my porch or yard. Where the hell are you coming up with this?

          • Prince Of Petworth

            Irvingman you are technically wrong. A lady was arrested for drinking a glass of wine on her front steps in Capitol Hill a number of years back.

          • PoP, after that case MPD backed away from that policy.

          • Prince Of Petworth

            Yeah I know it’s not enforced but I think technically it’s still accurate. You don’t “own” your front yard even though you are required for its upkeep. I think.

          • Depends on the neighborhood. I went into more detail below, but this is one of the more persistent myths about DC.

        • Using marijuana in public is still a crime.

        • those cigarettes are dipped in substances (think speed). By the sounds of it you are older person (if you have been living there for 17 years I would guess you are upper 30’s, mid-40’s). As a 20 something I think folks like to attempt to provoke me.

        • I can easily see if you were gay white male being harassed walking down that corner.

        • Try being a woman and walking through that area.

          • Exactly. Women are frequently harassed on the street there. It can be intimidating to walk through a large group of men regardless of race who are sitting around doing nothing besides staring at you. And loitering is fine if you’re not constantly littering and yes, peeing in the alley. I have seen an increased police presence out there, which is appreciated.

        • Anonymous @11:14 am is perpetuating an old myth about DC. In many (not necessarily most) neighborhoods, particularly within the original old city, the roads were ultimately built narrower than planned, so front/side yards with de facto easements onto public property became the norm. It doesn’t really matter for this purpose, though. A few years ago a woman and her visiting relative were cited for drinking wine on the woman’s stoop on Capitol Hill. At the time, MPD expressed a policy that the common front door line in historic neighborhoods was the line between private and public, and therefore the woman was drinking in public. After the predictable public outcry, MPD “clarified” (cough, cough) its position. Now front yards that are technically public property are considered private property for drinking-in-public purposes, as long as there’s a clear indication of what’s the front yard and what’s the sidewalk.

          • Ugh. That’s supposed to be a response to the whole debate above.

          • MPD didn’t clarify its position. Carol Schwarz amended the open container law to exclude stoops and porches in the public parking.
            (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this section, no person in the District shall drink an alcoholic beverage or possess in an open container an alcoholic beverage in or upon any of the following places:
            (1) A street, alley, park, sidewalk, or parking area;
            (b) Subsection (a)(1) of this section shall not apply if drinking or possession of an alcoholic beverage occurs:
            (1) In or on a structure which projects upon the parking, and which is an integral, structural part, of a private residence, such as a front porch, terrace, bay window, or vault; and
            (2) By, or with the permission of, the owner or resident.

          • Ah, you’re right. I could’ve sworn that they backed down before the law was amended, but I must be backfilling my memory with wishful thinking.

          • What’s this, anonymous @11:14 am? My front yard is mine all the way to the sidewalk. DC owns the strip of land between the sidewalk and the street. Period. And no one can stop me from drinking alcohol on my porch or yard. Where the hell are you coming up with this?

          • Right, so as an Irving St homeowner, I am not in the old city, so my yard is really mine. (Sorry about the duplicate post, PoP!)

        • You are confusing two completely different issues. In most parts of DC, title to land up to the front wall of a dwelling is in the United States government. It is not the private property of the resident. In any case, even if it were, doing something there is still doing that thing “in public” because by nature the space is visible to the public and, more importantly, is a space that the public is invited to enter (because, for example to ring your doorbell or knock on your door, a member of the public must necessarily enter that space and it is that same fact that causes you to have a duty to maintain it free of ice, etc). Therefore the prohibition on consuming alcohol in public applies, all else equal, to your front yard, regardless of who owns the property. For that reason, several people have been arrested for drinking on their front porch or in their yard. Recent changes to DC’s alcohol laws, however, provided an exception, providing that you are allowed to drink in the yard or porch, even though it is “in public.” The provision is ambiguous though, and police understanding of it is even fuzzier.

        • As a woman, I specifically avoid this area. Men making kissy noises, yelling obscene things, etc. Before I wised up to this pattern I was groped here once as well.

    • 1300 block of of Columbia Road is a public housing project, and it’s patrolled pretty regularly by police and armed guards.

      I suspect this happened inside one of the units.

      • It’s not, it’s Section 8 housing. Don’t see what that has to do with assaults though.

        • Can someone explain the details of the differences between public housing, section 8 housing, subsidized housing, mixed-income, etc. I’d like to be better informed and less ignorant about what options are out there and what various things are called.

          • I agree. Especially considering they want to turn the Old Jewish Home into public/affordable housing. There is a hearing at Raymond Rec Center on Aug 12th. All concerned citizens should attend.

          • I believe Section 8 housing means the resident has a voucher of some sort that pay for a certain amount of the rent. You can have Section 8 residents in a normal private building where some residents are paying a full market rate, and other residents (Section 8 voucher holders) are paying some out of pocket but some (usually most) from a publicly subsized voucher. Public housing is straight-up publicly supported. My understanding is that there may be tiers of support even within a building, with some paying nothing (after vouchers, SS Disability payments) and some paying a little bit (after vouchers, subsized rates, etc…). Bottom line, though- public housing AND Section 8 both involve taxpayer support of individuals.

          • Boo- please excuse all my typos. Need to read my work before I hit, “Post.”

          • This is a pretty good introduction to some of the biggest programs:

            If you want more information, the National Low Income Housing Coalition has an advocates’ guide available on their website with sections about just about every federal housing program.

          • the difference is that public housing is owned by the government — the DC housing authority. Section 8 housing is owned by a private company that enters into a contract with HUD and promises to use it for HUD’s low income housing program, usually for 40 years. Under the program, only individuals approved by the housing authority as meeting the low income requirements are allowed to live there, and eligibility requirements are almost the same as in public housing. It’s just that section * is transactionally a bit more complicated because HUD (through he local housing authority) is making payments to the landlord company to make up the difference between the fair market rent set by HUD and the tenant’s ability to pay, which generally is 30% of the tenants’ income.

          • First, I’m still unclear as to why the state would own any housing and not rely exclusively on section 8. Second, the convoluted nature of these agreements – and resulting limited supply of housing that’s willing to deal with section 8 vouchers – is another argument towards simply guaranteeing a minimum income for all citizens. Why institute a complicated (and expensive-to-run) housing voucher system when you could save the implementation costs and just give people cash?

          • The federal government no longer funds new public housing construction, which effectively has ended new public housing entirely. It has also shifted from section 8 projects — in which most or all units are designated for very low income people — to vouchers, which allow a person to get rent subsidies for basically any private apartment, provided the landlord will accept certain conditions imposed by the government. But the existing public housing projects will continue as such, and section 8 projects must continue to be operated as projects at least through the contract period, which typically is 30 to 50 years.

  • Not sure how the police are supposed to stop what looks like an intra-family murder and why we should be upset that they arrested the alleged perpetrator within 12 hours of the commission of the crime. If your expectation is different, perhaps the city is not for you.

  • More info from NBCWashington:

    “A 54-year-old long-time resident of Columbia Heights was found dead inside her apartment Thursday — the woman’s daughter has been charged with the murder.
    Neighbors told News4 they saw 30-year-old Keiva Hooks screaming and yelling in the courtyard of an apartment in the 1300 block of Columbia Road NW. Police responded to the area just after 5 a.m. for an aggravated assault and found Keiva outside.
    Police were then led to Keiva’s first-floor apartment, where they found the body of her 54-year-old mother, Tajuana Lynn Hooks. Hooks, according to charging documents, had blood on her face and more coming from the back of her head.
    Keiva, who suffered non-life threatening injuries in the incident, was charged Thursday evening with second-degree murder while armed in her mother’s death.
    “They were quiet, very respectful people. It’s a sad thing because they had no trouble. I thought they got along perfectly,” one neighbor said.
    Another neighbor said Keiva has an 11-year-old daughter.
    “It’s sad. I feel so sorry for the little girl,” she said.”

    • What exactly happened/what was the weapon? Reports are unclear. I live a block away and am under no illusion that this is a great block, but still a bit harrowing to hear.

      • Why do you feel the need for more details on what sounds like a gruesome murder? I think we have enough information to imagine that something horrible went down. This isn’t an episode of Law and Order for your entertainment.

        • Chill out. The charge is second degree murder while armed. People who live nearby shouldn’t be chided for wondering whether this was committed with a gun or with fists. The former suggests that there are probably more guns floating around out there and is more unsettling, I think.

          • Okay, so lets imagine that it’s a gun. Lets imagine they haven’t yet recovered the weapon. So what then? Sure, it’s unsettling, but I still don’t understand what you get out of knowing further details about this horrible crime.

          • These sorts of details are of utmost importance to the police, sure, but I don’t see what you gain personally out of knowing the exact nature of the argument that spurred this conflict. Follow the court case if you’re really that interested.

          • why do you need to know what they gain in learning the information?

      • Why “harrowing”? This wasn’t a random assault/murder; it was apparently an intrafamily dispute. There might be other reasons why you should be concerned for your safety on the 1300 block of Columbia, but this isn’t one of them.

  • I used to live in the last rowhouse on 13th, across the alley/driveway from the section 8 building. Never had problems with grownups, but the kids who live there are a nightmare. They broke my lawn chairs and literally started tearing up my mail and throwing it around like confetti.

Comments are closed.